Take a photo of a barcode or cover
659 reviews for:
Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Can Tell Us about Who We Really Are
Seth Stephens-Davidowitz
3.82 AVERAGE
659 reviews for:
Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Can Tell Us about Who We Really Are
Seth Stephens-Davidowitz
3.82 AVERAGE
From an academic side, this book is absolutely fascinating. I definitely learned new things about humanity through the blending of economics and Google search data, which was very clearly explained. That being said, the writing was not great and had some unnecessary personal fluff and odd ramblings even now and then. Still, I left feeling excited about the worlds data and all the applications in the social sciences.
Quotes:
- "Netflix learned a similar lesson early on in its life cycle: don’t trust what people tell you; trust what they do."
- "Silver noticed that the areas where Trump performed best made for an odd map. Trump performed well in parts of the Northeast and industrial Midwest, as well as the South. He performed notably worse out West. Silver looked for variables to try to explain this map. Was it unemployment? Was it religion? Was it gun ownership? Was it rates of immigration? Was it opposition to Obama? Silver found that the single factor that best correlated with Donald Trump’s support in the Republican primaries was that measure I had discovered four years earlier. Areas that supported Trump in the largest numbers were those that made the most Google searches for 'nigger.'"
- "Frankly, the overwhelming majority of academics have ignored the data explosion caused by the digital age. The world’s most famous sex researchers stick with the tried and true. They ask a few hundred subjects about their desires; they don’t ask sites like PornHub for their data."
Quotes:
- "Netflix learned a similar lesson early on in its life cycle: don’t trust what people tell you; trust what they do."
- "Silver noticed that the areas where Trump performed best made for an odd map. Trump performed well in parts of the Northeast and industrial Midwest, as well as the South. He performed notably worse out West. Silver looked for variables to try to explain this map. Was it unemployment? Was it religion? Was it gun ownership? Was it rates of immigration? Was it opposition to Obama? Silver found that the single factor that best correlated with Donald Trump’s support in the Republican primaries was that measure I had discovered four years earlier. Areas that supported Trump in the largest numbers were those that made the most Google searches for 'nigger.'"
- "Frankly, the overwhelming majority of academics have ignored the data explosion caused by the digital age. The world’s most famous sex researchers stick with the tried and true. They ask a few hundred subjects about their desires; they don’t ask sites like PornHub for their data."
Terric writing. I DID read to the very end and very much enjoyed the wit displayed.
I hate math and numbers and resent the power of statisticians and other math competent people, but this study made me appreciate the value of such work without the usually attendant annoyance.
Freudian slips are random and probably not real, but people search for incest porn A LOT! Telling people to not be racist does not lessen their feelings of hate but making them curious about athletes and soldiers helps! Interesting throughout.
I hate math and numbers and resent the power of statisticians and other math competent people, but this study made me appreciate the value of such work without the usually attendant annoyance.
Freudian slips are random and probably not real, but people search for incest porn A LOT! Telling people to not be racist does not lessen their feelings of hate but making them curious about athletes and soldiers helps! Interesting throughout.
It's good to have your whole perspective changed or shattered once in a while and this books does exactly that.
A Freakonomics for the modern age, this book explores the provocative notion that we can get more reliable information from people's Google searches and other online activity than from their answers to traditional polling questions. Author Seth Stephens-Davidowitz argues convincingly that people sometimes respond to surveys with the answers they consider socially expected or even aspirational, but they are less motivated to filter themselves before a search engine that can bring them whatever they ask of it. As a result, aggregate big data can provide insights on racism, political trends, sexual proclivities, and other sensitive topics that classical research methods might miss.
I did sometimes wish that the author had consulted more linguists for his discussions of language-related studies, but that's a larger critique for the text-as-data research field as a whole. Overall, I thought he made some sharp points about the research avenues opened up by big data, as well as the ways that the internet in particular can reveal discrepancies between who we claim to be and who we really are.
I did sometimes wish that the author had consulted more linguists for his discussions of language-related studies, but that's a larger critique for the text-as-data research field as a whole. Overall, I thought he made some sharp points about the research avenues opened up by big data, as well as the ways that the internet in particular can reveal discrepancies between who we claim to be and who we really are.
funny
informative
medium-paced
So this book will be one of the first that I DNF'd in under 50 pages, but am still giving 2 stars to.
I'm giving it 2 stars because I think Stephens-Davidowitz is probably right; search data is a gold mine into the human psyche, and far more telling than anything we will admit to on a survey.
But I don't think Stephens-Davidowitz gave any respect to his readers' knowledge of statistical analysis, or scientific processes in general. He finds a set of data, but it doesn't support his theory. So he finds another set of data, but that also doesn't support his theory. And so he continues until he finds some shred of evidence that his theory may have some plausibility, but then immediately weights it higher than all other data. Because it obviously, is the best piece. He also confuses relationships between cause and effect items, making leaps and assumptions no paper could ever get away with.
And that's the truth about this book: it was a paper he couldn't get peer reviewed. So instead he turned it into a book to sell to the masses. Because nothing says screw you like making money on the paper your peers wouldn't support.
I'm sure there's some great tidbits in here. And I hope that there are thousands of people currently working on search data as the next big insight. But this isn't where I want to start with it. All of this being said...I won't judge if you do.
I'm giving it 2 stars because I think Stephens-Davidowitz is probably right; search data is a gold mine into the human psyche, and far more telling than anything we will admit to on a survey.
But I don't think Stephens-Davidowitz gave any respect to his readers' knowledge of statistical analysis, or scientific processes in general. He finds a set of data, but it doesn't support his theory. So he finds another set of data, but that also doesn't support his theory. And so he continues until he finds some shred of evidence that his theory may have some plausibility, but then immediately weights it higher than all other data. Because it obviously, is the best piece. He also confuses relationships between cause and effect items, making leaps and assumptions no paper could ever get away with.
And that's the truth about this book: it was a paper he couldn't get peer reviewed. So instead he turned it into a book to sell to the masses. Because nothing says screw you like making money on the paper your peers wouldn't support.
I'm sure there's some great tidbits in here. And I hope that there are thousands of people currently working on search data as the next big insight. But this isn't where I want to start with it. All of this being said...I won't judge if you do.
informative
medium-paced
یکی از کتاب هاییه که موضوعش جالبه. مطالبش هم خوبه. سرگرم کننده هم هست اما....
اما کارآمد نیست.
یعنی این که خب حالا من فهمیدم نتایج جست و جوی گوگل مردم با چیزی میگن یا نشون میدن فرق داره. آیا قراره چیزی بهتر یا بدتر بشه؟ نه. قراره بیشتر خودم رو به نمایش بگذارم؟ نه. قراره از مردم انتظار داشته باشم خودِ بدون فیلترشون رو بهم نشون بدن؟ نه.
پس در نهایت، اگرچه از خواندن این کتاب لذت بردم و احتمال میدم دیگران هم ازش لذت ببرند، اما تغییری در من و زندگیم ایجاد نشد.
با همه ی این ها، برای سرگرمی خوب بود چون موضوعش رو دوست داشتم. چیز جدیدی بود و هیچ وقت از این زاویه به خودم و دیگران فکر و نقاب هایی که همه مون می زنیم فکر نکرده بودم.
اما کارآمد نیست.
یعنی این که خب حالا من فهمیدم نتایج جست و جوی گوگل مردم با چیزی میگن یا نشون میدن فرق داره. آیا قراره چیزی بهتر یا بدتر بشه؟ نه. قراره بیشتر خودم رو به نمایش بگذارم؟ نه. قراره از مردم انتظار داشته باشم خودِ بدون فیلترشون رو بهم نشون بدن؟ نه.
پس در نهایت، اگرچه از خواندن این کتاب لذت بردم و احتمال میدم دیگران هم ازش لذت ببرند، اما تغییری در من و زندگیم ایجاد نشد.
با همه ی این ها، برای سرگرمی خوب بود چون موضوعش رو دوست داشتم. چیز جدیدی بود و هیچ وقت از این زاویه به خودم و دیگران فکر و نقاب هایی که همه مون می زنیم فکر نکرده بودم.
funny
informative
reflective
medium-paced
This book gave me a sense of zooming out - Stephens-Davidowitz writes clearly and insightfully conveys the implications of big data. Everybody Lies is geared towards people who are interested in big picture statistical thinking, so if you'd like to gain some knowledge about big data (or just an interesting read), this book is worth your time.