Should Computers Run the World? - with Hannah Fry 

Flint Read “Dammit, Greg! If you can’t quit cooing in class, I’m going to have to ask you to leave. Unlike SOME pigeons here, the rest of the class are interested in learning oncology.”

:(

True, but Greg's dad made a huge donation to the hospital and Greg now runs the pathology department.

Glenn Pollock Sadly, it’s only a matter of time before Greg gets busted self-proscribing opioids and loses his medical license. Despite the high-paying job, trendy nest in Chelsea and young Frillback Pigeon trophy wife, Greg is one sad bird. How many times has his assistant had to pour him into a cab and send him home after too many martinis at lunch, I wonder?

In 2019 we know his parents bribed him and the teachers to get into medical school

public intellectual

She sometimes increases her talking speed too much and slightly stumbles on her own words but overall very enjoyable speaker yes

And I so very much envy her husband!

also hot af

I've seen several of her presentations and thoroughly enjoyed every one.

Just one of the advantages of not using money; something which is advocated by The Venus Project and something which I believe we should adopt.

JustOneAsbesto, they are stressed by the need to get food. But that is a more basic need than how to pay your student loan.

@@goromaster10 only stupid people (including ones with high IQs) ring up massive student debt. Smart people go to state schools, get jobs and study practical majors.

The one doing it wrong probably got out of the cage a lot sooner. Some deep learning right there!

@@gabydewilde Finally a response from someone who actually knows what a joke is.

simp

@@radioanon4535 the meme is dead

Should Hannah Fry Computers 'run the World?

no :(

So a recommendation algorithm recognized that a biological algorithm was learning about algorithms and responded with a suggestion for a machine with an algorithm?

@Phi6er A lawnmower that eats grass for energy. That would be amazing.

Ad sense works on your past behavior within Googles ecosystem, so you may have been doing research on stuff or must have been reading mail in Gmail just before you stumbled into this talk. The content of this video influences it only slightly compared to all the activity you had done before this video. Big brother is watching!

I got an add for painkillers at the end.

As long as it's not a self driven Husqvarna chainsaw, that might classify you as a tree and try to cut you down

nice one

Algorhythms

I see what you did there…

A Classical compusition for an orchestra of strings.

No no, it is: I'll be batch

Also I’m completely in crush with her. Le sigh.

she’s party to untold counts of menticide & democide

Loosely rehearsed and a script. Talking about a subject she knows very well. How is that impressive lol. That is expected rofl.

He said he enjoyed the talk. Where are you seeing "impressive"? And being knowledgeable about a field and being a good speaker don't necessarily go hand in hand.

@@Ken.- I know what he wrote, i looked through the comments and found 5+ of these saying the same thing. Wow so impressive ect. Knowledgeable part is far more impressive than speaking but the thing that goes everyones head is that THIS IS EXPECTED OF THEM. THEY ARE SPEAKING IN AN AUDITORIUM. And thus it cant be considered wow impressive much love. The bar for that is set much higher. This is not about gender either. I have not watched a single talk in this channel and found it boring. Meaning all of them are more than good enough to convey the subject at hand. This leaves me to believe theres clear bias for a pretty lady talking about complex things somehow being more impressive because she is a beautiful smart woman. I wonder who writes these comments. Cant be men because that thought never came into my head. Must be women power tripping or something lol.

@I'm the captain now I have no idea what it is you're trying to convey. Too many basic errors for me to decipher it. Have a nice day.

@@Ken.- want tl dr version? Her talk is no more impressive than any other ive seen. People need to calm down this isnt an entertainment medium.

That or she is a witty genius lol

😂

What does it mean?

@@tantiwahopak101 describing something or someone as "full(y)-fledged" is a metaphor that comes from the life cycle of birds. A fully fledged bird is an adult one which has shed the down it was born with, and grown its adult feathers. A full fledged pathologist is a professional one who has completed his/her training

I got that too and immediately started worrying if all humour had left the Earth.

I'm not a simple girl. I see Hanna Fry, and I curl in to a fetal position, tumble over and wishes she could hold me in her arms.

These replies are pure gold :'D

Just like Hannah Fry

I'm a simple guy. I see a copypaste comment, I dislike.

I'm a simp. I see a girl, and I click.

Just binging on it now! lol Her BBC 2 docs are awesome too if you've seen those?

The Royal Institution has been giving TED talks since 1825

I would hope that The Royal Institution does a better job at vetting their speakers than TED.

TED talks are commercial and PC biased talks with a lot less intelectual value.

TED Talk started great but then devolved into a hot mush of interesting speakers and snake oil peddlers.

@@PapiJack With TED talks proper being interesting speakers and TEDx talks being snake oil peddlers, or has the legitimate article also degraded?

Had a huge crush on her as a teen

Why dont you send her a gift?

Pls explain the joke, i dont want to fake laugh when i hear it in future

We also think she is amazing, which is why she is doing the Christmas Lectures this year!

Transhumanists would agree, in the area of technological augmentation.

But but but... what about the pigeons? Let's not discriminate against crows, either!

define the procedure "plus" first

"man plus machine" was theorised to be why we got the Boeing crashes (I didn't keep up) If there's a silver bullet, this doesn't seem to be it (though I'm all for improvements where we can get them)

Augmentation seems the best possibility in general it takes advantage of human insight and machine rapid processing. In specific domains machines will be vastly superior. Currently games like chess/go and even real time strategy games -- AI is way ahead.

It looks like you are trying to avoid videos with "Hannah Fry" in them. Would you like help? ☐ Yes Please ☐ Yes ☐ No (Yes)

Your avatar looks like sheep jumping a wooden fence on a lush green field.

*you* interact with this video *youtube algorithm* would you like some minecraft video from the year 2010?

something distinctly Orwellian about the term "thought leader"............

@@freezatron then don't visit american edutainment conferences :)

your thirst is showing

aidan levy, do you think I need to go to the Ministry of Truth for some political correction ? . & why would my saying that preclude me from going to a conference ? . are you a thought leader as well ? I'm not very good at this double think malarky, can you tell ? :)

I really is just that simple, isn't it?

that's not simplicity. it's called thirst.

and vice versa

It's all academic - there is zero chance that democracies will put a computer in charge. People don't trust politicians, let alone a computer program that could be infiltrated and biased.

Stephen Sinclair it’s actually the same question

cheating the youtube algorithm I see...

Slightly arousing.

"Useless" is a matter of opinion :-)

Still better than a biased and selfish human. The whole world has put their faith in programmers because computers make the world go around.

​ tarquin161234 I agree, humans should change their mentality. But the whole problem is money! Besides programmers aren't all the same so you want to trust a programmer, who's a human But you say humans are selfish and biased? Ever heard of malware? Or ransomware? Or did you think a computer virus is a biological virus that can infect computers? 😂 j/k

@@sendraw4088 Yeah you're right. Computer programs are no different to people because they were made by people. Clearly a human/democratic check is always going to be needed, so the recommendation of the video is a very good one (for computers and algorithms only to be used as tools by people.)

@@tarquin161234 You do realize that the computer's instructions are going to be written by one of those biased and selfish humans, right?

Terrible argument. The Republic was written by a "biased and selfish" human, but his instructions, if they were followed, would not lead to biased and selfish robot politicians. It's akin to saying railway logistics are inherently flawed because they were designed by humans, completely ignoring the fact that humans are only biased and selfish in very specific areas, and in those areas computers would obviously do better.

Only the ones that I did not program first. :P

Algorithmic composition is one of the greatest failures of computer science, so far. We still seem to have have little to no understanding of what exactly determines the quality of human music of any era. We can ask our greatest composers and musicians how they are composing and performing and many of them can explain in great detail what it is that makes their music "special". Our conductors can tell every instrumentalist in an orchestra how to play their part so that the entire orchestra comes together in a way that is far more than the sum of its parts. What we have not managed is to transform these explanations of how music is being created into a set of rules that can compose as much as a simple folk song or that can play a straight forward blues progression in a "natural" way. I find the depth of this failure utterly fascinating.

I'm fond of saying art is self-expression: no self, no self-expression - and the reason we express ourselves is to communicate with other humans. Bach knows people; the algo only knows rules.

Same

@@davidschmidt5507 Likewise.

She has been in some documentaries, and on the numberphile channel

So I have to admit I am not quite sure if I understand your point. How was the first one not cohesive? What were the indicators that gave it away for you? I am sure that there is tons of music written by humans that is not emotionally touching. I would also assume that different humans react differently to music. I might get emotionally carried away by some blast-punk and feel nothing while hearing bach. For you it might be the contrary.

@@niklasb6849 Yes, the first one is technically cohesive, but it doesn’t sound like a human wrote it because it lacks emotionality that only a human can give it. There is no “story” to it, it just sounds like Bach. The whole magic of writing music of any genre is to convey emotional stories. Whether or not you get emotionally carried away by it is a separate experience and will vary by personal preference. I just get head tingles when I hear music I like, whether that’s Bach, punk, hard rock, or a pop song.

Interesting - I experienced more of an emotional reaction to the first piece. Just kidding, it's not interesting. That's just how human emotions work - they're completely subjective and contextual.

There's worse. Enjoy it while it lasts, whatever they replace it with likely won't be an improvement.

@@EggBastion likely the twitter account will cause it

Although it would be nice to have a government run by a committee of both humans and computer representatives, which can filter through sound bites and and hyperbole, and runs the country logically.

@@wyndhamcoffman8961 far too complicated for modern AI, there are some great tools though

Not always. Computers are doing a decent job of generating algorithms already. In the simplest case, they can randomly generate multiple models, hundreds or thousands of them, and choose the ones that closest match a goal. To the video, it's imperative that we understand the limitations of this process and not treat it as a flawless system.

Talking about the 737-MAX situation? In that case I do think that the idea of that system is great, with the changed configuration the aircraft is prone to stall* under certain circumstances pilots might miss out on or aren't used to on the entire 737 family. Proper detection of that and overriding the pilot to avoid the stall and potentially falling out of the sky would be good. Now obviously a lot went wrong, the implementation was quite flawed and the training/certification guidelines/requirements from Boeing about the new feature was less than ideal. It should've been communicated better, such a scenario should've had at least one simulator training session for pilots flying that to experience it and go through the motions of manually overriding it. A bit baffling to me how such a rather essential new feature didn't get that kind of attention. Most concerning though is how they managed to implement it using only one of the angle of attack sensors creating a single point of failure. Of all industries the commercial airline sector is about redundancy everywhere with hardware and checklist procedures. Fairly certain a second angle of attack sensor is on that plane what it should've been designed to do is to turn the system off and give a warning as soon as a significant discrepancy shows up between those to sensors. I'm a bit afraid they were mandated by regulations to put a system in place to prevents accidents due to stalling, jammed it in there somewhere late along the design process. Did didn't test and evaluated it deeply enough due to time pressure to bring the planes to market. I sometimes do wonder what the damage is by now, obviously the two crashed planes but the financial and logistical impact on airlines with grounded planes is very significant. Boeing itself suffered a lot too in that department but that somehow bothers me less they are somewhat at the "too big to fail" state and it was their own fault to end up in the situation. I do hope though it won't affect too many regular Boeing employees and that it helps them to be more careful in the future in their corporate culture. *: Stall here is the fluid dynamics sense of the word. Basically there's an angle of attack referred to as the critical angle of attack at which the lifting potential of the wing is optimal. Going beyond that angle of attack will result in too much airflow separation behind the wing causing reduced lift force. It'll typically result in at least some loss of altitude but it could be severe and if not corrected control can be lost of the airplane. Having this happen in general is dangerous and at low altitude or busy airspace even more so.

Pigeons were not only used as messengers in WW1 and WW2, but they were even trained to guide missiles in WW2. Sadly the latter was a "suicide" mission though. :(

I think the invisible sheep have an edge.

ww3 will be fought with Nukes, no need for any ww4

I wouldn't go as far as to say "all these problems can be fixed" but sure, most of them can. And open-source is definately the way to go with tools as important as these as well as anything made with public money (With the exception of national security). Also an important part of making them open source is a generous bug bounty to actually make people report bugs instead of just exploiting them. There should also be a (properly, unlike most datasets) anonymized dataset of the decisions made by the algorithm to see if they seem valid and if the algorithm needs tweaking.

@@Sibula if we are thinking that we can cure aging and fix almost any disease, we can certainly fix man made algorithms. and there is a very important difference to how I would use computing power to how she and the state is using computing power. She worked to put computing power at the service of the state to control people. I would put computing power at the service of the citizens to control the state. Computing power to control the state can NEVER fall into authoritarianism while concentrating power into the hands of the state it's sure that sooner or later it will fall into authoritarianism.

@@canemcave I don't really know how you're planning to "put computing power at the service of the citizens to control the state". Someone would have to develop and maintain it, giving that person or organization power. And what would it actually control? But there are many ways you can use algorithms (eg. machine learning) Where it doesn't really give any power to anyone, mostly just makes everyones lives easier. Diagnosing illnesses is one such application.

@@Sibula machine learning is just one type of algorithms, we are using algorithms every day for all sort of things, from industrial process automation to document editing. How can you give power to the citizens to control the state? first by making proper use of resources already available to the state (and therefore proper use of the money you paid in taxes) and putting the responsibility for managing and maintaining that information not on you, the citizen but on the state you are employing for that purpose! second by making algorithms public and requiring traceable explanation and reasoning compulsory for any government decision and thus making government accountable and transparent third by applying same rules impartially, without human interference you remove abuse of power and arbitrary judgements and again introduce traceability and accountability in the system. Information systems should record every action and decision made by any government employee and reports should be immediately available. Databases could be made to exchange information only requiring your express permission for the data to be exchanged. trivial example a national and a foreigner couple marry in a country. They should only present their passports, the local authorities should register the act, and transmit it to the relevant authorities. For the foreign passport the event should be transmitter to the passport original consulate or embassy which would than have the responsibility to register it in the relevant registry. Simple, which country does that? No, one! it's a miracle if the information is recorded and transmitted within the country! this type of example can be extended to most government services, they are just not created to serve you, they are created to exploit you. There are many other things that can be easily done by information systems and we do not even need to employ AI systems. From transport systems which should operate Nationwide as credit cards do to sentencing which should be handed down according to a set of legislated rules and averages, irrespective of sex color or religion, information systems could be put to good use to make life easier and fairer, but they are not. Instead the state spends your money trying to control you. it's the time to change this state of affair, government are there as a service to the citizens, not to fill their pockets.

@@Sibula the purpose of open source algorithms is exactly that, removing power from the company implementing the system. An algorithm that, for instance, assigns sentencing, should be open source and any modifications to it should be evaluated and approved by a public college of IT and legal experts appointed for the specific purpose of creating or modifying the algorithm. an algorithm for sentencing does not require AI, it needs to embed the various legal rules properly, it could be as trivial as implementing an expression such as: ((mean period for offense + mean prison population for offense) / 2) + ( Sum period for aggravating circumstances - Sum period for extenuating circumstances ) Do you think a judge on the spot can elaborate all the rules of law properly when a team of scientist, engineers and legal experts cannot properly even defy them as an algorithm? The judge will brush aside most of the rules and go with what intuition or mood will tell within a set of constraints he or she will have developed from experience.

No, computers are there to help humans, not to take over decision making. There is no 100% guarantee that a programmer can make that there won't be an exploit in the programming that could result in humans being unable to revert decisions made by computers. Just look at how many companies get hit by malware attacks each year, every program can be exploited, safety can't be guaranteed, no matter how much effort you put in.

what does sycophantic mean ?

@@freezatron It means that you're fed up with phantics.

@@freezatron Doing something insincerely in order to gain something from someone.

there are all kinds of amazing women in tech. lisa su is my favorite person in technology today. don't let them tell you you're being held back. don't let them take away your confidence

Good for you!