change to
Someone sees the numbers failing and calls for a hard switch into a win-back mode; the tone is a quick decision, not a debate.
No. Something's very wrong. Let's switch to resurrection mode.The Social Dilemma · 2020 — 第 7 / 14 章 · 3'36" · C1
AI voices in a control room treat one user's attention as a problem to be solved: "We need something actually good for a proper resurrection, given that the typical stuff isn't working." Every usual nudge has failed, so they calculate that one option — a notification about Ana — has a 92.3 percent chance of resurrection.
In a control room, AI characters review a user who has gone quiet. Tagged photos, invitations, current events, even a direct message have failed. They cross-reference him against 13,694 similar users, then calculate that one option — a notification about Ana — has a 92.3 percent chance of resurrection. Cut against this, a voice explains what algorithms are and who they serve.
注目の表現
switch toas far as the eye can seecommercial interestin order to
このシーンの表現
acting independently
The narrator says a person writes the algorithm, yet it behaves as if it has its own will. The tone is explanatory, not joking.
My calendar seems to have a mind of its own this week.
change to
to the horizon
business motive
so as to
compare across records
50 行のセリフに 29 件のメモ
change to
Someone sees the numbers failing and calls for a hard switch into a win-back mode; the tone is a quick decision, not a debate.
No. Something's very wrong. Let's switch to resurrection mode.Practice linking switch and to as one unit, with no pause between them.
No. Something's very wrong. Let's switch to resurrection mode.user-winback mode — Product-team jargon for re-engaging lost users; avoid with outsiders.
No. Something's very wrong. Let's switch to resurrection mode.the overlooked point is that ...
And what people miss is that AI already runs today's world right now.controls how the world works run means to operate or drive, not to jog
And what people miss is that AI already runs today's world right now.subject clause: The what-clause is the subject; the real claim starts after is that.
And what people miss is that AI already runs today's world right now.Keep is that light and put the beat on AI already.
And what people miss is that AI already runs today's world right now.to the horizon
The narrator describes absurdly large server rooms and pushes rows of machines to the horizon; the tone is like a tour that turns overwhelming.
Tons and tons of computers, as far as the eye can see.a huge amount of
Tons and tons of computers, as far as the eye can see.to and fro
sending information back and forth between each other all the time.be called
some could be described as algorithms that are so complicated, you would call them intelligence.built into code
I like to say that algorithms are opinions embedded in code...tuned toward
Algorithms are optimized to some definition of success.what counts as success
Algorithms are optimized to some definition of success.business company
So, if you can imagine, if a... if a commercial enterprise builds an algorithm to their definition of success,machine learning
That's where the term "machine learning" comes from.in the correct sequence
And so, every day, it gets slightly better at picking the right posts in the right order so that you spend longer and longer in that product.purpose clause: So that links better ordering to a result: users stay longer.
And so, every day, it gets slightly better at picking the right posts in the right order so that you spend longer and longer in that product.so as to
The speaker says nobody truly understands what the machine is doing, then adds the goal with in order to. The tone is explanatory, almost forensic.
And no one really understands what they're doing in order to achieve that goal.acting independently
The narrator says a person writes the algorithm, yet it behaves as if it has its own will. The tone is explanatory, not joking.
The algorithm has a mind of its own, so even though a person writes it,concession clause: Even though sets up a contrast: people write the code, yet the system can still slip away.
The algorithm has a mind of its own, so even though a person writes it,a small number of
There's only a handful of people at these companies, at Facebook and Twitter and other companies...relative clause: The who-clause defines the few people; how those systems work is what they understand.
There's only a few people who understand how those systems work, and even they don't necessarily fully understand what's gonna happen with a particular piece of content.no longer control
So, as humans, we've almost lost control over these systems.lookalike psychological profiles — Data-team jargon for users with matching behavior profiles; not for daily talk.
His psychometric doppelgangers.lasting user involvement engagement means user involvement here, not a marriage promise
My analysis shows that going political with Extreme Center content has a 62.3 percent chance of long-term engagement.Say the number and percent in one breath, stressing 62.3.
My analysis shows that going political with Extreme Center content has a 62.3 percent chance of long-term engagement.radically centrist — A half-satirical political label; use with care in formal settings.
My analysis shows that going political with Extreme Center content has a 62.3 percent chance of long-term engagement.private message
Okay, okay, so we've tried notifying him about tagged photos, invitations, current events, even a direct message from Rebecca.The joke of the control room is that the AIs sound like product managers, not villains: "My analysis shows that going political with Extreme Center content has a 62.3 percent chance of long-term engagement." Engagement is the number being optimized, so a person becomes a probability — "a 92.3 percent chance of resurrection." The lines that cut in make the argument underneath: "algorithms are opinions embedded in code" and "algorithms are not objective." Someone chose the target, and the target is time spent in the product. What makes it unsettling is that even the people running the system don't fully understand it: "no one really understands what they're doing in order to achieve that goal."
And what people miss is that AI already runs today's world right now.The danger is not a robot in the future; these systems already decide what we see today.
I like to say that algorithms are opinions embedded in code...Ranking is not neutral: someone's judgment about what counts as a good outcome is baked into the code.
Algorithms are optimized to some definition of success.Every algorithm chases a target a person picked; for a company that target is usually profit or time spent.
So, as humans, we've almost lost control over these systems.Even the builders can't fully predict what a system will do with one post, so control is largely gone.
Because the usual prompts stopped working — tagged photos, invitations, current events and a direct message have all failed, so they try something stronger.
After the other nudges failed, the system calculates a 92.3 percent chance of resurrection with a notification about Ana, so that is the option it puts forward.
The company. One speaker says a commercial enterprise builds an algorithm to its own definition of success, so it serves a commercial interest, and "It's usually profit."
One line calls it "not good enough to lead with" — a decent probability isn't strong enough to open with, so they keep looking.
Only a handful of people at these companies, and even they don't necessarily fully understand what will happen with a particular piece of content.
次のチャプター · 第 8 章reckon withThe Wikipedia Analogy
第 1 章rakes in moneyYou Are the Product
第 2 章human futuresSurveillance Capitalism Explained
第 3 章dial up the adsTech Insiders Explain the Growth Dials
第 4 章fall prey toPinterest President Can't Put Phone Down
第 5 章let the record showBen Takes the One-Week Phone Bet
第 6 章conflateWhy Social Media Harms Teens
再生中 · 第 7 章a mind of its ownAIs Plot Ben's Resurrection
第 8 章reckon withThe Wikipedia Analogy
第 9 章tilt the floorFake News Spreads Faster Than Truth
第 10 章weaponizing social mediaFacebook Weaponized in Myanmar
第 11 章digital FrankensteinsSpeaker Reframes the Tech Threat
第 12 章willful ignoranceThe Civil War Interview
第 13 章put the genie back in the bottleInterviewees Call for Regulation
第 14 章set in stoneTech Insiders Explain What Went Wrong