A life by the numbers is not worth living
Sometimes, it seems like big data and data science will save the world.
At least, that is what the headlines seem to suggest. Just Google the terms and see for yourself.
A story in Forbes titled How Big Data And Tech Will Improve Agriculture, From Farm To Table paints a bright, shiny future where computers will eliminate wastage and human error.
Sensors on fields will provide data on soil conditions, wind, pests and exactly how much fertiliser and water is available as the weather changes.
GPS data analytics will determine how many tractors and trucks to use, and RFID tags can trace the movement of produce from the farm to the home and even to the trash bin.
Analytics can then take all that data and determine the best crops to plant – best for the soil, best for the weather conditions and the logistics flow, plus the most profitable given agricultural commodities markets.
My question is: Would I want to live in such a world?
Maybe in this case, the answer is yes.
I’m not so sure, however, about the scenario painted by another story published in the Wall Street Journal almost on the same day. This one is titled For A Flavour Boost, Chefs Turn to Big Data.
Here, a PhD student found that by utilising a branch of mathematics called “graph theory”, he could work out the best-tasting three-topping pizzas by examining and grouping existing consumer data on which two toppings people tended to like to go together.
The guy now works with Ocean Spray, the largest producer of cranberry products in the United States. His job is to analyse data on “what else people talk about when they talk about cranberries”, so the company can create better flavour combinations for its future products.
The story goes on to posit a future where data scientists trawl through thousands of recipes that people have posted online, finding bizarre flavour combinations that don’t seem to make sense, but actually do – at least “according to the data“.
Is something missing here?
Can everything that has gone into the evolution of something as subjective and abstract as the appreciation of good food – culture, history, biology, artistry – conceivably be reduced or pureed into consumer data to be sliced and diced like the very same onions that were monitored, grown, transported and packaged to perfection by data science?
If so, will a future Heston Blumenthal or Gordon Ramsay be allowed to create something not sanctioned or supported by the data? Will they even think of doing so?
To me, life is, and has to be, part art and part science.
And it would be a dreary world indeed if life were to become all science.
That is because the past is not always the best predictor of the future and not every optimal solution in life can be arrived at simply by having a computer hack at a giant set of numbers.
Of course, you have to realise that this is coming from me, a lifelong student of the arts that purposely chose an education and career that would take me as far away from the fields from science and mathematics as I could possibly get.
And so, I will freely admit to looking at all these gleeful and smug engineers, accountants and mathematicians today with a mix of horror and resentment.
I realise that this is really their time. Their left-brained view of the world has triumphed and they are the new warriors of the wasteland.
But they have also done considerable damage in many areas where quality counts as much as quantity, and not everything can be reduced to a set of numbers.
