thread for thinkpieces about TEH BIG BAD ALGORITHMS! ALGORITHMS! that don't seem to understand what an algorithm is

actual lol (no offense to any doctors other than the ones I know)

reminds me of having a routine checkup to make sure everything else was fine after a specialist scheduled me for surgery, and the primary care dude was basically, "wow, surgery for what? that sucks man, sounds bad"

OT aside: those in the know don't do routine checkups. If you have symptoms, by all means seek care, but fishing for diagnoses is fishing for overtreatment. One of the central falsehoods of the U.S. healthcare debate is that more healthcare is better healthcare.

recently at work i was trying to explain to someone how a certain system availability metric has been defined and she was like “ok can you send me the algorithm?”

it was all i could do to not respond “it’s.....not an algorithm. it’s a spreadsheet full of formulas. a woman named sharon populates it once a month.”

I’d still probably call that an implementation of some algorithm.

maybe sharon just types whatever comes to mind. the sharon algorithm.

in theaters July 10

<record scratch>

an algorithm is just a really specific recipe what is all this mysticism nonsense

i use an algorithm to put my pants on

today is a banner day for terrible takes about algorithms but this older one is the one that is the most ridiculous

https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/20/are-algorithms-hacking-our-thoughts/

Is human thinking beginning to mimic algorithmic processes?

yeah, fucking ban to-do lists

also featuring references to Karl Marx and Baudrillard:

Algorithms create a sort of Baudrillardian simulation, where each rating has completely replaced the reality it refers to

ironically, the current use of the word "algorithm" is itself a Baudrillardian simulacra, in that it is completely detached from reality

(I know that's not quite what it really means)

also *ym

*um, christ

for the "oh! i always get those two mixed up" file: jean baudrillard, charles baudelaire

maybe an algorithm would help you remember

Let’s talk about algorithms.

Let’s talk about time and space.

Let’s talk about O(n^{2}) and O(n log(n)).

The Most Important Algorithms

After a long discussion with some of my RISC colleagues about what the 5 most important algorithms on the world are, we couldn't reach a consensus on this question. So I suggested to perform a little survey. The criterion for suggestions was that these algorithms should be widely used. Further we restrict ourselves to the fields of computer science and mathematics.

A* search algorithm
Beam Search
Binary search
Branch and bound
Buchberger's algorithm
Data compression
Diffie-Hellman key exchange
Dijkstra's algorithm
Discrete differentiation
Dynamic programming
Euclidean algorithm
Expectation-maximization algorithm (EM-Training)
Fast Fourier transform (FFT)
Gradient descent
Hashing
Heaps (heap sort)
Karatsuba multiplication
LLL algorithm
Maximum flow
Merge sort
Newton's method
Q-learning
Quadratic sieve
RANSAC
RSA
Schönhage-Strassen algorithm
Simplex algorithm
Singular value decomposition (SVD)
Solving a system of linear equations
Strukturtensor
Union-find
Viterbi algorithm

(from http://www.risc.jku.at/people/ckoutsch/stuff/e_algorithms.html)

This is a pretty good list and also reflects contemporary use!

I’d only remove strukturtensor and RANSAC. I don’t think there’s any that I’d add.

my first job out of college dijkstra's algorithm came up in the interview and I knew how it worked and I got the job so I think algorithms are good

if I had a dollar for every time someone wrote about how algorithms are evil, I'd have a huge list of dollars, but I could never sort it

RSA shortly to be toast thanks quantum computing

top 5 there I think are:
hashing
DH
FFT
merge sort
compression

my wildcard most important algorithm is the Knuth-Plass line-breaking algorithm

this is beyond my current level of knowledge but I approve of it

(I mean, not *all* of it is, but)

I mean I've never had to know precisely what a fourier transform is in my life but I know it's important for signal processing!

merge sort is cool as hell

Quick sort is mental

One of the authors of that Techcrunch idiocy is a compsci phd apparently?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPRA0W1kECg

quicksort is beautiful: quicksort(x < p) ++ p ++ quicksort(x >= p)

I like thread. And I really enjoy dunking on people writing about the coming gray goo or whatever. Excuse my rambling.

My analysis professor once described learning calculus, like reading Shakespeare or reading a foreign language, as something that makes everyone smarter and see the world in an entirely different way. I always loved that.

I think quicksort could be added to that list of subjects. Everything from the implementation to its analysis and even its peculiar history is complex and fascinating. I actually think a few of these would fit that too. Simplex, Dijkstra’s, or gradient descent would apply too.

If I would’ve posted this five years ago, everyone (myself included) would’ve said gradient descent should probably be removed, right? It’s incredible when ideas can be rediscovered or applied in different ways to transform entire fields. I pay my bills because of gradient descent! If it didn’t come back my research would look completely different.

I really don’t know anything about the two encryption algorithms Diffie-Hellman and RSA outside of the pop science descriptions.

I’m a little surprised by the lack of compiler-related algorithms like LALR or ideas like Chomsky hierarchy of formal grammars or even Church calculi. I first heard about the Kahan algorithm for SVD when I went to a Q&A with Chomsky and someone asked him to share a math trick he liked.

Silby, of the algorithms on the list I’ve implemented, FFT is the trickiest but possibly the most rewarding. It’s usefulness also extends outside of signal processing. I believe NLP, for example, now uses conceptually similar transformations for translation problems.

You should try it! (I bet the key exchange or RSA are trickier but, like I said, I don’t know much about them. Maybe I should try and learn something.)

https://www.fastcodesign.com/90174587/if-you-walk-breathe-or-talk-this-ai-probably-knows-who-you-are

that one's not so bad beyond the headline

this maybe isn't the thread for it but someone I follow on Twitter pointed out Angela Merkel being on the same Coachella tier with an android

What are the implications of AI? How can society interact responsibly with machines? And will our current political strategies help shape the future of intelligent systems? Do not miss out on #moralsandmachines in Berlin on June 27 & 28. Tickets -> https://t.co/s4l6W1aneD #wiwo pic.twitter.com/1GeIBLSKgl

— Léa Steinacker (@leasteinacker) June 7, 2018

Eye in the Sky: Real-time Drone Surveillance System (DSS) for Violent Individuals Identification using ScatterNet Hybrid Deep Learning Network

https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.00746v1

😳

I'm starting to think any paper submitted should require an ethicist be one of the credited contributors before it's allowed to be published

see that doesn't belong in the thread either because it sounds like it actually is a bad algorithm

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/yuval-noah-harari-technology-tyranny/568330/

I haven't read any of Harari's books, but I feel like the buzz around him is mostly positive so I was surprised to read stuff like this:

Imagine Anna Karenina taking out her smartphone and asking Siri whether she should stay married to Karenin or elope with the dashing Count Vronsky. Or imagine your favorite Shakespeare play with all the crucial decisions made by a Google algorithm. Hamlet and Macbeth would have much more comfortable lives, but what kind of lives would those be?

tbf this is nowhere near as dumb as the OP and he raises plenty of valid concerns, but I'm not sure techno-dystopianism is going to help us anymore than its opposite ever did

The insatiable demand for content and for novelty leads to every kind of inanity getting disseminated. The bar for punditry is set exceptionally low.

harari's 2014 book is compelling, his 2016 one a bit more of a slog

came here to post this

http://www.drb.ie/essays/the-hive-mind

the whole paragraph is a clusterfuck really

Democratic elections and free markets might cease to make sense.

algorithmic trading has existed for over three decades now

(and actually has caused very real and very big problems with the economy, but that isn't as exciting as robots stealing our free will)

only tangentially related to algorithm panic but the best thread on this subject you'll ever erad

(nsfw, probably, conceptually nsfw at least)

Ugh. I will be receiving this article for the foreseeable future, and while I love yelling at people for sending me dumb shit, I have things to do. In an effort to save time, I present

ONE DEGREE OF TRANSLATIONAL FREEDOM DOES NOT A BLOWJOB MAKE

A THREADhttps://t.co/ltHco7EGtU

— Kyle Machulis (@qDot) October 26, 2018

s/read

the links in this thread are like a greatest hits of shitty articles written about THE BIG BAD ALGORITHMS: that awful Racked piece, that terrible "pop music all sounds the same now!!!!!1!1!!!one" study, etc.

https://www.cjr.org/analysis/algorithms-music.php?fbclid=IwAR3gSkSWU0xFnlPK-AkF8BcQwryqYeVdMqB96p_phCE12hyIMuvBbe394Pc

Perhaps with an undertone of personal resentment, phrases like “algorithmic culture” and the “algorithm economy” have cropped up among critics to illustrate the way aesthetic and commercial motivations shift in this world of passive, automated discovery.

TRANSLATION: no one knows what the fuck an algorithm is, and people use "algorithms" as a scary technological bucket to hold their old anxieties about art vs. commerce, authenticity, rockism, and perhaps aging out of technology's target demographic, and I have no idea how people who program things for a living and also listen to music don't want to disintegrate on the regular

“By ‘algorithm culture,’ I meant the notion of art as something reduced to an integer and formula—a constant infinity loop of ‘recommended if you like…’ playlists,” Weiss says.

not to pick on him, I generally like his music writing, but this is kind of hilarious since an infinite loop is, by definition, not an algorithm, which is finite

lol and otm. Weiss might have been gesturing at some kind of cybernetic feedback loop system? Idk I think the discourse/hype around machine learning has made these discussions even worse.

I did think this bit was interesting:

Spotify employs natural-language processing (NLP) models in its recommendation algorithms, analyzing text from blogs, news articles, forums, and other sources to draw connections among different artists and songs, and to figure out what adjectives and moods people associate with these artists online.

Reminds me of people wondering why Conde Nast wanted to buy Reddit. Also that one poster who would freak out about Spotify all the time...maybe he knew

I wonder if they don't actually do that and just say they do b/c it sounds good

IBM must be grateful there's an I in Mafia

ha, I was going to ask, is this actually getting traction? The introduction is disqualifying on its own

the algorithm currently on my shit list is the one medium used to determine, correctly, that I would click this and email me about it

I don't even know

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0F45NHLrRA

https://www.businessinsider.com/hbo-netflix-recommended-by-humans-website-fan-testimonial-2019-8

look out for the algorithims is something

i'm very fascinated by the placement of objects in that room, specifically the large potted plant which almost looks photoshopped in

seriously! like, why is dude putting his tripod on top of the kick drum head? Looks like it could lead to it ripping? ... otoh, he could have just put the tripod on the floor, if it weren't for the immense potted plant that seems to be there for no good reason? The potted plant is really jarring the more I think about it.

also the plant looks a *slight bit* tilted? from left to right? like it seems to tilt more than the bass drum
it's a very claustrophobic mise en scene

yeah ... the plant is really troubling ... maybe it was photoshopped in, but in place of some other object? also the tree branch that seems to be tapping at the window at various times? though we can't hear it in the recording, even though it is ostensibly being recorded through the zoom recorder on the tripod, which would presumably pick up some of that sound? though, maybe not?

and what are the drums resting on? it looks like it's some white pedestal or ... like they are just sitting in mid-air? is it just me, or does it kinda look like the snare/tom stack is just floating there?

really wish I knew who ran this account

Looking for non-algorithmic pop smashes!! https://t.co/SOm0DQqeSQ

— ShittyAandRguy (@shittyAandRguy) December 28, 2019

an otherwise ok aggregation post of a twitter workaround with an unfortunate title: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7kz9ez/go-into-2020-by-taking-your-twitter-feed-back-from-the-algorithm

Here's the heart of it:

By adding a few strings—little bits of code used by Twitter to tag types of tweets—to your muted keywords list, you can change the way the Twitter algorithm sends content to your feed.

While logged in to Twitter, go to Settings > Notifications > Muted > Muted words, and add the strings below.

•suggest_activity_tweet: Stops the platform from feeding you tweets you might like

•suggest_recycled_tweet_inline: Stops repeated tweets from appearing over and over

•suggest_pyle_tweet: Stops serving tweets because mutuals engaged with them

•suggest_grouped_tweet_hashtag: Stops tweets associated with popular hashtags from appearing randomly in your timeline

•suggest_who_to_follow: Self-explanatory

•generic-activity-momentsbreaking: Keep tweets served simply because they're part of a Moment out of your feed

right, take your feed back from the algorithm by... adding additional parameters to the algorithm

from this spotty essay on big thief: https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/listening-in-an-emergency

The task of finding new music presents its own difficulties. If the trouble with YouTube is that it serves up progressively more extreme ideological content, Spotify has precisely the opposite problem, where any song, no matter how brilliant, quickly leads to a chain of forgettable copies that degrade the first song in retrospect.

a) so how, exactly, does this differ from YouTube? because the last time I checked YouTube had a music recommendation algorithm too (although half the time it just sends you to "Plastic Love"). or for that matter, how does this differ from the one on SoundCloud, or Bandcamp, or Amazon, or Last.fm, or literally every other music site that has a similarity feature?

b) 1,000 landfill indie copies exist of virtually every band in existence, because that's how influence works, and the only difference between a playlist and a used-record bin is that the used-record bin probably gave people an advance; in fact one could argue this is what brilliance is, the inability to fade into the background

c) and if Big Thief (the subject of the essay) is indeed brilliant, then why don't they get degraded by the 1,000 Big Thief copies that exist?

d) how exactly does this have anything to do with the rest of the essay

https://slate.com/technology/2020/07/college-admissions-algorithms-applications.html

"will colleges start using THE ALGORITHMS in admissions decisions?" unfortunately I have some bad news for the author about the current process that college admission boards use

college board website: "Large, public state university systems often use a mathematical formula based on a student's grade point average (GPA) and scores on the SAT or ACT. They tend to favor in-state applicants."

if there's some explanation for how this is not an algorithm, the author hasn't mentioned it

the algorithms haven't had a great week in the UK

https://www.wired.com/story/an-algorithm-determined-uk-students-grades-chaos-ensued/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2020/08/13/algorithm-has-ruined-a-level-results-thousands-students/
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/education/a-level-exam-grades-faulty-algorithm-a4526646.html

Q: Who is to blame for the government's mishandling of a situation everyone saw coming six months ago?
A: The algorithms!

FWIW I think this scandal is a bit different as most people seem to correctly recognise that the algorithm is being used as a clumsy shield by the unforgivable people who are actually in charge of this shitstorm.

I'm going to lose my fucking mind:

Algorithms, by contrast, change as human behavior changes. They resemble not the cars or coal mines we have regulated in the past, but something more like the bacteria in our intestines, living organisms that interact with us. In one experiment, for example, Matias observed that when users on Reddit worked together to promote news from reliable sources, the Reddit algorithm itself began to prioritize higher-quality content.

this is the equivalent of saying "when people started adding 2+4 instead of 2+2, the algorithm produced 6 instead of 4! It's changing!" (or, in this case: "when people started to promote more high-quality content, the prioritize-stuff-people-promote algorithm started to prioritize more high-quality content! It's changing!")

i think my brain needs a new algorithm

Recipes, by contrast, change as human behavior changes. The recipe called for chicken so the first time I made it, I used a can of dog food. The second time I used fresh chicken, resulting in higher-quality food.

now uk government policy

The minister in charge of the new law regulating behaviour online has told social media bosses to “remove your harmful algorithms today” - or face swift criminal prosecution https://t.co/BkxI3Hwcr8

— Sky News (@SkyNews) November 4, 2021

Is that Secretary Aimless? ;)

She said of the social media companies: "They know what they're doing wrong."

Her junior minister, Chris Philp, added: "The platforms have no regard or scant regard for protecting people… it is completely unacceptable and irresponsible."

Ms Dorries, who was unexpectedly promoted to culture secretary by Boris Johnson in last month's reshuffle, also confirmed that the bill would use an expansive definition of online harm, up to and including "psychological harm" caused by abuse.

The government has found the exact nature of "online harm" difficult to pin down and critics - including tech company lobbyists - argue that it has still not been properly defined in the legislation.

The government is being urged to use its upcoming Online Safety Bill to give police and prosecutors more powers.

Ms Dorries said she believed the definition was "quite clear", saying: "If it causes physical or psychological injury then, of course, it wouldn't be allowed."

However, she said that the concept of "societal harm", which some have called on to be included in the bill, was "too complex" to put into law.

my god

Omg they're doing it out in the open!!

https://www.algoriddim.com/

https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/10/22775580/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-judge-apple-ai-pinch-to-zoom-footage-manipulation-claim

What the fucking fuck. Fuck this judge.

judge is 75. judge doesn't do email

“iPads, which are made by Apple, have artificial intelligence in them that allow things to be viewed through three-dimensions and logarithms,” the defense insisted. “It uses artificial intelligence, or their logarithms, to create what they believe is happening. So this isn’t actually enhanced video, this is Apple’s iPad programming creating what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there,” they added.

...Judge Schroeder argued that it was the prosecution — not the defense — that had the burden of proving that Apple doesn’t use artificial intelligence to manipulate footage, demanding that they provide an expert to testify, and didn’t allow the prosecution to adjourn to find that expert before bringing Rittenhouse up for cross-examination. The judge suggested that prosecutors could somehow find that expert in 20 minutes while they took a brief recess. “Maybe you can get someone to testify on this within minutes, I don’t know,” said the judge. No such expert was there by the time the trial resumed.

someone, find an expert on logarithms!!

i think i could be a pioneering lawyer, now that i know this kind of stuff works!

your honor, i'm afraid that all of the video and audio exhibits presented by the prosecution must be thrown out. you see, they don't want you to know all of the video and audio has been manipulated. it is not the original sound and images that a witness would have perceived in real life. these sounds and images were captured by a device - an iPhone, made by a company called Apple - and then stored on their digital platform. in the process, apple uses proprietary "logarithms" to convert these files for storage.

Judge Larry Fontaine: I am so sick of these companies and their logarithms trying to fool us. Prosecution, unless you can produce a logarithm expert while I go take a 20-minute three-flusher, I will be forced to throw out all evidence in this trial. Now if you'll excuse me, I have a crossword to do

Why does the YouTube Music algorithim think I want to hear "Take My Breathe Away" every goddam day

if they mean The Knife single then because it's a great single