Couverture de Weapons of Math Destruction

Weapons of Math Destruction

How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy

 Aperçu

30 jours d'essai gratuit à Audible Standard

Essayer Standard gratuitement
Choisissez 1 livre audio par mois dans l'ensemble de notre catalogue.
Écoutez les livres audio que vous avez choisis pendant toute la durée de votre abonnement.
Accédez à volonté à des podcasts incontournables.
Gratuit avec l'offre d'essai, ensuite 2,99 €/mois. Possibilité de résilier l'abonnement chaque mois.

Weapons of Math Destruction

De : Cathy O'Neil
Lu par : Cathy O'Neil
Essayer Standard gratuitement

Renouvellement automatique à 2,99 € mois après 30 jours. Annulation possible chaque mois.

Acheter pour 16,34 €

Acheter pour 16,34 €

À propos de ce contenu audio

 NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER • A former Wall Street quant sounds the alarm on Big Data and the mathematical models that threaten to rip apart our social fabric—with a new afterword

“A manual for the twenty-first-century citizen . . . relevant and urgent.”—Financial Times

NATIONAL BOOK AWARD LONGLIST • NAMED ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS OF THE YEAR BY The New York Times Book Review • The Boston Globe • Wired • Fortune • Kirkus Reviews • The Guardian • Nature • On Point

We live in the age of the algorithm. Increasingly, the decisions that affect our lives—where we go to school, whether we can get a job or a loan, how much we pay for health insurance—are being made not by humans, but by machines. In theory, this should lead to greater fairness: Everyone is judged according to the same rules.

But as mathematician and data scientist Cathy O’Neil reveals, the mathematical models being used today are unregulated and uncontestable, even when they’re wrong. Most troubling, they reinforce discrimination—propping up the lucky, punishing the downtrodden, and undermining our democracy in the process. Welcome to the dark side of Big Data. Economie Politique et gouvernement Politique publique Sciences sociales
Tout
Le plus pertinent
the writer has a good knowledge of the topic. She could have made a thorough an interesting analysis of it. however she ends up being highly biased and presents opinion rather than analysis. there there is no balance nor any counter argument presented.

interesting topic highly prejudiced analysis

Une erreur s'est produite. Réessayez dans quelques minutes.