Thank you very much for the opportunity to participate in this Open Review and to gain early access to a book, which I have been looking for and wanting to read for a while. It promises to be a very interesting, timely, and exciting contribution, which is much needed, especially as we begin to tackle the ethical questions in the digital age and there is no obvious guide and many of the digital phenomena that are being studied are still poorly understood. I have enjoyed making comments and being part of the conversation here in the Open Review very much and I look forward to reading the final version of the book! Many thanks again for making it possible for curious and non-expert readers like myself.

what we have done -- remove "with"

consider replacing "increase" with "grow"

that in the future

Might be useful to mention the Galaxy Zoo researchers by name for consistency with previous sentences.

remove "to" otherwise the sentence that begins with "how" does not make sense

Opower

Unless someone reads the part of the book where the urinal is discussed, they are going to be quite puzzled by this.

double the

experiment was over or experiments were over?

responses?

the use is used twice

that it is?

not to?

governments keep or government keeps?

the or a?

helps?

not a necessary comma

attacker knows? or attackers know?

different font than the text font

educational?

review?

development? developmental?

approach means?

result of this efforts?

consent, while

remove "an"

I somehow expected to find more about his in this book/chapter.

overly confident?

lumps

expose?

poses?

As of now, we are still waiting to find out what that valuable knowledge exactly was.

delete "up"

maybe add word "approach" so then "is" follows smoothly

upcoming election?

Is university lower case here?

I called?

informational risk?

UK just passed a huge surveillance law which makes this concerned classification sound somewhat ironic.

will decrease

double "that"

which? to share about?

I actually looked this up and it seems like the top hits are about how this mixture helps to clean drains and sinks. Is this supposed to be explosive?

Is embarrassment psychological or social? Perhaps discrimination is a better example?

Is it "informational" as above or "information" as in this sentence?

As far as I understand, and since blockchain as transparent ledger is about revealing transactions to whoever wants to or has the mathematical capacity to know them, I am not sure this is such a good example after all because the people who participate in this type of digital economy must consent to their data being transparent.

Might want to mention it is a transparent record, as it seems to be in essence connected to ethics.

Now that blockchain is more commonly known, I believe everyone just says "blockchain" without the "the".

A write up on the front page of the home town newspaper does not necessarily mean it is a critical article - I think the point is not the treatment in the press, but the level of comfort with publicaly disclosing the information about the study if need be.

as open access? with open access?

The class of 2009, was it? They were the first class graduating into a very different job market, after the economy crashed. They very likely had bigger problems than some graduate student researcher looking up their Facebook profile, especially since in those days the "network" feature would render their profiles to be visible to anyone on the Harvard network. But yes, their service to knowledge and society should have at least got them a gift certificate to the Coop Bookstore!

participate?

Intuitively I agree with the possibility that the fabric of the community would be disrupted by favoritism and unfairness in rewarding for hard work but I am still not sure what this sentence means.

Unclear.

Not a serious academic comment but I wonder what ethical concerns were raised by the book called "My Freshman Year" which was an outcome of a professor's clandestine presence in a college to study and observe undergraduates to form a better understanding of who they were. Was it due to the fact that it was done in the pre-internet era that it raised relatively small outcry? The book was given out as a freshman year self-help reading material at my college, for example. I feel like Harvard has such a special relationship with Facebook that it sometimes seems that all moves are allowed. Then again, I have not read the Lewis papers yet so I cannot tell to what extend they reveal information that Harvard students wouldn't tell you themselves anyway. I'm kidding, I also think that it was not cool to study them without their informed consent.

or the ability to perturb?

originally?

This made me think of the thought experiment with surveillance cameras in "Bursts" and of the artist Hassan M. Elahi who records every single thing he does to make a statement on the surveillance demands of modern times.

Personally, the connection between unethical uses of for instance Facebook feed and mental health are the reason why the IRB should take closer look at the computer science proposals. The researchers mean no harm but if the phenomenon they are triggering is not well understood by the scientific community, or any community for that matter, because it is so new, then a saying comes to mind: the road to hell is paved with good intentions..

would? since the previous tense was "was rendering"

It's Harvard, isn't it? Especially since Kevin Lewis did his Ph.D. there. I'm only guessing.

Such as?

Is this legal for non-US citizens?

problems or a problem?

What happened to the favorites? No favorites in Chapter 5? :(

approach?

other?

combined?

This type of carefully thought out and evidenced reassurance is needed badly as we're being bombarded by news of AI and machine learning making huge strides in these fields. And even though I love Google Photos it freaks me out how good at image recognition it is becoming since their use of neural networks, so for how long will your argument hold? I'm not sure I'm ready to hear the answer!

replace with "ordinarily" because usually is already in this sentence

This was a great chapter! I've enjoyed reading it a lot.

"Id like to remind you"

remove "and"

there?

double bracket

distributed?

a comma missing?

do not easily lead to verifying solutions? verifiable solutions?

This reminds me of http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/10/30/499200614/how-one-university-used-big-data-to-boost-graduation-rates and how the interviews paired with big data helped to improve graduation rates.

predict the shape into which a protein will fold?

Consider adding "an end in and of themselves"?

started

needs to be customized

Another one is Atlas Obscura.

greater?

Interesting word choice.

Probably with non-degree free online courses?

A variant of this exercise is to write a letter to convince a young woman to go into STEM. Prof. Cialdini can retire, it's time.

approach?

remove "is"

remove "they"

experiments cause or experiment causes?

focuses?

This was a really great chapter! Congratulations!

can

from appearing in the News Feed

Are we being experimented upon by participating in this open review? Hmmmmm

Are there any examples in the big data world for that? It would be interesting to know.

Remove?

I understand the need to refer to historical cases for illustrating these differences but I would be curious to see some modern day studies classified this way and if their authors would be comfortable with this division and assessment.

Apologies for being a cynic but the improved product does not necessarily lead to more research, more likely it leads to more sales and more money. There is perhaps a continuous feedback loop dedicated to improving a well-selling product and that generates research that necessitates that. Hopefully, though, this feedback loop is real and it results in more research, though this is a very academic perspective. An industry perspective would be to leave the final word on this to the R&D budget.

I'm not sure if I like or dislike this mental shortcut. Probably for learning purposes I would prefer for these errors to just be named correctly.

whom?

be tested

mostly or most?

more likely to adopt the program

It is clear that this happened but what did they speculate caused it? The university's reputation? The relative unknown status of the company? Or was it the distinction between reacting positively to a hand-written vs. printed, so towards more personal vs. generic information?

But why?

Recently acquired by Oracle.

What will come later?

It would be helpful to get a bit more insight about those insightful analyses beyond just mentioning them.

Perhaps some data can be added to the plot, like making off the area of the greatest potential.

Hahaha

these students

researchers'

as:

This was a lot of fun!

explains

delete "can"

why not first??? :)

Sense? There are words missing but I am not sure which ones :)

delete the second "the"

to the gym?

is?

What is a black-box in his context?

remove space after the full stop

continue

Agree with the comment about explaining what cross-validation means and why it is 10-fold.

provide estimates?

first it's plural then it's singular "trace" -- does the concordance matter?

data singular or plural? exist or exists?

would be impossible otherwise

can turn?

are

a set choice?

This is now much clearer but in the opening of the paragraph it was definitely in need of more context or examples.

The chapter ends with a figure, not with text - is that essential? Can it end with text instead?

sex, it

This reads like the name of the technique also includes the word Essentially..

there are?

giving

token?

Remove "and" and begin with "The simplest probability sampling.." shorter sentences = more clarity

I don't think "rational aversion" exists, thus maybe leaving out "irrational" completely?

Since both examples were discussed earlier, wouldn't it make sense to say "the most dramatic failures of survey researchers discussed earlier, such as.."

spacing between last word and full stop

with?

double bracket

I'm missing a conclusion related to this data, so what does this result mean for American spending, or what did it lead to? Even as a curiosity it would be interesting to know some follow up about this finding.

a review?

:D of course pb&j is a very American thing. But I guess people worldwide will get it.

increase or increases? singular or plural?

captured?

Using "I expect" twice in a short space.

The golden age was mentioned in the first paragraph as a possibility as regards to the future but now we read that it's actually considered by most to be in the past. This sentence makes the case for the golden age = digital age somewhat weak so perhaps it needs to be taken out or rephrased.

What are the grounds for this pessimism? Perhaps some more on this would help to determine how justified they are or aren't.

"from the perspective of someone"

"here also what you see depends on your perspective"

"in order to", or "on collecting and curating their data"?

Not sure comma is necessary here.

"second" would be more in line with using words for numbers throughout this book.

recommendations?

suggestions?

tweets?

:)

is?

reflects?

"Probability of harm" listed twice

Add "see"

present?

Remove coma, italicize statistical data editing?

less of a concern?

Capitalize Boyd?

This is written pre-November 2016 so I wonder if updates with new scholarly analyses could follow up about how Facebook influenced US election results.

protocol?

of

double bracket

then

That's very useful, thank you! Indeed, ethnography would have been interesting to include but complicating the narrative.

What did they do? A couple of words about their work might be helpful.

of?

"Farber's (2015) work with the Taxi drivers" -- I think it's necessary to continually reference the topic of the study.

"Examples of this kind of work include..."

"what is an interesting question.."

listings,

completely

Why not stick to "club"?

outcomes,

Great compiliation of interesting reading material!

Use "mechanisms" for consistency - the term appears as "mechanisms" in the next sentence.

Please define "eq. 2.1"

what does "eq." mean?

It sort of makes the reader feel like all the other research is not quite as elegant. What is the point of this value judgement?

Might be worth defining this term.

Perhaps more explicit "five years after the draft" or rearrange the sentence: "and found that there was little long-term effect ... so long after the draft"

what is a comparable veteran to a white veteran? i.e. maybe this needs to just be expressed as "white non-veterans" -- if I am understanding this correctly.

:

Past tense might be less ambiguous - "suggested" or "had suggested".

period?