Sep 9, 2022 08:01 AM
(This post was last modified: Sep 9, 2022 04:10 PM by C C.)
Privacy advocates slam Amazon's $1.7B iRobot deal that fuels 'pervasive surveillance' because it can map out entire home layouts and connect to smart devices - as FTC now opens probe into buyout
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/...-home.html
KEY POINTS: Privacy advocates slammed Amazon's buyout of iRobot for 'pervasive surveillance' fueled in part by the device's camera. 'Amazon stands to gain access to extremely intimate acts in our most private spaces,' states a letter signed by over 20 civil liberties groups. The $1.7 billion purchase of the robotic vacuum maker is being examined by the Federal Trade Commission's antitrust unit. Advocates say the Roomba's ability map out entire homes would then be fed into Amazon's massive data trove and end up being abused by the firm. (MORE - details)
Cutting down Ockham's razor
https://www.openmindmag.org/articles/the...simplicity
EXCERPTS: We hear all the time that the simplest explanations are usually the right ones. This truth-testing idea—known as Ockham’s razor, after the English medieval philosopher William of Ockham—has been embraced by no less authorities than Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. Today scientists invoke Ockham’s razor on topics ranging from Covid’s origins to cosmic dark matter, while folks debating a subject on social media regularly invoke it as their final arbiter. After all, why complicate something more than you need to? Isn’t it better to shave ideas down to their essential truths?
Ockham’s razor sounds logical and definitive, which is exactly what makes it dangerous. Not only is the assumption of simplicity often false, but following it blindly can lead to serious misunderstandings, both in science and in everyday life.
A well-known historical validation of the principle of simplicity in science was in the overthrow of the geocentric model of the universe [...] The lessons here are that the simplest explanation is not necessarily the correct one, and the correct one is often not as simple as it first appears. Ockham’s razor, as applied in science, does not mean that a new theory should replace a previous one just because it is simpler or has fewer assumptions.
I prefer a different interpretation of Ockham’s razor: A better theory is one that is more useful because it makes more-accurate predictions about the world and leads to reproducible results. Simplicity is not always what we should strive for. In everyday life, too, explanations are often not as simple as we would like them to be...
[...] The challenge is to apply the principle of simplicity thoughtfully and strategically. ... Unfortunately, people often seek simplicity well beyond the point of usefulness. ... Sometimes, acknowledging the role of complexity is vital for understanding the properties of a system. Even simple systems following deterministic physical laws can behave in highly unpredictable ways...
[...] Scientists therefore try not to be seduced by Ockham’s razor. In my preferred formulation: The simplest explanation is not necessarily the most useful one, and ideas that appear simple often fall apart in the face of new evidence.
It is a lesson we should all embrace. [...] Ockham’s razor has become a tool of political identity. Those daring to point out that an issue is more complicated than either side wishes to admit can find themselves attacked by both sides: If you’re not 100 percent with me, you are against me.
We would do well to apply anti-Ockham scrutiny to our political and social discourse, just as scientists attempt to apply it to their research. Practically speaking, we cannot go around digging into every issue or rejecting every explanation just because it seems too easy. But we can train ourselves to be wary of making up our minds on a matter as soon as we’ve found a simple narrative. We should try to question whether that simple narrative is accepted by people who have put in the effort to study it more deeply than we have, or than we can... (MORE - missing details)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/...-home.html
KEY POINTS: Privacy advocates slammed Amazon's buyout of iRobot for 'pervasive surveillance' fueled in part by the device's camera. 'Amazon stands to gain access to extremely intimate acts in our most private spaces,' states a letter signed by over 20 civil liberties groups. The $1.7 billion purchase of the robotic vacuum maker is being examined by the Federal Trade Commission's antitrust unit. Advocates say the Roomba's ability map out entire homes would then be fed into Amazon's massive data trove and end up being abused by the firm. (MORE - details)
Cutting down Ockham's razor
https://www.openmindmag.org/articles/the...simplicity
EXCERPTS: We hear all the time that the simplest explanations are usually the right ones. This truth-testing idea—known as Ockham’s razor, after the English medieval philosopher William of Ockham—has been embraced by no less authorities than Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. Today scientists invoke Ockham’s razor on topics ranging from Covid’s origins to cosmic dark matter, while folks debating a subject on social media regularly invoke it as their final arbiter. After all, why complicate something more than you need to? Isn’t it better to shave ideas down to their essential truths?
Ockham’s razor sounds logical and definitive, which is exactly what makes it dangerous. Not only is the assumption of simplicity often false, but following it blindly can lead to serious misunderstandings, both in science and in everyday life.
A well-known historical validation of the principle of simplicity in science was in the overthrow of the geocentric model of the universe [...] The lessons here are that the simplest explanation is not necessarily the correct one, and the correct one is often not as simple as it first appears. Ockham’s razor, as applied in science, does not mean that a new theory should replace a previous one just because it is simpler or has fewer assumptions.
I prefer a different interpretation of Ockham’s razor: A better theory is one that is more useful because it makes more-accurate predictions about the world and leads to reproducible results. Simplicity is not always what we should strive for. In everyday life, too, explanations are often not as simple as we would like them to be...
[...] The challenge is to apply the principle of simplicity thoughtfully and strategically. ... Unfortunately, people often seek simplicity well beyond the point of usefulness. ... Sometimes, acknowledging the role of complexity is vital for understanding the properties of a system. Even simple systems following deterministic physical laws can behave in highly unpredictable ways...
[...] Scientists therefore try not to be seduced by Ockham’s razor. In my preferred formulation: The simplest explanation is not necessarily the most useful one, and ideas that appear simple often fall apart in the face of new evidence.
It is a lesson we should all embrace. [...] Ockham’s razor has become a tool of political identity. Those daring to point out that an issue is more complicated than either side wishes to admit can find themselves attacked by both sides: If you’re not 100 percent with me, you are against me.
We would do well to apply anti-Ockham scrutiny to our political and social discourse, just as scientists attempt to apply it to their research. Practically speaking, we cannot go around digging into every issue or rejecting every explanation just because it seems too easy. But we can train ourselves to be wary of making up our minds on a matter as soon as we’ve found a simple narrative. We should try to question whether that simple narrative is accepted by people who have put in the effort to study it more deeply than we have, or than we can... (MORE - missing details)
