3 ms·

Data Scientist Cathy O’Neil: “Algorithms Are Opinions Embedded in Code”

24 points by heisenbit 9y ago

heisenbit 9y ago
> My definition of success is: a meal is successful if my kids eat vegetables. It’s very different from if my youngest son were in charge. He’d say success is if he gets to eat lots of Nutella. But I get to choose success. I am in charge. My opinion matters. That’s the first rule of algorithms. > Algorithms are opinions embedded in code. It’s really different from what you think most people think of algorithms. They think algorithms are objective and true and scientific. That’s a marketing trick. It’s also a marketing trick to intimidate you with algorithms, to make you trust and fear algorithms because you trust and fear mathematics. A lot can go wrong when we put blind faith in big data. Is funny and then she builds on this a few insightful arguments.
soganess 9y ago
I think her imagery is quite evocative and she deserves much applause for it. That said, wouldn't a more accurate categorization be "Algorithms are presuppositions embedded in code". Opinions seems a bit limited, but perhaps I'm splitting vernacular hairs.
freech 9y ago
There's a fundamentally wrong view of the way algorithms are written implicit here. Take for example a recommendation algorithm for porn. It's not written by some programmer expressing his tastes in code, like he would in language, it's written by analyzing the tastes of lots of people. If the result is racist - maybe people prefer black men and asian women - then it's because people's tastes are racist, not because the programmer is racist.
- setr 9y ago
  i think the response would be that allowing racist tastes to persist in the successful model is itself an opinion embedded in your algorithm. Its not that algorithm is an opinion, but that the goal achieved by it is defined with opinions (and thus, a successful algorithm is targetting those opinions)
  - OtterCoder 9y ago
    Exactly. Adding no personal opinions to the algorithm is an implicit opinion that the status quo is fine, as she addresses in the talk.

24 points by heisenbit 9y ago

> My definition of success is: a meal is successful if my kids eat vegetables. It’s very different from if my youngest son were in charge. He’d say success is if he gets to eat lots of Nutella. But I get to choose success. I am in charge. My opinion matters. That’s the first rule of algorithms. > Algorithms are opinions embedded in code. It’s really different from what you think most people think of algorithms. They think algorithms are objective and true and scientific. That’s a marketing trick. It’s also a marketing trick to intimidate you with algorithms, to make you trust and fear algorithms because you trust and fear mathematics. A lot can go wrong when we put blind faith in big data. Is funny and then she builds on this a few insightful arguments.

soganess 9y ago

I think her imagery is quite evocative and she deserves much applause for it. That said, wouldn't a more accurate categorization be "Algorithms are presuppositions embedded in code". Opinions seems a bit limited, but perhaps I'm splitting vernacular hairs.

freech 9y ago

There's a fundamentally wrong view of the way algorithms are written implicit here. Take for example a recommendation algorithm for porn. It's not written by some programmer expressing his tastes in code, like he would in language, it's written by analyzing the tastes of lots of people. If the result is racist - maybe people prefer black men and asian women - then it's because people's tastes are racist, not because the programmer is racist.

setr 9y ago
i think the response would be that allowing racist tastes to persist in the successful model is itself an opinion embedded in your algorithm. Its not that algorithm is an opinion, but that the goal achieved by it is defined with opinions (and thus, a successful algorithm is targetting those opinions)
- OtterCoder 9y ago
  Exactly. Adding no personal opinions to the algorithm is an implicit opinion that the status quo is fine, as she addresses in the talk.