Skip to main content

Timandra Harkness - Four Way Interview

Timandra Harkness is a writer, comedian and broadcaster, who has been performing on scientific, mathematical and statistical topics since the latter days of the 20th Century. She is a regular on BBC Radio, resident reporter on social psychology series The Human Zoo as well as writing and presenting documentaries including BBC Radio 4’s Data, Data Everywhere and FutureProofing series.

In 2010 she co-wrote and performed Your Days Are Numbered: The Maths of Death, with stand-up mathematician Matt Parker, which was a sell-out hit at the Edinburgh Fringe before touring the rest of the UK and Australia. Science comedy since then includes solo show Brainsex, cabarets and gameshows. She is currently writing a new comedy show about Big Data.

 Why big data? 

 I got interested a few years ago in statistics, partly because I enjoy the maths (I know! It's a niche hobby, but I like it), partly because it's a great way to understand new things about the world we live in, and partly because I found it odd that everyone was suddenly into infographics and percentages. I had a hunch that something else was going on, if statistics had suddenly got so sexy. I mean, I like stats as much as the next person,* but they'd suddenly acquired this almost mystical status. Which made me uneasy.

 While I was debating, and writing about, and doing comedy shows about statistics, along came Big Data. It was like the sequel, only now with very expensive special effects and a bigger marketing budget. Like stats wearing a robotic exoskelton. So again, it was partly the appeal of the very clever mathematical ideas, and partly a hunch that it would tell me something wider about what's going on in society.

 *Probably more than the next person, in fact, as I'm doing a Mathematics & Statistics degree with the Open University in my spare time. 

 Why this book?

 I've been working on the ideas in this book for about five years. I'm very lucky, because I spend most of my time either writing or debating or making radio about ideas. So I've spoken at, or chaired, dozens of events about big data, made a BBC Radio 4 programme about it, and generally explored not only what people are doing with big data, but why it's such a hot topic. 
People are doing some remarkable things with big data, things which simply weren't possible before. Scientific research is being transformed, businesses run more efficiently, new connections are found by linking sets of data that are collected by default, like weather records and medical histories. 

 There are also developments that I find more worrying. It's so easy to collect data on each one of us, and then aggregate it without our knowledge or consent. I do worry about privacy, but also about the tendency to see us all as datapoints instead of people.

 But I'm not somebody who thinks technology is evil and will destroy all we hold dear. If anything, the urge to trust big data more than we trust human judgment tells us more about how we see people than about the technology itself. I think it has huge potential, if we have the nerve to use it. In some ways big data needs to think bigger.

 What’s next?

 I'm writing a new comedy show based on big data. It's a topic that most people connect with on some level, even if it's just because they have a smartphone and hadn't really thought about how much information their own phone is collecting about them. So it should be very interactive. 
I also do a lot of live events, so I'm looking forward to getting the ideas in the book back out into public spaces to debate them. I expect some people will read the book and come along to tell me I'm wrong. If they make a good enough case, maybe I'll agree with them! Then I'll have to do a rewrite before the paperback comes out. 

 That's what's so important about discussing ideas: if we don't keep testing what we think, how can we tell if our ideas are right?

 What’s exciting you at the moment?

 I co-present a BBC Radio 4 series called Futureproofing, so I get to talk to people at the forefront of new technologies and explore what they might mean for society. I'm always most interested in those questions: not just 'how does it work?' but also 'what can it tell us about the bigger questions?'

 One of the recurring themes is asking: what makes humans unique? Is there anything about us that can't be modelled in machines? I think there is, but putting my finger on what, exactly, is a question that goes right through science and beyond.

 And that takes me back to the other radio series I work on, Human Zoo, about social psychology. How do we think? Can studying how we think help us to think... better? What would better mean, in this context?

 Small questions like that!

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