Skip to main content

An Algorithmic Life

Photo by sk
Data is the most valuable commodity of the 21st century. Algorithms are what transform data into information. Algorithms have become like a trusted friend whose recommendations we seek, and that we adhere to. Perhaps what isn't known is how these pieces of code are able to derive such useful information for us, which is the part of algorithms that are unseen to many. An algorithm is ultimately only as good as the data that is fed into it, and we are all feeding vast amounts of data into code we did not author, that we don't control, and that is only visible to us in its outputs.

The convenience provided by algorithms is certainly welcome, but according to a recent Pew Research Center report, the public doesn't have such a welcoming opinion of them when used for decisions that can be life-changing. Algorithms represent far more than recommendations on which media to consume. There is an innate desire for humanity in decisions that could dictate, for example, whether or not we are being honest, whether or not we are likely to commit a crime, or if we are an acceptable credit risk. Trusting code to make such a decision is met with a high degree of skepticism, especially when we are asking it to account for something uniquely human, like empathy.

Bias is a major concern when evaluating the reach of algorithms. According to the Pew Research Center report, 58% of people surveyed felt that algorithms will always reflect some level of human bias. This speaks to the fairly narrow range of humans, from a demographic sense, who are creating them. Algorithmic creators are overwhelmingly male, and typically white or Asian.

Presumably without knowing this nuance, the majority of those surveyed found it unacceptable to use algorithms in all four scenarios presented in the study. Criminal risk assessments, resume screening of job applicants, video analysis of job interviews, and alternative personal finance scores were all found to be unacceptable by greater than 50%. Several themes emerged during the study regarding why they were viewed as unacceptable. Privacy violation, lack of fairness, removal of the human element, and code not being able to capture a sufficient level of nuance for circumstantial factors were all sited as reasons for the unacceptability of algorithms by the Pew Research study.

Social media is perhaps the most fertile ground for assessing the value of algorithms, which does not look promising. Social media, according to the Pew Research Center, seeks to drive people towards content that is engaging. Engaging content may not be quality content, it could simply be content that makes users "...angry, inflames their emotions or otherwise serves as intellectual junk food."

Another facet of algorithms on social media that further shows their flaws is how social media users will become locked into an echo chamber of people they already know, who are likely of similar demographics, and who share similar world views. Algorithms, in this scenario, are exploiting what is called confirmation bias. Whereby, we seek to have our current beliefs reinforced rather than seeing things in a new light and perhaps changing our mind. When an algorithm is ultimately designed for a commercial purpose, to keep us engaged with social media in this case, their trustworthiness is compromised.

Facebook is no stranger to bad press these days, unless it's earnings season. The value that Facebook provides society, beyond their balance sheet, has come into question for myriad of reasons. The social media giant was recently reprimanded by Apple for running a Virtual Private Network (VPN) which vastly overreached on the amount of personal information it harvested for its algorithms. For handing over data about everything they were doing on their smartphone, far beyond what they were doing only in Facebook, users as young as 13 years old were paid all of twenty dollars per month. Once discovered, public reaction was swift and severe, and the software has since been shuttered entirely.

This example demonstrates how valuable data really is, and how crucial it is to algorithms. Facebook is an enterprise that is entirely dependent on a consistent flow of high quality data about its users and it will go to great lengths to sustain itself. Yet another instance that has recently surfaced is how third party smartphone apps report data to Facebook even if no Facebook account is present on a device, without the users knowledge or consent. Without having any connection to Facebook directly, you are likely still feeding your data into their algorithms.

Ironically, the decision to use algorithms is as nuanced as the decisions we are entrusting them to make. Simply opting-out is not really possible, and even if it were it would be a huge step backwards. We must take ownership of our information and guard it as much as possible. There are many things we can opt-out of that do not handicap the advantages provided by an algorithmic life. For example, we are able to opt-out of the gigantic data brokers like Acxiom, and we should. The notion of our data being our property is already gaining a foothold, and it is my hope that this notion will soon become widespread.

--Jay E. blogging for


Popular posts from this blog

The Growing Disruption Of Artificial Intelligence

Photo by Frank Wang Artificial intelligence may be as disruptive as the computers used to create it once were, and it could be even bigger. Given the disruption that social media has proven to be, one has to wonder if we are fully prepared for the life altering consequences we are building for ourselves. IBM has been a key player in the artificial intelligence arena for over two decades. Deep Blue was their first tour de force in 1997, when its team of developers received $100,000 for defeating chess champion Gary Kasparov in a game of chess. That watershed moment has its roots all the way back in 1981 when researchers at Bell Labs developed a machine that achieved Master status in chess, for which they were awarded $5000. In 1988, researchers at Carnegie Melon University were awarded $10,000 for creating a machine that achieved international master status at chess. Deep Blue, however, was the first machine to beat the world chess champion. Google has entered the fray as well,

On Homelessness

Photo by Quaz Amir It started yesterday, after work as I left my building, I saw them walking. A couple, hauling their belongings in a few neatly stacked boxes that looked like tackle boxes tied to a small luggage cart. The man had crossed the street, along with his dog who stayed faithfully by his side. An older woman was stuck at the intersection waiting for cars to stop. Before long, the cars did stop, she joined her partner, and I didn't spend much more time thinking about them that day. At my job today, I had a great morning. A coworker gave me a great idea for a quick but useful project, which I was able to finish before noon. I feel I am at my best when I am able to be productive. It gives me a sense of purpose for lack of a better word. Feeling good about myself, I set out to buy myself a hamburger for lunch and skip the more healthy option that I brought from home. I drove the short distance to the hamburger joint, the epitome of laziness. As I drove up, I saw the

The Evolution Of Tech Culture

Photo by Skitterphoto The culture associated with technology has a checkered past but maybe not in the way you think. Before it became socially acceptable to tote your pocket supercomputer around, why was technology culture anti-social? Are we more social now, or less? Ars Technica recently interviewed Clive Thompson for his upcoming book  Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World .Thompson specifically focuses on the origins of the culture of programmers, and there are some interesting divergences from the culture as it is today. Traditionally, software programmers are stereotyped but Thompson debunks these myths. Rather than being purely anti-social, programmers are merely intensely focused problem solvers. Programmers will spend many hours trying to fix something, which can be frustrating, but they are a rare breed equipped to handle frustration. Programmers solve hard problems, despite frustration, because this is what they enjoy doing. There is a cos