079

- Intro -

Search engines have become our most trusted sources of information and arbiters of truth. But can we ever get an unbiased search result? Swedish author and journalist Andreas Ekstrom argues that such a thing is a philosophical impossibility. In this thoughtful talk, he calls on us to strengthen the bonds between technology and the humanities, and he reminds us that behind every algorithm is a set of personal beliefs that no code can ever completely eradicate.

网上搜索引擎已经成为我们最信赖的信息来源和真理的仲裁者。但任何时候我们都能得到一个无偏差的搜索结果吗？瑞典作家和新闻记者，Andreas Ekstrom，认为这样的事在哲学思维分析上不可能存在。在这个值得深思的演讲中，他呼吁我们要加强科技和人文科学间的联系，而且他提醒我们，通过计算机操作解决问题的背后，是一套个人的信仰，从来没有破译密码能完全根除这样的信仰。

- Audio -

- Transcript -

So whenever I visit a school and talk to students, I always ask them the same thing: Why do you Google? Why is Google the search engine of choice for you? Strangely enough, I always get the same three answers. One, "Because it works," which is a great answer; that's why I Google, too. Two, somebody will say, "I really don't know of any alternatives." It's not an equally great answer and my reply to that is usually, "Try to Google the word 'search engine,' you may find a couple of interesting alternatives." And last but not least, thirdly, inevitably, one student will raise her or his hand and say, "With Google, I'm certain to always get the best, unbiased search result." Certain to always get the best, unbiased search result.

每当我参观一所学校， 和学生们交谈， 我总是问他们同样的问题： 为什么你用Google？ 为什么你首选Google 作为搜索引擎呢？ 奇怪的是，我总是得到 三个相同的回答。 第一个回答， “因为它是个管用的搜索工具，” 这是最好的答案，也是 我使用Google的原因。 第二个回答是， ”我真的不知道其他 任何可代替的方法。“ 这不是一个很好的回答， 而我的回应总是， ”尝试在Google上 键入搜索引擎， 你可以发现一些有趣的， 可代替的搜索方法。” 最后一个回答 并非不重要， 如我所预料的， 一个学生举手说， ”使用Google， 我确信总得到 最好和客观公正的搜索结果。“ 一定得到最好和客观 公正的搜索结果。

Now, as a man of the humanities, albeit a digital humanities man, that just makes my skin curl, even if I, too, realize that that trust, that idea of the unbiased search result is a cornerstone in our collective love for and appreciation of Google. I will show you why that, philosophically, is almost an impossibility.

作为一个学习人文科学的人， 尽管我是研究科技 和人文科学间关系的， 这个回答听起来 使我心里发毛， 尽管我也知道， 这种对搜索结果的信任， 是以我们共同喜爱和对 Google的认识为基础的。 我会证明给你看，这种想法 在哲学思维分析上几乎不存在。

But let me first elaborate, just a little bit, on a basic principle behind each search query that we sometimes seem to forget. So whenever you set out to Google something, start by asking yourself this: "Am I looking for an isolated fact?" What is the capital of France? What are the building blocks of a water molecule? Great -- Google away. There's not a group of scientists who are this close to proving that it's actually London and H30. You don't see a big conspiracy among those things. We agree, on a global scale, what the answers are to these isolated facts.

但首先，我对网上查询的 基本原则说明一下， 我们有时似乎忘记，每个 搜索查询背后的原则。 因此，每当你用Google 查询所需的东西， 首先要问自己： “我要寻找个别的事实吗？” 例如，法国的首都是哪里？ 水分子的构成要素是什么？ 使用Google搜索 都能找到这些答案。 没有一个严密的 科学家小组去证明 这些答案，实际上 会是伦敦和H30。 在这些答案中， 你不会找到什么阴谋。 我们同意，在全球范围内， 这些个别事实通过 网上查询能找到答案。

But if you complicate your question just a little bit and ask something like, "Why is there an Israeli-Palestine conflict?" You're not exactly looking for a singular fact anymore, you're looking for knowledge, which is something way more complicated and delicate. And to get to knowledge, you have to bring 10 or 20 or 100 facts to the table and acknowledge them and say, "Yes, these are all true." But because of who I am, young or old, black or white, gay or straight, I will value them differently. And I will say, "Yes, this is true, but this is more important to me than that." And this is where it becomes interesting, because this is where we become human. This is when we start to argue, to form society. And to really get somewhere, we need to filter all our facts here, through friends and neighbors and parents and children and coworkers and newspapers and magazines, to finally be grounded in real knowledge, which is something that a search engine is a poor help to achieve.

但是，如果你搜索 一些稍复杂的问题， 例如，“为什么出现以色列 和巴勒斯坦之间的冲突？“ 你不会只寻找单独 形式的个别事实， 你要找的是知识， 这些知识会表现出很 复杂和微妙的形式。 为了获得这些知识， 你必须要搜索10，20或 100个相关的事实 并认可这些事实，说： ”这些都是真实的。“ 但是，取决于我是谁， 年龄、肤色、性别取向， 人们以不同方式， 去评估这些事实。 我会说，“这是真实的， 但对我来说，这些事实 比那些更重要。” 事情在这里变得微妙， 你可以在这里发现人性。 当我们开始对这些事实 进行辩论，这就形成社会。 要获得真实的信息，我们需要 对所有的事实进行过滤， 通过我们的朋友， 邻居，父母和小孩 还有通过同事， 报纸和杂志， 最后会得到真实的知识， 这些真实的知识， 很难依赖网上搜索引擎的帮助。

So, I promised you an example just to show you why it's so hard to get to the point of true, clean, objective knowledge -- as food for thought. I will conduct a couple of simple queries, search queries. We'll start with "Michelle Obama," the First Lady of the United States. And we'll click for pictures. It works really well, as you can see. It's a perfect search result, more or less. It's just her in the picture, not even the President.

让我举例证明 要得到真实， 公正和客观的知识有多困难 － 提供另一个观点供你们思考。 在这里，我会进行一些 简单的搜索查询。 我们查询“Michelle Obama，” 美国第一夫人。 我们点击她的图片。 你能看到，这个查询 方法很管用。 或多或少这是一个 完美的搜索结果。 只有她在相片中，她的 总统丈夫不在相片中。

How does this work? Quite simple. Google uses a lot of smartness to achieve this, but quite simply, they look at two things more than anything. First, what does it say in the caption under the picture on each website? Does it say "Michelle Obama" under the picture? Pretty good indication it's actually her on there. Second, Google looks at the picture file, the name of the file as such uploaded to the website. Again, is it called "MichelleObama.jpeg"? Pretty good indication it's not Clint Eastwood in the picture. So, you've got those two and you get a search result like this -- almost.

搜索引擎是如何工作呢？ 很简单。 Google使用大量智能技术 呈现搜索结果，但很简单， 它们更多看两样东西比 任何其他东西。 首先，每个网站上 的图片标题是什么？ 在图片下有显示 “Michelle Obama” 吗？ 有的话会是很好的指标。 第二，Google显示图像文件， 该文件的名字会传到网站。 被称为“MichellObama.jpeg”吗？ 非常好的指标，它不是 Clint Eastwood的图片。 你已经获得两个搜索结果，而且 你会得到其他像这样类似的结果。

Now, in 2009, Michelle Obama was the victim of a racist campaign, where people set out to insult her through her search results. There was a picture distributed widely over the Internet where her face was distorted to look like a monkey. And that picture was published all over. And people published it very, very purposefully, to get it up there in the search results. They made sure to write "Michelle Obama" in the caption and they made sure to upload the picture as "MichelleObama.jpeg," or the like. You get why -- to manipulate the search result. And it worked, too. So when you picture-Googled for "Michelle Obama" in 2009, that distorted monkey picture showed up among the first results.