When Ant Financial, the payments affiliate of the internet group Alibaba, goes public, its potential $120bn valuation could exceed that of Goldman Sachs. Alipay, Ant's mobile payments platform with 520m users, is innovative as well as valuable, having devised a new method of credit rating.

当互联网集团阿里巴巴旗下的金融服务公司蚂蚁金服上市时，其1200亿美元的潜在估值将超过高盛集团。蚂蚁金服成立的第三方支付平台支付宝拥有5.2亿用户，并且在这个基础上，设计出一套即创新又具有价值的信用评级体系。

Sesame Credit, Alipay's alternative to traditional credit scores is intriguing. It broadens access to loans in a developing market by monitoring people's buying habits and social circles as well as their credit records. Alipay insists that it does not share personal data with governments without users' permission. But they have plenty of drawbacks nonetheless.

支付宝用来替代传统信用评分制度的"芝麻信用"在表面上看来十分有趣。芝麻信用分是芝麻信用对海量信息数据的综合处理和评估，主要包含了用户购物历史、人脉关系、信用历史等五个维度。"芝麻信用"通过分析大量的网络交易及行为数据，可对用户进行信用评估，这些信用评估可以帮助互联网金融企业对用户的还款意愿及还款能力做出结论，继而为用户提供快速授信及现金分期服务。然而虽然支付宝坚称，未经用户许可它不会向政府透露用户的个人数据，"芝麻信用"体系仍存在很多问题。

First, they have been designed by technology companies, which have a laxer attitude to data than banks. Banks store enormous amounts of data on the spending and personal habits of their customers but, thanks to regulation and the tradition of confidentiality, they do not exploit it as much as they might.

首先，"芝麻信用"系统是由科技公司设计的，它们对数据的管理和监控较银行而言更为宽松。银行储存了大量关于客户消费和个人生活习惯的数据，但是由于严监管和保密的传统，银行并未尽其所能地利用这些数据。

Tech companies, on the other hand, tend to think they can hold and analyze any data they get their hands on. That includes all the information from people's mobile phones - not only their location but details of their social media circles and the products and services they buy. The potential for abuse is enormous and there is less regulation than in financial services.

而科技公司则更倾向于认为他们有权分析他们掌握的任何数据，这包括客户手机上的所有信息-不仅是他们的位置信息，还有他们的个人社交圈以及他们购买的产品和服务的细节。这些数据信息被利用的可能性极大，且目前我国对科技公司的监管也比金融服务业少。

Second, there is a perverse incentive built into calculating credit scores on the basis of transactions and activity. One improves a traditional credit score by borrowing less and displaying self-control. Social credit tends to work in the opposite way - it gives users an incentive to buy and rent items through platforms, and to build a circle of active and highly rated friends.

其次，基于交易和活动计算的信用评分制度本身就有一种不合理的激励元素。以传统的信用评分来说，我们如果想要提高信用评分，就需要通过减少借款以及修炼自身约束能力等途径来实现。但"芝麻信用"采用的是一个相反的方式-它不断地给予用户在网络平台上进行购买或租赁交易的动力，并且时时督促用户要积极去维持自己的高等人际关系网。

Social credit is thus "gamified" - a tournament in which people must compete to raise their numbers through activity, like a financial version of social networks and mobile games.

因此，社会信用评分被"游戏化"--在这场比赛中，人们必须通过聚会或交易活动来提高自己的评分，就像金融版本的社交网络和移动端的游戏。

Third, in order to build a high Sesame score, a user must keep using Alipay. There is a glaring conflict of interest in being a payment platform as well as a judge of credit ratings-one tweak to a credit score algorithm can push customers to transact more. China's central bank has belatedly realized that giving power over credit scores to rival tech companies has pitfalls.

第三，为了建立一个高的芝麻信用评分，用户将面临被硬性捆绑式地继续使用支付宝的局面。支付宝作为一个独立第三方支付平台，如果进而成为信用评级的决裁者，这本身就存在明显的利益冲突。对信用评级算法的一个小调整即可推动客户在其支付平台上进行更多的交易。中国央行后知后觉地意识到，将信用评分的权力交给科技公司这个决定是有缺陷的。

So social credit must be treated carefully before everyone has a number that determines their reputation as well as their ability to borrow. One essential safeguard is that ownership of the trove of data generated by every digital citizen is held not by governments or companies but citizens themselves. Rather than customers of payment and social platforms ceding control of personal information to brands, they should retain it.

由于信用评分的结果将会直接影响我们大众的声誉和借贷能力，故在社会信用评级广泛推行之前，我们必须谨慎考虑及对待此评级制度将会带来的隐性问题。一个基本的保障措施是，每个网络公民产生大量数据信息的所有权不应该是由政府或个别公司拥有，而是应该由公民自己拥有。支付平台和社交平台的用户应该注意不要把个人信息的控制权交给品牌公司。