Mo Gawdat, Chief Business Officer at Google [X], having applied his superior skills of logic and problem solving to the issue of happiness, he proposed an algorithm based on an understanding of how the brain takes in and processes joy and sadness. He essentially ‘solved’ for happy.
license
Where the stuff on this blog is something i created it is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License so there are no requirements to attribute - but if you want to mention me as the source that would be nice :¬)
Showing posts with label algorithims. Show all posts
Showing posts with label algorithims. Show all posts
Friday, 4 August 2017
6min 51sec @TheRSA clip - An #Algorithm for #Happiness with Mo Gawdat
Mo Gawdat, Chief Business Officer at Google [X], having applied his superior skills of logic and problem solving to the issue of happiness, he proposed an algorithm based on an understanding of how the brain takes in and processes joy and sadness. He essentially ‘solved’ for happy.
Thursday, 11 May 2017
#Data - The world's most valuable resource AND @KingsCollegeLon 's The #Digital Everyday - exploration or alienation
Last Saturday I attended a one day King's College London conference at their Strand Campus entitled "The Digital Everyday - Exploration or Alienation".
In a serendipitous week the Economist magazine's leader and briefing was on digital data with a cover headline of "The world's most valuable resource".
In their leader the Economist describe data as the oil of the digital era. They point out that with Alphabet (Google's parent company), Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Microsoft's dominance those companies use their vast pools of data to protect their dominant market positions. In part the data they have means they can ID potential competitors quickly which they then acquire via "shoot-out acquisitions", (think Facebook and What's App) before they become a threat.
The article goes on to describe how the enormous amount of data collected - on what we buy (Amazon), what we share & like (Facebook), what we search for (Google), how we drive (Tesla), where we take taxis to (Uber) - allows these tech companies to identify and develop new services (or improve existing ones) in ways users want - so serving needs and attracting new users. And because their competitors can't see the data they don't even know about some of the opportunities.
Given such analysis the Economist suggests antitrust authorities need to loosen the big companies grip on the data and open up Government's data to encourage competition (both with user's consent). Towards the end of the article the Economist covers the the tension between data portability and privacy and how people need help in understanding that their data has value and they are due some form of compensation when others use it.
The Kings College conference came at the digital data issue from a different angle.
And slightly unusually for a tech/soc media conference it didn't have a #
The main themes I heard during the various sessions I attended are set out below.
The full programme for the day is to the left of this text and the text below.
The twitter (or other) IDs I could find for the people who talked at the sessions I attended are -
@jwajcman1 @paologerbaudo @girlslike_us @Caliviral @ianmtucker1 @tainab @RachaelCKent @mjgw
@ideacritik
@jrpybus
@TupsTweets @susannapaasonen samuel forsythe tanya kent pinelopi troullinou
and the institutions that organised the conference @kingsdh @DigiCultureKCL
Is our experience of time shaped by digital technology?
In the Opening keynote Judy Wajcman talked about how we describe and perceive the effect of technology on time so for example:
- Accelerating the pace at which things happen
- Changing our very perception of time (as did the second hand on clocks when first introduced)
- Reinforcing speed as being best - technological determinism or as much culturally driven?
- Reality check - earlier technologies were also “blamed” for speeding up & too much data
- Not all of us are affected in the same way (e.g. taxi drivers wait to speed others to places)
- Time as an individual resource or as a collective accomplishment
- Information overload (e.g. email inbox) – equally due to collective norms on how we expect others to deal with emails
- Concept of time as a limited resource and so of value & so to be used productively.
So the idea of the digital affecting our experience and/or perception of time is something several have looked at ....
... and written books about ....
Our approach to digital technology
Judy's opening keynote, and Zeena Feldman's response touched on this issue. Some of the issues mentioned that struck me are headlined below.
- Need to be more discriminating about when we use digital tecnology and be more demanding of it when we do
- Are we helpless victims or willing consumers?
- Should we be questioning more closely those who provide the devices and services in terms of their their bias and motivations?
- Is the technology a help in using “our” time productively by multi-tasking or is the practice of multi-tasking inherently less productive?
- In one of the slots in the 1st session after lunch Alessandro Caliandro talked about some research which tracked students use of smartphones and how they were always dipping in and out of using them - sometimes to kill time and sometimes to avoid stressful situations.
When asked about misuse of smartphones some cited others hogging a digital environment with too much intellectual context. When questioned about themselves people - of course - thought they got the balance of using smartphones for serious/silly/funny/heavy/light topics just right.
What do we actually want?
- In her response to the opening keynote Zeena Feldman pointed out that we are still figuring out how to live with these pocket computers.
- Its almost as though we're adolescents again - experimenting and trying things out as we begin to figure out who we are.
- All of which begs the question of what sort of life we want and how can digital technology help us achieve that. Is the productive use of a time the morality that underpins the choices we want to make?
How nuanced is the information we receive that we consider to be factual (eg the filter bubble that means my google search on a word will bring up different results from your search on the same word). Is happiness what we pursue? Are we human beings or human doings?
How much we share digitally and why
Self tracking devices - Rachel Kent talked about her research on self tracking devices/apps and people's use of them. Some of the use appeared to be motivated by a form of self policing where people used the app and the community to motivate themselves towards better exercise/eating/whatever regimes.
Indeed the very use of such apps made people feel more healthy even if they were having a "lazy" day or the device had over reported their activity levels. Equally when the app produced results that under reported activity there was genuine angst.
Digital Mental Health - Ian Tucker talked about the use of apps to help those with mental health issues and in particular an online supportive community app called Elefriends.
He described from his research
- the initial disruption participants faced when 1st using the community,
- the quite profound level of sharing that occurred,
- the concern if regular participants dipped out or deleted their accounts,
- and the relief some participants felt in dipping out of using the site
Filling the Void - Social Media as depressive hedonia - Marcus Gilroy-Ware riffed on his reflections on our use of sites like facebook and how far it was compulsive or some form of escape or distraction from our unhappiness.
In doing so he also highlighted the relentlessly positive language social media companies use to describe their products features - for example newsfeed - and suggested we should challenge that language - perhaps triviafeed instead?
Digital Data Funerals - Audrey Samson talked about how difficult it is to delete data that is in the digital world and about Digital Data Funerals as rituals representing what data we wish could be - but can't be - deleted.
In workshops or via other means participants gathered together onto usb memory sticks the data they wished could be deleted so it could be embalmed or ritually destroyed.
Digital Surveillance
Quieting the Niche - Sam Forsythe discussed the effects on knowledge sharing and participation of surveillance - and counter measures against such and the way in which data was used to predict the patterns of people's lives.
Fertile Space - Tanya Kant talked about the Clear Blue Ads (pregnancy/fertility) on You Tube and the algorithmic anticipation - of gender, age, wish to conceive - to target such ads tp particular audiences.
Set against this was the reactions of users against such categorisations and the doubly oppressive anticipation that females of a certain age would be interested in their fertility.
In commenting on such she observed that how although such targeting was based on various correlations of data sets = the way such data sets were described to users used more old fashioned marketing demographics language.
Digital learning - Pinelopi Troullinou talked about the data gathered from students during their study to help them analyse their learning and performance. She described this "seductive surveillance" as offering quantification to students whilst being unclear about the risks of such data gathering.
Datification of student life. Claire Tupling described the type of data now typically gathered in higher education "for the student's own good" and how discussion was less evident about ownership, consent, storage and application of such data. She also remarked on all this data displacing the individuals as the subject of the analysis.
The closing plenary session was on Algorithms
Algorithmic Orientations - Taina Bucher talked about how we describe different platforms algorithms - how we ponder whether such have changed or are new or are frozen - and how we react when we think the algorithim is not working in the way it serves stuff up to us that is "wrong".
Distraction - Susanna Paasonen reflected on how our attention is diverted - our our boredom diverted - by what is served up to us - and while she talke on this subject in the background she had projected a non-repeating sequence of interesting/amusing/diverting gifs.
In /doing so Susanna touched on a number of issues ...
- our loss of focus/shortening of attention spans
- but our increased capacity to handle information
- distraction not necessarily being the opposite of focus/attention
In a serendipitous week the Economist magazine's leader and briefing was on digital data with a cover headline of "The world's most valuable resource".
In their leader the Economist describe data as the oil of the digital era. They point out that with Alphabet (Google's parent company), Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Microsoft's dominance those companies use their vast pools of data to protect their dominant market positions. In part the data they have means they can ID potential competitors quickly which they then acquire via "shoot-out acquisitions", (think Facebook and What's App) before they become a threat.
The article goes on to describe how the enormous amount of data collected - on what we buy (Amazon), what we share & like (Facebook), what we search for (Google), how we drive (Tesla), where we take taxis to (Uber) - allows these tech companies to identify and develop new services (or improve existing ones) in ways users want - so serving needs and attracting new users. And because their competitors can't see the data they don't even know about some of the opportunities.
Given such analysis the Economist suggests antitrust authorities need to loosen the big companies grip on the data and open up Government's data to encourage competition (both with user's consent). Towards the end of the article the Economist covers the the tension between data portability and privacy and how people need help in understanding that their data has value and they are due some form of compensation when others use it.
And slightly unusually for a tech/soc media conference it didn't have a #
The main themes I heard during the various sessions I attended are set out below.
The full programme for the day is to the left of this text and the text below.
The twitter (or other) IDs I could find for the people who talked at the sessions I attended are -
@jwajcman1 @paologerbaudo @girlslike_us @Caliviral @ianmtucker1 @tainab @RachaelCKent @mjgw
@ideacritik
@jrpybus
@TupsTweets @susannapaasonen samuel forsythe tanya kent pinelopi troullinou
and the institutions that organised the conference @kingsdh @DigiCultureKCL
Is our experience of time shaped by digital technology?
In the Opening keynote Judy Wajcman talked about how we describe and perceive the effect of technology on time so for example:
- Accelerating the pace at which things happen
- Changing our very perception of time (as did the second hand on clocks when first introduced)
- Reality check - earlier technologies were also “blamed” for speeding up & too much data
- Not all of us are affected in the same way (e.g. taxi drivers wait to speed others to places)
- Time as an individual resource or as a collective accomplishment
- Information overload (e.g. email inbox) – equally due to collective norms on how we expect others to deal with emails
- Concept of time as a limited resource and so of value & so to be used productively.
So the idea of the digital affecting our experience and/or perception of time is something several have looked at ....
Our approach to digital technology
Judy's opening keynote, and Zeena Feldman's response touched on this issue. Some of the issues mentioned that struck me are headlined below.
- Need to be more discriminating about when we use digital tecnology and be more demanding of it when we do
- Are we helpless victims or willing consumers?
- Should we be questioning more closely those who provide the devices and services in terms of their their bias and motivations?
- Is the technology a help in using “our” time productively by multi-tasking or is the practice of multi-tasking inherently less productive?
- In one of the slots in the 1st session after lunch Alessandro Caliandro talked about some research which tracked students use of smartphones and how they were always dipping in and out of using them - sometimes to kill time and sometimes to avoid stressful situations.
When asked about misuse of smartphones some cited others hogging a digital environment with too much intellectual context. When questioned about themselves people - of course - thought they got the balance of using smartphones for serious/silly/funny/heavy/light topics just right.
What do we actually want?
- In her response to the opening keynote Zeena Feldman pointed out that we are still figuring out how to live with these pocket computers.
- Its almost as though we're adolescents again - experimenting and trying things out as we begin to figure out who we are.
- All of which begs the question of what sort of life we want and how can digital technology help us achieve that. Is the productive use of a time the morality that underpins the choices we want to make?
How nuanced is the information we receive that we consider to be factual (eg the filter bubble that means my google search on a word will bring up different results from your search on the same word). Is happiness what we pursue? Are we human beings or human doings?
How much we share digitally and why
Self tracking devices - Rachel Kent talked about her research on self tracking devices/apps and people's use of them. Some of the use appeared to be motivated by a form of self policing where people used the app and the community to motivate themselves towards better exercise/eating/whatever regimes.
Indeed the very use of such apps made people feel more healthy even if they were having a "lazy" day or the device had over reported their activity levels. Equally when the app produced results that under reported activity there was genuine angst.
Digital Mental Health - Ian Tucker talked about the use of apps to help those with mental health issues and in particular an online supportive community app called Elefriends.
He described from his research
- the initial disruption participants faced when 1st using the community,
- the quite profound level of sharing that occurred,
- the concern if regular participants dipped out or deleted their accounts,
- and the relief some participants felt in dipping out of using the site
Filling the Void - Social Media as depressive hedonia - Marcus Gilroy-Ware riffed on his reflections on our use of sites like facebook and how far it was compulsive or some form of escape or distraction from our unhappiness.
In doing so he also highlighted the relentlessly positive language social media companies use to describe their products features - for example newsfeed - and suggested we should challenge that language - perhaps triviafeed instead?
Digital Data Funerals - Audrey Samson talked about how difficult it is to delete data that is in the digital world and about Digital Data Funerals as rituals representing what data we wish could be - but can't be - deleted.
In workshops or via other means participants gathered together onto usb memory sticks the data they wished could be deleted so it could be embalmed or ritually destroyed.
Digital Surveillance
Quieting the Niche - Sam Forsythe discussed the effects on knowledge sharing and participation of surveillance - and counter measures against such and the way in which data was used to predict the patterns of people's lives.
Fertile Space - Tanya Kant talked about the Clear Blue Ads (pregnancy/fertility) on You Tube and the algorithmic anticipation - of gender, age, wish to conceive - to target such ads tp particular audiences.
Set against this was the reactions of users against such categorisations and the doubly oppressive anticipation that females of a certain age would be interested in their fertility.
In commenting on such she observed that how although such targeting was based on various correlations of data sets = the way such data sets were described to users used more old fashioned marketing demographics language.
Digital learning - Pinelopi Troullinou talked about the data gathered from students during their study to help them analyse their learning and performance. She described this "seductive surveillance" as offering quantification to students whilst being unclear about the risks of such data gathering.
Datification of student life. Claire Tupling described the type of data now typically gathered in higher education "for the student's own good" and how discussion was less evident about ownership, consent, storage and application of such data. She also remarked on all this data displacing the individuals as the subject of the analysis.
The closing plenary session was on Algorithms
Algorithmic Orientations - Taina Bucher talked about how we describe different platforms algorithms - how we ponder whether such have changed or are new or are frozen - and how we react when we think the algorithim is not working in the way it serves stuff up to us that is "wrong".
Distraction - Susanna Paasonen reflected on how our attention is diverted - our our boredom diverted - by what is served up to us - and while she talke on this subject in the background she had projected a non-repeating sequence of interesting/amusing/diverting gifs.
In /doing so Susanna touched on a number of issues ...
- our loss of focus/shortening of attention spans
- but our increased capacity to handle information
- distraction not necessarily being the opposite of focus/attention
Sunday, 3 July 2016
Wednesday, 13 May 2015
algorithmically enhanced confirmation #bias - 6 uncomfortable facts about how #facebook affects what we see #chsocm
The points below are summarised out of a most excellent post (and some of the comments made on that post) by @nathanjurgenson on the the society pages website (which I found via @cyborgology )
For the full detail of the arguments and facts and for further related posts I encourage you to read Nathan's original post (note he discloses in his post that he works for Snapchat but does also make the point that he isn't just picking on Facebook as other social media companies are similar in their approach to falsely claiming their neutrality in what they provide users)
At the foot of this post are links to some other posts that you may find useful
1) A study by facebook researchers found/estimated that:
- conservatives chose 17% less ideologically opposed (to their own views) news stories and added to that bias the facebook algorithm feeds them another 5% less ideologically opposed news stories
- liberals chose 6% less ideologically opposed news stories and added to that bias the facebook algorithm feeds them another 8% less ideologically opposed news stories
(note - in how it was reported the study didn't make the above findings clear nor that the methodology and the findings from it are based on the 9% of facebook users who also put their political orientation on their profiles)
2) But Facebook's line is “it’s not that we control NewsFeed, you control NewsFeed” - which appear contrary to the facts from their own research
3) The newsfeed we see on facebook is in part sorted based on what people are willing to pay. Apparently the 2nd position in the newsfeed is often allocated to sponsored content
4) At recent EuroCPR conference in Brussels it is reported in the comments to Nathan's original post that the Policy Director of Facebook UK, Middle East and Africa mentioned (in front of some 20 people including LSE, University of Amsterdam, The Guardian, …) that Facebook shaped the algorithm in such a way that it shows you (out of 10 items shown) 8 items from your (real) friends and 2 items from other friends: media, companies etc. etc.
5) Our choices about what we look at on facebook is partly a result of how the algorithm teaches us to behave (e.g if certain of our posts are liked we see that and adjust what we post accordingly)
6) The algorithm itself is dynamic and so reacts to and changes with our individual choice.
other posts on RSA, TED, other lectures, conferences, others blog posts
2015
11 headlines on why we use facebook & social media - summarised out of a very rich buffer post by Courtney Seiteron
The 10 problems which mean the process to allocate scientific funding is broken
where does creativity come from? - a @RSAEvents lecture by mathematician @Cedric_Villani @alexbellos
how to innovate & survive - by @markf212 (Mark Payne)
where does creativity come from? - a @RSAEvents lecture by mathematician @Cedric_Villani @alexbellos
how to innovate & survive - by @markf212 (Mark Payne)
18 top tips and thoughts about using #social media to enable #community source = an article by Anatoliy Gruzd PhD & Caroline Haythornthwaite PhD
2014
Data Protection & Privacy - 8 issues from an International Conference
escape your social horizon limit & understand more - source = a blog post summarising the work of Jeffrey A. Smith, Miller McPherson & Lynn Smith-Lovin
OECD - challenges for the next 50 years - in an OECD report
Want to help somebody - shut up and listen - by ermesto sirolli
social media & death - 10 things you may not have thought about - #DORS conference
persuasion and power in the modern world and the rise of soft power - UK House of Lords
2013
UK Government Policy Blunders & their common causes - by Anthony King & Ivor Crewe
the development of the U2 spyplane - source = CIA historians Gregory Pedlow & Donald Welzenbach
considering culture and business process improvement - source = an article by Schmiedel, Theresa, vom Brocke, Jan, & Recker
ideas that may help you attract older volunteers - source = a paper by Brayley, Nadine, Obst, Patricia L., White, Katherine M., Lewis, Ioni M.,Warburton, Jeni, & Spencer, Nancy
physical factors which help people get better quicker - source = a paper by Salonen, Heidi & Morawska, Lidia
guiding principles on designing construction kits - by Mitchel Resnick & Brian Silverman
signs of overparenting - source = an article by Locke, Judith, Campbell, Marilyn A., & Kavanagh, David J
making ideas happen - source = a 99U conference
2012
how to spot a liar - by pamela myer
ambiguity, irreverence, commentary & judgement - by lauren zalaznick
measuring happiness - source = talk by jim clifton, jim harter, ben leedle
Sunday, 10 May 2015
10 useful links (no. 10) - delete search history, 2015 social media, click farms, #twitter mistakes, #google cultural institute, #facebook changes, data visualisation, church projects, social media tips
uk social media in 2015 - found via @was3210
dealing with trolls - found via an email from @abc3d & @hautepop.
The Bot bubble - how Click Farms Have Inflated Social Media Currency - found via digg
Common Twitter mistakes and how to avoid them - from DigiProud - Easy Digi and Social Media Advice for Churches
google cultural institute - a great way of curating some images
Facebook Likes don't go as far as they used to in News Feed update - found via @was3210
types of data visualisation - found via an email from @abc3d & @hautepop.
cinnamon projects churches might consider applying to do - found via @cinnamonnetwork
5 tips on social media for non-profits - found via @hootsuitepro
Previous 10 Useful Links posts
No.'s 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
Sunday, 1 February 2015
how does the #facebook algorithim see you? (link from @was3210 found via @newbiephd ) #nsmnss
Farida talks about how algorithms position us
- how the algorithms make themselves more visible when something breaks ("ruptures"),
- how the workings of algorithms are in part reflections of the humans who make and design them (so objects within a cultural political context)
- how whilst invisible most of the time, such ruptures offer important opportunities to think about how algorithms increasingly mediate our lives and realities.
Thursday, 8 March 2012
how algorithms shape our world
this kevin slavin talk basically says:
- maths has changed form something we extract from the world to something that is shaping it.
- specifically algorithms (how computers decide stuff).
- they become like truth because they repeat again and again.
- used a lot in financial trading - algorithms used to hide large trades by splitting them up into lots of small trades - and algorithms used to find algorithms doing that and put all the small trades together to see what is going on.
- but these algorithms have caused a 9% flash reduction in the usa stock market - and nobody can explain how it happened.
- so we are writing things we can no longer read.
- also happens on amazon where items get crazy prices without any buying or selling - what we see here is algorithms locked in loops with each other with no human control.
- or are used by netflix to work out what movies to recommend you watch next.
- or there is one that analyses a movie script to determine how big a grossing movie it will make - so affecting culture.
- and if any of these algorithms went wrong how would we know?
- or to go back to the stock market - speed is of the essence for these algorithms.
- "it takes you 500,000 microseconds just to click a mouse, but if you’re a wall street algorithm and you’re five microseconds behind, you’re a loser".
- so people are building facilities for servers near the nodes where the internet is distributed from so these algorithms can get nearer to the internet in microseconds.
- and they are digging trenches for optic fibre cables between cities to allow thee algorithms to get faster.
- so the virtual world is affecting the real world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)