Skip to main content

The Master Algorithm - Pedro Domingos ***

I am really struggling to remember a book that has irritated me as much as this one, which is a shame because it's on a very interesting and significant subject. Pedro Domingos takes us into the world of computer programs that solve problems through learning, exploring everything from back propagating neural networks to Bayesian algorithms, looking for the direction in which we might spot the computing equivalent of the theory of everything, the master algorithm that can do pretty much anything that can be done with a computer (Turing proved a long time ago that there will always be some things that can't). As the subtitle puts it, this is the quest for the ultimate learning machine that will remake our world.

So far, so good. Not only an interesting subject but one I have a personal interest in as I had some involvement in artificial intelligence many moons ago. But just reading the prologue put my hackles up. It was one of those descriptions of how a technology influences every moment of your life, as the author takes us through a typical day. Except 90% of his examples have only ever been experienced by a Silicon Valley geek, and those that the rest of us have come across, like algorithms to make recommendations to you on shopping websites and video streaming sites, in my experience, are always so terrible that they are almost funny.

The pain carries on in part because of a kind of messianic fervour for the topic that means that the author seems convinced it is about to totally takeover the world - and like most fanatics, he presents this view while viciously attacking everyone who disagrees, from the likes of Marvin Minsky and Noam Chomsky to Black Swan author Nassim Nicholas Taleb. It's interesting that Domingos is totally dismissive of the early knowledge engineers who thought their methodology would take over the world, but can't see that his own pursuit of the 'master algorithm' (think of Lord of the Rings, but substitute 'algorithm' for 'ring') is equally likely to be a pursuit that is much easier to theorise about than to bring to success.

To make matters worse, Domingos repeatedly claims, for instance, that thanks to learning algorithms it's possible to predict the movement of the stock market, or to predict the kind of 'black swan' events that Taleb shows so convincingly are unpredictable. Yet I have never seen any evidence that this is true, it seems to go totally against what we know from chaos theory, and Domingos doesn't present any evidence, he just states it as fact. (Could you really have predicted the existence of black swans before they were discovered? How about blue ones?)

One other problem I have with the book is that the author isn't very good at explaining the complexities he is dealing with. I've seen many explanations of Bayesian statistics over the years, for instance, and this was one of the most impenetrable I've ever seen.

I can't tell you to avoid this book, because I've not come across another that introduces the whole range of machine learning options in the way that Domingos does. But any recommendation has to be made through gritted teeth because I did not like the way that information was put across.
Hardback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...
Post a Comment
Read more

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...
Post a Comment
Read more

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more