I started this unread blog because I read about algorithms, and how they are growing in importance and power, and how all data add to their databases, making them stronger. So I was going to add my own thoughts to the grand collection of thoughts and knowledge accumulating in the electronic world.
So far, I haven't seen much change. There is still a lot of discussion of the capabilities of Big Tech, of companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, and others that we use without much thought,and that survive by selling advertising platforms, using data collected about how we interact with websites on the Internet to help guide the advertisements. I have read that these companies now know more about me than my friends or family, or even than I do myself. That is, if asked, the algorithms and databases of Google and Facebook could answer more questions correctly than any of us could about my habits, purchases, possessions, and possible dreams and desires.
That may be true, but I don't see it as a threat. I don't feel that advertisements or search results have much effect on my decisions or actions. I could be wrong about that. I might do things because of subtle influences I'm not aware of. All through my life, I have had moments when I realized that I had been wrong about something I believed, or wrong simply not to notice that something was real and true, and I had never noticed. What I see in cyberspace could cause such moments, or could, I suspect, lure me into such unobservant behaviors, and those processes could possibly be guided by algorithms, with deliberate goals.
But I don't spend much money myself, so I don't think the advertisers or the sellers of advertisement space are getting much from me. I do sometimes get frustrated when I have trouble finding something in and Internet search that I know exists, but that won't come up the searches I perform. One strong bias I have noted in the Internet is chronology. Recent events and posted stories are favored. Even when I specifically put in dates, looking for past news, the search results are dominated by more recent stories. I consider that a flaw in the algorithm, but it might have a purpose. I think that so long as I think about these things, I can keep the insidious plot from overcoming me.
I don't know how much social media and news stories will influence my political thinking. I do get some information from them, but I try to check facts for stories, and avoid jumping onto bandwagons. I read an editorial about the Trump campaign's connections to Russian attempts to interfere in our last presidential election, and I found myself agreeing with it, which was a bit odd because I rarely agree with that author. The thesis was that there isn't much evidence of cooperation between Trump campaign people and Russian operatives, though there is extensive evidence of contacts. The contacts mostly seem to be pretty superficial. I have said a few times that my impression is that people from the Trump campaign tried to get contact and cooperation with the Russians, but that the Russians realized how incompetent the Trump people were, and ignored them. That seems to be the editorial's conclusion, too. That kind of brings up the question about why Trump has tried so hard to suppress the investigation, since nothing came of all the efforts his people made to get something of value from the Russians came to nothing, but that I see as further evidence of Trump's lack of intelligence and incompetence.
Can Mueller write a report that describes a bunch of idiots trying their best to conspire to alter the election, only to fail in every effort and look stupid? And then compound their errors by trying to cover it all up and stop the investigation into their incompetence? How much of that is actually breaking the law? It reminds me of the dilemma a police officer has when finding that the "drugs" someone sold turned out to be oregano instead of the promised marijuana. Do you charge the culprit with selling drugs? Or with fraud? Can such charges lead to a conviction? Or do you just let the dumb ass go with a warning? Or maybe threaten to tell his customers about what he actually did? Like they wouldn't figure it out on their own. Who can mistake the smell of burning oregano?
No comments:
Post a Comment