"We should not be using algorithms to determine sentences for criminals, the judiciary is there for that to determine the facts of the case and the intent of the criminal. I understand it is still an opinion but its better than something that does not know or see what is in front of it and is basing it's opinion based on information fed in to it."
But if you depend on humans, what happens with a charismatic suspect?
"Mortgages are based on ability to pay so I have no problem with them, money in - money out = amount you can afford with an adjustment to factor in interest rate changes."
But since mortgages tend to be long-term things, they also have to take vulnerability into account. How likely is the borrower to suffer a significant event that severely alters his/her ability to fulfil his/her end of the deal (say, the industry he/she is in is prone to collapse leaving him/her not just unemployed but unemployABLE).
"Googles algorithms should be open to scrutiny by a legally backed watchdog because they can make or break a company/product/person/opinion."
But Google is multinational. They can probably play foreign sovereignty against you. What will you do then? Block Google and get complaints up the wazoo?