I think I heard in another TED lecture that this flood of online personal data may effectively increase user security because it makes targeting *you* less likely. If you leave your car doors unlocked there's a good chance it'll get stolen, but if everyone leaves their cars unlocked, everyone shares the risk equally. If someone could point me to that talk I would be grateful.
Well said. Consent is a start but not enough. Think "terms and conditions." What we need is education about how our information is being used and some kind of control over the outcome.
The level of accuracy for these so-called predictions is low. For instance, many people hit 'like' because of social obligation, not because they really like/want/use certain things that appear on their timeline. Once again, poor correlation social science. They think they know you, but they don't.
Good Study about our social media behavior. We can't accept whatever she says is true and correct but the approach is laudable.I don't why people are unnecessarily cursing this talk..
How about having a live profile of what you currently look like to marketing agencies. That would helpusers to be informed and understan what they are sharing.
Tad Saine which is funny, because it is consistent with her data. You are smart, and are being exposed to curly fries because you are exposed to them from a smart source.
8:23 She's talking about the *FaceCloak* privacy plugin here. Once installed, put @@ at the start of your facebook message and it will automatically PGP encrypt it. You then give the encryption keys to your friends, thus only your friends can read those messages. No-one else can read them, not even facebook.
So just to screw with the advertisers I could start doing random google searches for things I have no intention of buying and likes to things I hate and nonsensical comments on things I could care less about. That actually sounds like fun, I wonder how well the algorithms actually work with disinformation?
In general, they account for cases like this. They're called edge cases. They typically throw them out. So yes, if you did this frequently, the data mining would turn up some false information, but it would still be able to figure out certain things about you accurately. Even if you bought a bunch of random stuff, the combination of x, y, and z still points to L. So you wouldn't be able to completely screw with the algorithm.
Holy crap, a TEDx talk that wasn't awful. This is really clever, how she figured out why curly fries are such a good indicator, and the effects of that.
I have noticed that some people, maybe many people use the "Like" to simply show that they saw what you posted. It is merely an acknowledgment. I wonder if different uses of the "Like" break, or reinforce the data model?
Why would you "like" something in the first place? Is there an incentive to "liking" curly fries that I'm missing? Maybe not having a Facebook profile is the strongest indicator of high intelligence after all. But maybe someone can explain to me why people feel the need to rub their favourite >everything< in their acquaintances faces.
Interesting video about how your personal information is used by Facebook and the like for relatively harmless reasons but how it could be used for more invasive reasons.
Great talk, and we should definitely be careful, however I think it's short-sighted to look at only the downsides of this vast amount of freely available information about ourselves. There's an unprecedented opportunity to learn so much about who we are and how we should organize our society for the benefit of everyone, not to mention all kinds of yet unimagined technological possibilities. Yes, you can use it to learn personal information about people, but you could always do that by just following someone around and digging through their trash, it's just a little bit easier on the internet. Most of our information is not very secret with or without internet, it's only a matter of someone willing to put in the effort.
Remind me again.... why we don't want advertises to show us stuff that we would be interested in? Is it better to hear ads that are only of interest to everyone?
This is the woman who is super popular on Twitter for many many videos of her four Golden Retrievers. She posts dozens of Snapchat pictures and videos like every day. So...yeah.
I don't get why people care that marketers have access to your data. You get ads targeted to you based on what you actually search and like, it allows these services to be free, and everyone profits. Maybe it stems from some vague idea of privacy, but privacy in this context means nothing until they start selling personal information to stalkers. Nobody cares about what you like or search besides people who are trying to give you those services, and by finding out who likes what marketers can be a lot more effective with their ads and make things easier for everyone instead of bombarding everywhere with everything trying to get their ad seen by that niche person who'll buy your stuff.
If by "push them to manipulate you" you mean, put ads on my screen for products I likely will want, sure. No one is forcing you to do anything, there is no criminal mastermind in a tall building laughing maniacally because he now has the data about people's opinions. The only way someone can exploit this data is within the context of what's actually true about people's likes and habits. It allows whoever has access to it to make decisions in accordance to people's desires. Having access to data will never be a bad thing, ever, period. Data is that which you evaluate to make the proper decision. If bad things come of that, you blame the agent's decision making ability, not their ability to access data.
IceJT15 I suggest you re-watch the video, and also have a look into why privacy is important. It can be dangerous in the hands of private individuals because of harassment or abuse of that information. And this is before we get into the the government getting this information.
I hope you never talk to anybody in your life ever, because all your friends have information about you that is sure to destroy you.You're never private about your likes in public because if anyone actually cared for reasons outside marketing then it'd be a different story. There is no motivation for people to go out of their way to obtain this information unless they want to offer the individual services. "OMG A HUGE CORPORATION HAS MY INFO AND ARE PLOTTING MY DOWNFALL AS WE SPEAK" Anyone has the capacity to harass, kill or otherwise harm you if that is their intent, why be scared about some amorphous threat you've no reason to suspect exists? I do know one thing, this is how services I like that are free make money, I am completely fine with my interests being evaluated if that means I get the benefits of things like free Facebook, UA-cam, Google and a wealth of other services.
So guilt by association? what i'm wondering about is the accuracy of this correlation she didn't give any stats. also i doubt that an intelligent person only has intelligent friends on Facebook, for example my entire graduating class of 80 is friends with every one else and i haven't even spoken to some of them ever. how does that fit in. plus i'd think if she did that it would be pretty easy to skew the results by unliking and liking certain things when your going for a job.
And then, here we (Brazilians) are, almost 9 years after this TED, with "our" capitólio version consequences, by "ours patriots", and our fragile democracy. Say hello to Zuckerberg and a big hello to Steve Bannon and his Brazilian friends.
How can the pool of people who like the curly fries page remain so homogeneous? Wouldn't a lot of lower intelligence people also like it and mix up the pool? You can't say that the first person to like a page, or the person who creates it, is the indicator of what the rest of the people are going to be like
She isn't saying that it's homogeneous...she's saying that the initial likes may have come from a person with relatively high intelligence who had friends that also liked it. Based on the theory that you surround yourself with like-minded individuals, then those people are also relatively high intelligence. So while this social network was expanding to encompass an entire social network of intelligent people....others may also have started to like it. Just because other people start to like it does not slow down the progress of the initial web of higher-than-average intelligent users...that is also continually expanding. At that point you will have more and more people joining in, but the initial umbrella started by the intelligent user may have exponentially grown faster than any other subclass of user simply because it was the first to kick off the "like". I hope that makes sense.
Naah, why bother? The information isn't used specifically AGAINST you, it's used for example to target better advertising and such. Maybe it might harass you that someone COULD know a lot about you if they delved into your facebook page, but why would they bother to stalk exactly you, out of the 1,2 billion users there? I don't see the problem of people having an idea of me, since I really don't have anything to hide...
Mat Broomfield Oh yes I have, and I think that almost everything they do is immoral and unacceptable but I just commented that it really isn't all that smart not to use facebook since it still is pretty good tool to socialize, they give us the service and we provide them with information, the deal isn't all bad if you know what you're doing and accept what's happening.
LanttuLoL their is another ted talk about this in witch speaker explains the data can be used against you i forget the name but i think it is "why privacy matters"
So, does that mean that I am no longer being followed because now I know how the system works and my likes are practically useless for the market, because they are compromised by me?
The way NOT to share private info is TO USE A LOCAL LANGUAGE, a lingo or a dialect that only a few millions (or even less) are useing. This way the effort of mining your data will be too costly and much less accurate when the described technique is applied to English. Also - Avoied being a herd animal: It's much easier to detect a smart person than to find a wise one.
beautiful talk, the future needs to be a place on consenting actions by knowledgeable users. There's just too much people buying into things they dont understand.
So is she saying that the person that made the curly fries page has a higher intelligence and that the likes on that page were a result of his or hers friends liking the site first ?
0:30 Even in 03/04 I highly doubt many people were on Myspace. People don't think of the early 2000s as that different to now but certainly in Britain people like me didn't have digital TV or broadband for a long time.
Yeah that's why I didn't like the integration between youtube and google+... Tracking what you watch and like. I was already questioning myself when i found Justin Bieber and One Direction recommendations
The problem with using FB to generate marketing info about a user is that FB will often NOT show things that the user has expressed interest in to the user for them to like, and with the continual "updates" and "repairs" to FB, it gets worse every month. People with eclectic interests and friends from many social spheres are in general not well marketed to by FB. Although this talk does explain why a post-menopausal woman would suddenly begin receiving Parenting magazine!
We should be prepared to redefine what is considered private in this new media age. Private things might turns out to be things that people don't care about.
Adolf Hitler That'll teach me to watch the video instead of making toast :) - here ... I thought you were living on the moon in a red London double decker bus and selling your diary to the highest bidder ? you connecting via 3G then (I'm assuming a high speed fiber optic cable is fraught with technical difficulties :)?
one of the few time where i havent been insulted for being a white heterosexual male on a tedtalks video. anyways i personally dont mind people using my data, however i feel like they make a lot of assumptions that are wrong., i simply would enjoy it if it was possible to help in a more direct way to make their assumptions more likely to be true.
Yeah, Bill and Melinda Gates were totally hating on white hetero dudes yesterday. And Allan Adams talking about gravitational waves the day before? So insulting. TED, the Musical? Don't even go there.
cleodel88 thats 3 out of 1605...... but that doesnt matter, the point was that its a common theme here to claim that white heterosexual males are the spawns of satan and everyone else would live perfect lives if it wasnt for us.
DIVAD291 Yes, the three videos that were released just in the past few days. And if you take a look, you'll notice that a majority of the videos have nothing against you, or nothing to do with you. Even videos discussing feminism, racism, or heteronormativity have nothing to do with claiming that "white heterosexual males are the spawns of satan". They're looking at inequalities that exist currently. This is also true of gender studies in general that cover topics potentially of interest of you. This includes white hetero males who are assaulted in prison, who are poor, who are pressured to hide their emotions, who face ridicule when they're the main caregiver, who are more likely to drop out of school. White, hetero, male issues are not being ignored. If white straight guys dropped off the face of the planet today, equality would still not exist, there would just be another group with the highest amount of privileges.
cleodel88 first off, i really want to believe you when you say that feminists and people that ''promote diversity'' genuinely care about equality. yes there are a few of them but lets not give the credit of a few to all o them. most of them really dont care about that. straight white males issues are being ignored...one of the issue you gave as an example is literally a direct result of people not wanting to hear about straight white males issues. what do you mean another group? if males fell of females would remain the group with the highest amount of privileges. at least i think they would, i dont think the number of white straight males is significant enough to force females into playing their role.
DIVAD291 Actually it isn't a few, you're underestimating the research being done. Also, I'd like to point out that you said people, rather than ~ everyone who is not white/male/hetero ~ because I think that is the truth of the matter. Every single issue that I used as an example has been a major societal problem since before 20th century feminism and civil rights. I think the ability to control populations by the people in power is easier than you believe. People can be convinced of their "inferiority" if it is constantly reinforced by the society they live in. It's not a matter of population, but power. Consider colonialism and the way that a small island nation wreaked havoc abroad. As far as the privilege idea goes... I'm going to have to disagree with you on that, and there's a fair amount of research to back it up. This doesn't mean that you in particular are more privileged than the woman walking down the street, however. There are a lot of other factors at play such as class, mental health, disability, et cetera. This is why the idea of intersectionality is so important. There are going to be women more privileged than you, but that doesn't mean that as a group your resume isn't more likely to lead to a job interview solely based on a male name.
Been saying that for years. The users of facebook are no the customers of facebook. If you get a great product for free, then the producers dont get their income from you. The oranges in the grocery store has no say whether they are sold by the dozen or not, or whether they are on sale or not.
let them the company's experience them-self how it is to be spammed by commercial on there personal pages for ad least a few months. then they really know how that is like
Every other comment is talking about curly fries. Someone help me understand a little better... I thought she was saying was that using all the things u do online and creating a book of you shouldn't be the way you should be judged as far as future work hirings or potentially how ur future should be molded? Please help me understand?
I have discontinued my Facebook account, and sent links of this video to family and friends. Identity misrepresentation might cause me to lose a job interview or job, or make people think I am someone I am not. It is as dangerous as identity theft. BTW: I have been targeted with Roundup ads when I believe in organic gardening. What are they saying about you? This doesn't even consider the principles of someone in the global village making profit from your information. How would you feel if someone in your town was doing this to you?
I really don't want anyone to customize my web response. I already know what I like and how to find it. I don't wanna be in an information bubble confirming what I already know. I want to be surprised. My pattern of behaviour may reflect not my real interests anyway, but just the immediate needs that turned out as web behaviour. A lot of the searches I do are academic and work-related. Why would I necessarily want that regurgitated to me at other times? People may have many limitations to their searches. Web behaviour is not fully representative of the person behind them. I may have to research stuff I don't care for. I don't need the web to play smart for me. I can find what I want. When I don't do that I need something not-related not-kinda-similar, but something that may or may not speak to the rest of me or spark some new train of thought. Inspiration. The youtube feed has turned ridiculous like that. The shit I want, I'll subscribe to or find more of when needed. I don't give a hoot whats popular to some mainstream either, or what some think will be popular with me. I wanna just write some search word and see what really turns up. Unedited and un-behaviorally. Please burst the information bubble, its yesterdays news, this customizing cocoon. Programmers are ridiculous for assuming that what I do is not only what I really want but all I really want. Please - stay off my side guys, open up the search.
As "TOTAL DATA FUSION" inevitably becomes an ever more pervasive aspect of our personal and collective reality, the real issue is whether the outcomes are constructive and desirable, for the individual, for society, for the economy and "the world" ... Targeted marketing and even data-typing prospective personnel are not necessarily "BAD" things, either for the individual or for "the whole" ... Of course, the MIS-application of "control" technologies has always been a "natural trend", throughout History and that is the main fear and the main danger. ... We can hope for and look for the POSITIVE BENEFITS (democratization and individual empowerment and enhancement) though, as WELL as the MISuse and abuse of such tech and the resultant trends and outcomes.
what would happen if the presenter opened an hr consulting company and was able to present datapoints that she describes? Well, it's likely that business will not actually care. At some point the entire population would be put on some virtual spectrum and it might be interesting to compare two candidates for one position but in the end all we will learn is how low we are willing to lower the bar. And then we will also be challenged with the "minority report" syndrome. And then what happens when people game the system? This can only be a fad and quite frankly has a natural bias that can be considered prejudicial. No good will come from this.
Why is there so much hate towards her? i thought it was a legitimate speech about a topic revlavent to most people today.
I think I heard in another TED lecture that this flood of online personal data may effectively increase user security because it makes targeting *you* less likely.
If you leave your car doors unlocked there's a good chance it'll get stolen, but if everyone leaves their cars unlocked, everyone shares the risk equally.
If someone could point me to that talk I would be grateful.
Well said. Consent is a start but not enough. Think "terms and conditions." What we need is education about how our information is being used and some kind of control over the outcome.
I think my last status: "Wasted and NEED cocaine" probably gave me away
The level of accuracy for these so-called predictions is low. For instance, many people hit 'like' because of social obligation, not because they really like/want/use certain things that appear on their timeline. Once again, poor correlation social science. They think they know you, but they don't.
Good Study about our social media behavior. We can't accept whatever she says is true and correct but the approach is laudable.I don't why people are unnecessarily cursing this talk..
How about having a live profile of what you currently look like to marketing agencies. That would helpusers to be informed and understan what they are sharing.
Golden Ratio mom!!
What I got from this video? Don't use facebook. :)
mine was that if that if you are going to use Facebook, 'like' Curly Fries. :)
Mine was they have a countdown on the TED stage; that's horrifying.
Tad Saine which is funny, because it is consistent with her data.
You are smart, and are being exposed to curly fries because you are exposed to them from a smart source.
Adam Boyd actually not, because the "smart guy" didn't befriend him.
You don't have to stop using Facebook.
Just use bonafeyed to protect your info.
8:23 She's talking about the *FaceCloak* privacy plugin here. Once installed, put @@ at the start of your facebook message and it will automatically PGP encrypt it. You then give the encryption keys to your friends, thus only your friends can read those messages. No-one else can read them, not even facebook.
So just to screw with the advertisers I could start doing random google searches for things I have no intention of buying and likes to things I hate and nonsensical comments on things I could care less about. That actually sounds like fun, I wonder how well the algorithms actually work with disinformation?
In general, they account for cases like this. They're called edge cases. They typically throw them out. So yes, if you did this frequently, the data mining would turn up some false information, but it would still be able to figure out certain things about you accurately. Even if you bought a bunch of random stuff, the combination of x, y, and z still points to L. So you wouldn't be able to completely screw with the algorithm.
YEEESSSSS
Holy crap, a TEDx talk that wasn't awful. This is really clever, how she figured out why curly fries are such a good indicator, and the effects of that.
The thing that's most indicative of high intelligence is not using facebook.
ExON Norway that’s just not true 😂
I have noticed that some people, maybe many people use the "Like" to simply show that they saw what you posted. It is merely an acknowledgment. I wonder if different uses of the "Like" break, or reinforce the data model?
Wow, I am glad I keep most of my stuff private
And now you just implied publicly that you have a bunch of stuff to hide! RUN!
You can't hide your likes.
well if its not all of your stuff hidden you'll get a really skewed result from the stuff that isn't
@@Souumnomedeconta That you "know"
I love 1 computer scientist. and jen is that computer scientist
Why would you "like" something in the first place? Is there an incentive to "liking" curly fries that I'm missing? Maybe not having a Facebook profile is the strongest indicator of high intelligence after all.
But maybe someone can explain to me why people feel the need to rub their favourite >everything< in their acquaintances faces.
Excellent talk!
Interesting video about how your personal information is used by Facebook and the like for relatively harmless reasons but how it could be used for more invasive reasons.
What am I going to be seen as if I like this video?
Nice talk, next time please cite the name of the paper for the curious minds out there
Great talk, and we should definitely be careful, however I think it's short-sighted to look at only the downsides of this vast amount of freely available information about ourselves. There's an unprecedented opportunity to learn so much about who we are and how we should organize our society for the benefit of everyone, not to mention all kinds of yet unimagined technological possibilities.
Yes, you can use it to learn personal information about people, but you could always do that by just following someone around and digging through their trash, it's just a little bit easier on the internet. Most of our information is not very secret with or without internet, it's only a matter of someone willing to put in the effort.
Remind me again.... why we don't want advertises to show us stuff that we would be interested in? Is it better to hear ads that are only of interest to everyone?
This is the woman who is super popular on Twitter for many many videos of her four Golden Retrievers. She posts dozens of Snapchat pictures and videos like every day.
So...yeah.
Jesse Clark *TheGoldenRatio5!!*
Is that supposed to discredit her as an expert on the matter or something?
Don't ever buy anything that you know about because of an advertisement alone.
I'm getting this Gattaca feeling but instead of psysical characteristics its with personal attributes..
*TheGoldenRatio4*
Liking fries on facebook surely decreases your intelligence score by 30 points.
I don't get why people care that marketers have access to your data. You get ads targeted to you based on what you actually search and like, it allows these services to be free, and everyone profits. Maybe it stems from some vague idea of privacy, but privacy in this context means nothing until they start selling personal information to stalkers. Nobody cares about what you like or search besides people who are trying to give you those services, and by finding out who likes what marketers can be a lot more effective with their ads and make things easier for everyone instead of bombarding everywhere with everything trying to get their ad seen by that niche person who'll buy your stuff.
I suggest you re-watch the video. She made pretty clear the dangers to users of this kind of data analysis.
If they know what buttons you have, they can push them to manipulate you.
If by "push them to manipulate you" you mean, put ads on my screen for products I likely will want, sure. No one is forcing you to do anything, there is no criminal mastermind in a tall building laughing maniacally because he now has the data about people's opinions.
The only way someone can exploit this data is within the context of what's actually true about people's likes and habits. It allows whoever has access to it to make decisions in accordance to people's desires.
Having access to data will never be a bad thing, ever, period. Data is that which you evaluate to make the proper decision. If bad things come of that, you blame the agent's decision making ability, not their ability to access data.
IceJT15 I suggest you re-watch the video, and also have a look into why privacy is important. It can be dangerous in the hands of private individuals because of harassment or abuse of that information. And this is before we get into the the government getting this information.
I hope you never talk to anybody in your life ever, because all your friends have information about you that is sure to destroy you.You're never private about your likes in public because if anyone actually cared for reasons outside marketing then it'd be a different story. There is no motivation for people to go out of their way to obtain this information unless they want to offer the individual services. "OMG A HUGE CORPORATION HAS MY INFO AND ARE PLOTTING MY DOWNFALL AS WE SPEAK" Anyone has the capacity to harass, kill or otherwise harm you if that is their intent, why be scared about some amorphous threat you've no reason to suspect exists? I do know one thing, this is how services I like that are free make money, I am completely fine with my interests being evaluated if that means I get the benefits of things like free Facebook, UA-cam, Google and a wealth of other services.
This is fascinating, and also rather scary.
So guilt by association? what i'm wondering about is the accuracy of this correlation she didn't give any stats. also i doubt that an intelligent person only has intelligent friends on Facebook, for example my entire graduating class of 80 is friends with every one else and i haven't even spoken to some of them ever. how does that fit in. plus i'd think if she did that it would be pretty easy to skew the results by unliking and liking certain things when your going for a job.
I was starting to get worried half way through the video, until she finally got to saying that yes, this is a problem, and let's try to fix it.
And then, here we (Brazilians) are, almost 9 years after this TED, with "our" capitólio version consequences, by "ours patriots", and our fragile democracy.
Say hello to Zuckerberg and a big hello to Steve Bannon and his Brazilian friends.
jennifer i love you from iran!! great talk very informative! Iranian s are peaceful people! please come and visit us
Seriously TED? Now I have to go and un-like curly fries since this video means it's been flooded with all the riffraff.
How can the pool of people who like the curly fries page remain so homogeneous? Wouldn't a lot of lower intelligence people also like it and mix up the pool? You can't say that the first person to like a page, or the person who creates it, is the indicator of what the rest of the people are going to be like
I agree!
She isn't saying that it's homogeneous...she's saying that the initial likes may have come from a person with relatively high intelligence who had friends that also liked it. Based on the theory that you surround yourself with like-minded individuals, then those people are also relatively high intelligence. So while this social network was expanding to encompass an entire social network of intelligent people....others may also have started to like it.
Just because other people start to like it does not slow down the progress of the initial web of higher-than-average intelligent users...that is also continually expanding.
At that point you will have more and more people joining in, but the initial umbrella started by the intelligent user may have exponentially grown faster than any other subclass of user simply because it was the first to kick off the "like".
I hope that makes sense.
This is when social media begins to feel like Big Brother...
If they were smart, they wont use facebook.
Naah, why bother? The information isn't used specifically AGAINST you, it's used for example to target better advertising and such. Maybe it might harass you that someone COULD know a lot about you if they delved into your facebook page, but why would they bother to stalk exactly you, out of the 1,2 billion users there? I don't see the problem of people having an idea of me, since I really don't have anything to hide...
LanttuLoL Have you been following these NSA stories AT ALL?
Mat Broomfield I really don't understand why so many people are jumping in to defend these social networks.
Mat Broomfield Oh yes I have, and I think that almost everything they do is immoral and unacceptable but I just commented that it really isn't all that smart not to use facebook since it still is pretty good tool to socialize, they give us the service and we provide them with information, the deal isn't all bad if you know what you're doing and accept what's happening.
LanttuLoL their is another ted talk about this in witch speaker explains the data can be used against you i forget the name but i think it is "why privacy matters"
First she should establish what "smart" means in this context.
I feel reassured in my intelligence because curly fries are delicious.
shoutout to library 10
Glendora what college
"Hey, this guy's name is Jordan Trepanier, he is a 20 year old male that lives in Montreal Quebec"
"See no one cares"
"I care, I just happened to be looking for 20 year old males living in Montreal Quebec that goes by the name Jordan Trepanier .... for reasons."
I did not know curly fries existed my IQ is 1 haha
Love you Jen!! Great talk :) Would love to hear more of what you have to say on this
So, does that mean that I am no longer being followed because now I know how the system works and my likes are practically useless for the market, because they are compromised by me?
Great Talker, greater Talker!
"Look at these things I can do, isn't that neat? You need to make laws to stop me from doing this."
Doesn't the curly fry example go against regression to the mean?
The way NOT to share private info is TO USE A LOCAL LANGUAGE, a lingo or a dialect that only a few millions (or even less) are useing. This way the effort of mining your data will be too costly and much less accurate when the described technique is applied to English. Also - Avoied being a herd animal: It's much easier to detect a smart person than to find a wise one.
I think people who like the curly fries page just change the meaning to from smart to pretentious....
I frickin LOVE curly fries. Win.
beautiful talk, the future needs to be a place on consenting actions by knowledgeable users. There's just too much people buying into things they dont understand.
A smart guy made a page called 'curly fries'? If he's really that intelligent, that like must also be indicative of shame....
So is she saying that the person that made the curly fries page has a higher intelligence and that the likes on that page were a result of his or hers friends liking the site first ?
She is right
i wonder how many people liked curly fries after this:P
0:30 Even in 03/04 I highly doubt many people were on Myspace. People don't think of the early 2000s as that different to now but certainly in Britain people like me didn't have digital TV or broadband for a long time.
Picture of Curly Fries brought me here.
Same
Eu bem que podia ter assistido esse vídeo antes do Enem de 2018.... Tema da redação todinha
Yeah that's why I didn't like the integration between youtube and google+... Tracking what you watch and like. I was already questioning myself when i found Justin Bieber and One Direction recommendations
kinda scary they easily find those who are against the established government
I see that timer on the monitor xD
Just "like" a lot of random things so that you fuck with Facebook algorithms. Just make sure to also "like" the occasional thing you actually do like.
Jennifer Golbeck: The curly fry conundrum: Why social media "likes" say more than you might think
The problem with using FB to generate marketing info about a user is that FB will often NOT show things that the user has expressed interest in to the user for them to like, and with the continual "updates" and "repairs" to FB, it gets worse every month. People with eclectic interests and friends from many social spheres are in general not well marketed to by FB.
Although this talk does explain why a post-menopausal woman would suddenly begin receiving Parenting magazine!
My problem is that Facebook is selling my info to companies to sell crap to me
We should be prepared to redefine what is considered private in this new media age. Private things might turns out to be things that people don't care about.
Picture of Einstein might have skewed the demographic too ...
That was photoshopped in...
Adolf Hitler
That'll teach me to watch the video instead of making toast :) - here ... I thought you were living on the moon in a red London double decker bus and selling your diary to the highest bidder ? you connecting via 3G then (I'm assuming a high speed fiber optic cable is fraught with technical difficulties :)?
Inb4 EVERYBODY goes and likes the curly fries page.
one of the few time where i havent been insulted for being a white heterosexual male on a tedtalks video.
anyways i personally dont mind people using my data, however i feel like they make a lot of assumptions that are wrong., i simply would enjoy it if it was possible to help in a more direct way to make their assumptions more likely to be true.
Yeah, Bill and Melinda Gates were totally hating on white hetero dudes yesterday. And Allan Adams talking about gravitational waves the day before? So insulting. TED, the Musical? Don't even go there.
cleodel88 thats 3 out of 1605......
but that doesnt matter, the point was that its a common theme here to claim that white heterosexual males are the spawns of satan and everyone else would live perfect lives if it wasnt for us.
DIVAD291 Yes, the three videos that were released just in the past few days. And if you take a look, you'll notice that a majority of the videos have nothing against you, or nothing to do with you.
Even videos discussing feminism, racism, or heteronormativity have nothing to do with claiming that "white heterosexual males are the spawns of satan". They're looking at inequalities that exist currently. This is also true of gender studies in general that cover topics potentially of interest of you. This includes white hetero males who are assaulted in prison, who are poor, who are pressured to hide their emotions, who face ridicule when they're the main caregiver, who are more likely to drop out of school. White, hetero, male issues are not being ignored. If white straight guys dropped off the face of the planet today, equality would still not exist, there would just be another group with the highest amount of privileges.
cleodel88 first off, i really want to believe you when you say that feminists and people that ''promote diversity'' genuinely care about equality. yes there are a few of them but lets not give the credit of a few to all o them. most of them really dont care about that.
straight white males issues are being ignored...one of the issue you gave as an example is literally a direct result of people not wanting to hear about straight white males issues.
what do you mean another group? if males fell of females would remain the group with the highest amount of privileges. at least i think they would, i dont think the number of white straight males is significant enough to force females into playing their role.
DIVAD291 Actually it isn't a few, you're underestimating the research being done.
Also, I'd like to point out that you said people, rather than ~ everyone who is not white/male/hetero ~ because I think that is the truth of the matter. Every single issue that I used as an example has been a major societal problem since before 20th century feminism and civil rights.
I think the ability to control populations by the people in power is easier than you believe. People can be convinced of their "inferiority" if it is constantly reinforced by the society they live in. It's not a matter of population, but power. Consider colonialism and the way that a small island nation wreaked havoc abroad.
As far as the privilege idea goes... I'm going to have to disagree with you on that, and there's a fair amount of research to back it up. This doesn't mean that you in particular are more privileged than the woman walking down the street, however. There are a lot of other factors at play such as class, mental health, disability, et cetera. This is why the idea of intersectionality is so important. There are going to be women more privileged than you, but that doesn't mean that as a group your resume isn't more likely to lead to a job interview solely based on a male name.
So, if I "like" this video, i'll be considered as a smart person?
she reminds me of Sam Carter
1/3 into the video and no fries, so thumbs down and closed.
The Target™ example is very old.
Yeah, 2012, so very old.
cleodel88 Try harder.
***** Wow, that expression is probably older than the Target story.
i clicked on this because of the curly fries hehe
GR Mom!
You can just pay me and everyone else for all the data that you’re stealing from me
This is why we should all have scripts that randomly like things so that we flood the system with false data.
venk was not born here yet
Been saying that for years.
The users of facebook are no the customers of facebook.
If you get a great product for free, then the producers dont get their income from you.
The oranges in the grocery store has no say whether they are sold by the dozen or not, or whether they are on sale or not.
let them the company's experience them-self how it is to be spammed by commercial on there personal pages for ad least a few months. then they really know how that is like
Curly fries are delicious
correlation is not causation.
Every other comment is talking about curly fries. Someone help me understand a little better... I thought she was saying was that using all the things u do online and creating a book of you shouldn't be the way you should be judged as far as future work hirings or potentially how ur future should be molded? Please help me understand?
fries come in many flavors and I do like curly fries but eat more regular fries and I do like a little bit of salt on them.
8:41 Why the fu*k is there a timer counting down her speech time?!
GR MOM!!!
Measuring 'intelligence' and being 'smart' this way....clever when companies wanna make bigger and bigger profits.
I have discontinued my Facebook account, and sent links of this video to family and friends. Identity misrepresentation might cause me to lose a job interview or job, or make people think I am someone I am not. It is as dangerous as identity theft.
BTW: I have been targeted with Roundup ads when I believe in organic gardening. What are they saying about you?
This doesn't even consider the principles of someone in the global village making profit from your information. How would you feel if someone in your town was doing this to you?
Wouldnt you rather have adds for things you like in stead of random things?
I really don't want anyone to customize my web response. I already know what I like and how to find it. I don't wanna be in an information bubble confirming what I already know. I want to be surprised. My pattern of behaviour may reflect not my real interests anyway, but just the immediate needs that turned out as web behaviour. A lot of the searches I do are academic and work-related. Why would I necessarily want that regurgitated to me at other times? People may have many limitations to their searches. Web behaviour is not fully representative of the person behind them. I may have to research stuff I don't care for. I don't need the web to play smart for me. I can find what I want. When I don't do that I need something not-related not-kinda-similar, but something that may or may not speak to the rest of me or spark some new train of thought. Inspiration. The youtube feed has turned ridiculous like that. The shit I want, I'll subscribe to or find more of when needed. I don't give a hoot whats popular to some mainstream either, or what some think will be popular with me. I wanna just write some search word and see what really turns up. Unedited and un-behaviorally. Please burst the information bubble, its yesterdays news, this customizing cocoon. Programmers are ridiculous for assuming that what I do is not only what I really want but all I really want. Please - stay off my side guys, open up the search.
Your so smart repeating info from an old article
And then I click the like button...
GR MOM!!!! ❤️
she just keeps on blabbing about how to bring back the power to us users but did not give us any tips on how to do it. that was frustrating.
You like curly fries? You may be intelligent! (...or twisted ;) )
Or have taste buds.
As "TOTAL DATA FUSION" inevitably becomes an ever more pervasive aspect of our personal and collective reality, the real issue is whether the outcomes are constructive and desirable, for the individual, for society, for the economy and "the world" ... Targeted marketing and even data-typing prospective personnel are not necessarily "BAD" things, either for the individual or for "the whole" ... Of course, the MIS-application of "control" technologies has always been a "natural trend", throughout History and that is the main fear and the main danger. ... We can hope for and look for the POSITIVE BENEFITS (democratization and individual empowerment and enhancement) though, as WELL as the MISuse and abuse of such tech and the resultant trends and outcomes.
this is the kind of baloney that is lapped up by ppl nowadays... any prediction which assumes reverse causality is gonna fail, eventually.
She didn't use social media to pick out her dress.
now i want curly fries
what would happen if the presenter opened an hr consulting company and was able to present datapoints that she describes? Well, it's likely that business will not actually care. At some point the entire population would be put on some virtual spectrum and it might be interesting to compare two candidates for one position but in the end all we will learn is how low we are willing to lower the bar. And then we will also be challenged with the "minority report" syndrome. And then what happens when people game the system? This can only be a fad and quite frankly has a natural bias that can be considered prejudicial. No good will come from this.