Algorithms Are Taking Over The World: Christopher Steiner at TEDxOrangeCoast

Christopher Steiner is the author of Automate This (2012) and $20 Per Gallon, a New York Times Bestseller (2009). He is a cofounder at Aisle50, a Y Combinator company that sells grocery deals through the Web. Before starting Aisle50 in 2011, Steiner was a senior writer covering technology at Forbes magazine for seven years.
His writing has also appeared in The Wall Street Journal, the Chicago Tribune, Fast Company, MIT Technology Review and Skiing Magazine. He holds an engineering degree from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a masters in journalism from Northwestern University. Steiner lives in Evanston, Ill., with his family.
About TEDx.
TEDx was created in the spirit of TED's mission, "ideas worth spreading." The program is designed to give communities, organizations and individuals the opportunity to stimulate dialogue through TED-like experiences at the local level. At TEDx events, a screening of TEDTalks videos -- or a combination of live presenters and TEDTalks videos -- sparks deep conversation and connections. TEDx events are fully planned and coordinated independently, on a community-by-community basis

[@paulhaynes7522]

That was a fascinating listen!!! What’s more is that this was 8 years ago. I wonder how much more advanced the algorithms have gotten in this time and whether they have advanced society for better or worse🤔

[@ewjedijoel]

Earth. Where humans are conditioned to be robotic. And robots are programmed to be human. We'll meet in the middle, shall we?

[@sandy666ification]

+Joel Gafford hail Scientology!

[@xamael1989]

+Joel Gafford lol only in earth

[@figthorn]

I think the blind spot here is culture. Algorithms I think are heavily biased towards English and American culture, because a lot of them are created by English speakers who identify as males and who don’t speak a second language. That is almost never mentioned in these discussions about algorithms.

[@Brainbuster]

Play at 1.5x playback speed. ;) MUCH better.

[@alexmartin7183]

TEDx PLEASE load options for low quality video. Very hard to watch in my part of the world with buffering every 4 seconds!

[@empasant]

Thank you.

[@NOCRealEstate]

Fascinating. We better act fast to counter their power! :)

[@lukasblignaut]

the problem is that the algorithms are becoming autonomous as their human controllers become less active in monitoring the them. Many algorithms are left to an always on state, "just let it do its thing" is a common phrase in the workplace today. Yet people do not understand that the algorithm they are relying on is only partially intelligent, there are limits to its decision making and anything could happen when the machine is given a problem outside of its limits.

[@screentake01]

Now what if someone who is an academy award winning actor calls up customer service and each time acts with a different personality character?? That would certainly confuse those bots!!

[@burkettbrody]

I honestly don't understand the conflict. Algorithms help the people in their searches. If they already don't care about the Beatles or Nirvana, what would getting rid of the algorithm do?

[@GuillermoRobles]

So it sounds to me that algorithms are a key tool that brings order out of chaos.

[@SabrinaDacosta]

LOL...NO!

[@danny-bw8tu]

quite right, but u forgot one thing, the opposite c an also happen, depends on what u want,

[@emmacassimere3408]

Guillermo R coding

[@Spartan043]

The sad thing about this is that we've had the computing power necessary to realize a technocratic society for decades, but we waste that technology propping up a market economy that has outlived its usefulness. We use supercomputers to speculate on prices instead of using them to allocate resources directly. Think about that for a minute. Think about how absolutely ridiculous that is. I'm almost embarrassed for our species.

[@muhammadyahya9343]

Did you notice how algorithm shape your behavior here on KZbin and all social media apps...it basically feeds the info you consume hence affecting your daily decisions in a subtle way...pay attention u will notice

[@GeneralZap]

The answer, one would think, is the human element; common sense and wholesome observation are what actually fuel success, are they not?

[@stevenfielden8955]

Algorithms cannot pre-guess what you intend to do - they can only suppose by narrowing possibilities using your previous choices to 'predict'. If anything, algorithms can only hold people in a design bubble - your phone is only a tool - not a friend.

[@GuillermoRobles]

Didn't this video start with the rearrangement of lines ?

[@rosmer00]

For a moment there, i thought i was listening to Carl Sagan..O.o

[@snorman1911]

I think this is mandatory for a TED talk - they could be talking about poop and make it sound like the most profound, important thing you'll ever hear with deep implications for the human race. (Nice talk, btw...)

[@mrjdavila]

Very interesting...

[@bzsgzs]

where can i find that software that determines my personality?? i want to understand myself better.

[@FlorinSoldan]

Read this article.

[@queseyopa]

@@FlorinSoldan ?

[@SlimThrull]

Says the guy who's brain is basically one big organic algorithm. :) You get input (sight, hearing, taste, etc) and produce outputs (actions). Smell something good? Bet you want to eat it. See a beautiful sunset? Bet you smile. Oh, don't get me wrong, we're incredibly complex algorithms. But we are, nevertheless, algorithms.

[@reenabharath9845]

I agree with you!

[@nightknight5620]

Omg that was very insightful

[@PeterAnthonyMartins]

His intonation reminds me of Carl Sagan.

[@daultonbaird6314]

Peter Anthony Martins Thought space? That's interesting,,,

[@Petioptrv]

I would have liked him to elaborate more on the "they determine what we read". I assume he's referring to Facebook's news feed, but if that's the case, then we're the ones in "control" since the algorithm learns from what we've clicked and how long we've spent on a page...

[@hairypaulsack]

+Petio Petrov yeah bruh; get the fluck off facebook.. get off the interweb!

[@Kaddikt]

+Petio Petrov like he said in the beginning, algorithms take input to produce output. in the case of facebook's news feed, the algorithms would need some input to determine what we read, and that input is what we've clicked. at least that's what i think

[@adpontier]

+Petio Petrov Nice book about the subject is The Filter Bubble.

[@rhondamathis1323]

3:33

[@SzaboB33]

to execute an algorithm you dont need a machine... a food recipe is an algorithm

[@oad1168]

interesting...very interesting.....

[@peterpetrov6522]

Does the speaker come from the year 2030? That was interesting...

[@dashawnramelbledsoe_niblscoin]

True

[@speciescruzing2]

phloor show !!,,

[@circusboy90210]

As far as psychological algorithms movie is already knew and already can use don't need algorithms for this

[@sonofmanjohn8322]

everything is calculated

[@benaloney]

Doesn't a computer only read a representation of an algorithm, not the algorithm itself?

[@WaterMan-ss6eb]

Is Christopher the son of ted kubinski ?

[@naimulhaq9626]

Is there an algorithm that will tell Obama how to solve the ISIS problem. I am not joking, every time the President of USA is faced with a problem like Afghanistan or Iraq, they not only fumble, the people of the whole world is made to pay.

[@Tr1ckori]

No, computers don't solve problems like that because a president makes choices. A computer doesn't think, it listens to your command but can only guess decisions based on your previous decisions or commands if you will.

[@naimulhaq9626]

Richard Wild Bill Gates' , "virtual president",should be able to make choices,or at least make "probable" choices.

[@Tr1ckori]

make probable choices? If you mean give a list of suitable choices then somebody already has that job. I think Bill would be great at it but who would take over the work he's been doing? The truth is our system of nations does not work as it is kind of like the party system with the exception that parties don't work together except for a coalition which only benefits the party with the most votes out of the two partaking in the coalition. I believe the only way past it is to have a worldwide debate about rules and regulations and program a computer to uphold those rules and regulations. Example, Oscar Pastorius or whatever his name is should get life in prison for murder as he attempted to kill a burglar anyway without checking for possible weapons, he should get more than 5 years house arrest with 1 year in prison but fame is more important than a life a guess. Computers don't compromise they say it doesn't work or it does. What would you suggest?

[@naimulhaq9626]

Richard Wild Sorry, I should have said "consider possible choices". You are certainly correct in pointing out the limitations of computers to make human judgements. You are absolutely right about programming a computer with accepted rules and regulations, to offer possible choices. However I have a hunch that Bill already has worked out a program, but is waiting for the appropriate time to release.

[@Tr1ckori]

I sure hope so my friend, it's nice to know there's somebody likeminded out there :)

[@willhart6110]

how about the algorithm for fallatio...

[@RM-gm7lu]

Hmm very interesting...

[@TerrorJesus]

Algorithms are cavemen thoughts.

[@jameshall5556]

Indeed.

[@dragonsigh2]

who is this guy and why is he trying to get people afraid of technology?

[@zes3813]

wrong, idts nerx

[@xamael1989]

this is ridiculous

[@xamael1989]

***** indeed it seems to be my friend my friend and i think i finally get the gentleman's point i

[@hairypaulsack]

+xamael1989 are you are you a robot?

[@foxdelaney8655]

Listen to this mute XD

[@lucasfish8748]

cancer

[@timcook3410]

lucasfish 87 cocaine! tootski! asperger!

[@marianharris68]

The calm act mechanically dare because goal essentially battle in a horrible ethernet. dazzling, shrill interactive

[@ArnoldvanKampen]

What kind of bizarre rubbish is this millisecond trading with algorithms? It is nothing but a game, sports if you like. It is a symbol of a casino economy par excellence! To me, it is the biggest bullshit in the world. Now, how can a real economy allow itself to depend on this nonsense? To say, very seriously, a billion evaporated in 5 minutes or 45 if you like? To say, look and see how important the algorithms are! There ought to be thought about and looked for another system, to get rid of this lunacy once and for all.

[@circusboy90210]

Arnold Van Kampen You don't even realize how insignificant a billion 0 dollar really Is

[@gmshadowtraders]

Can an algorithm of today produce a piece of art which is up to the standard of the masters? Say a Rembrandt or a Turner?

[@utubewatcher806]

yes.

[@TizzyT455]

gmshadowtraders yes

[@gmshadowtraders]

TizzyT455 Okay guys, link me to the computer's work of art. I'd like to see how they compare.

[@krizzahedia7039]

It's possible.

[@Tutorials4Stuffz]

Knowledge is definitely power. How easily can people who know about the existence of these algorithms fool them? For example, with the personality analysis. Is it possible for such a thing to occur? Because if algorithms become as commonplace and important as we predict, especially for personality analysis and matching people for tasks, then that could become one of our biggest problems.

[@edwinmorenomarun6404]

This sounds like another proof that Ray Kurzwell is right And the Singularity is Near

[@brandik790]

Best talk on algorithms and modern day culture!! 👏 finally understand this now

[@Spartan043]

Read Thorstein Veblen and G. Edward Griffin's books, and you'll come to understand why the price system is an entirely arbitrary societal construct that has nothing to do with the actual value of labor or goods, and therefore it makes no sense to waste computing clock cycles on it using finite sources of energy. Also, look up the Technocracy movement and The Venus Project and you'll see what I'm talking about when I say direct allocation of resources.

[@snorman1911]

Ahem, Skynet.

[@GeneralZap]

Only yours.

[@archaedemos]

interesting!

[@joaodecarvalho7012]

What social psychologists have to say about the NASA’s system?

[@circusboy90210]

Algorithms are severely limited and no they really can't do things humans can do. Like true creativity and empathy. Skill litter very important almost every endeavor

[@circusboy90210]

The major and most of port trades on Wall Street are still done by human beings. They just do things better than robots ever will

[@stevenfielden8955]

Algorithms are very simple - they give you choice to chose from whilst you're inside the design bubble, - if you don't make a choice, by stepping out of the design bubble the algorithm cannot learn nor give response to your choice by presenting you with further choices - further more: - anyone living in a bubble small enough to imagine that algorithms can out manoeuvre the human brain in perception and thought is in for a very long isolation - (the designers of these algorithms will be at work for ever).

[@stevenfielden8955]

Experiment: - put your smart phone down for a second and you too will realise the potential of unlimited choice and possibility.

[@sandorrezmann1055]

Who's liable when algorithms screw up??

[@lookup.3047]

Keep replacing humans with algorithms, some day they are going to need an algorithm to create a human.

[@waggawaggaful]

Has it occurred to them that some people understand how to manipulate algorithms in order to craft a particular image of themselves that they'd like the world to see? Lol.

[@zes3813]

wrg, idts nerx, not machinex

[@lucyvalentinovalverdegonza2241]

Michelle they will categorize you as unstable

[@CarlosSanchez-ev3bn]

i don't like this mans demeanor.

[@felixthecat5416]

man that was awwwwkword

[@JaredHester]

Algorithms have neither agency nor intentionality, they are tools used by people. The question is not whether algorithms are taking over the world, it is -- Are the algorithms we're using the best ones possible to solve the most important problems?

[@sagenmiau7585]

I've watched this a few times to really let this idea soak in, but one thing that bothers me is when he asks if the algorithms would find Nirvana or the Beatles. I have to say that of course they would. To assume that an algorithm would not find a band who at one point was the most popular band in the world, who could be classified as pop, they're not so special. An algorithm could place The Beatles in a pop playlist easily. Although Nirvana is not nearly as pop-y, I do think that a lot of modern pop does have some influences from bands like Nirvana. They would be able to pick up on both of these bands easily. Don't get me wrong, I do like both of these bands a lot. But to put them on a pedestal and say that they're too good for an algorithm to put them into a pop list is difficult for me to agree with, even if it has to be a few degees from a song.