Newsletter Subject

When Computers Collude

From

npr.org

Email Address

email@et.npr.org

Sent On

Tue, Apr 2, 2019 11:02 AM

Email Preheader Text

Can Computers Collude? Was this forwarded to you? Subscribe and of the 1,600 best-selling items sold

Can Computers Collude? Was this forwarded to you? Subscribe [to our newsletter here]( and [to our podcasts here]( [NPR] Supercollusion --------------------------------------------------------------- by Greg Rosalsky If you shop online, there’s a good chance the price you pay for stuff is determined by a computer algorithm. As of 2015, [over one third]( of the 1,600 best-selling items sold on Amazon came from sellers who used algorithms to set their price. Algorithms are spreading like crazy, but are they giving companies too much power over consumers? Emilio Calvano, an economist at the University of Bologna in Italy, has been studying the economic effects of algorithms. In 2016, he hopped on a scooter with his colleague Giacomo Calzolari and scooted across the historic city to their university’s computer science department. There they conversed with experts on artificial intelligence and took a stack of materials to study. A few years later, Calvano and Calzolari, together with a couple of other Italian economists, Vincenzo Denicolò and Sergio Pastorello, used what they learned [to create a simulation](. They built algorithms that use “reinforcement learning,” which means they learn as they go through trial and error. “This is basically the building block of artificial intelligence,” Calvano says. Their A.I. algorithms duked it out on a university computer, competing to sell imaginary goods in a virtual marketplace. NurPhoto via Getty Images But these algorithms did not go to war and force each other to sell their simulated goods at the lowest competitive price. Instead, the algorithms raised prices as if they were explicitly colluding together. The most surprising part is they did so even without being able to communicate with each other. “So in a sense they reach superhuman performance,” Calvano says. All of which challenges the rules — and even the entire vocabulary — of antitrust law. Is it even “collusion” if these machines aren’t talking to each other? Algorithmic competition: good or evil? The use of algorithms by companies to set their prices is not new. The airline industry has been using them since [the 1980s](. However, those algorithms relied on close supervision by humans. Today, algorithmic pricing is transforming a range of industries, from taxis to retail. In 2012, Amazon changed prices about 50,000 times a day. A year later, they implemented a dynamic pricing strategy — and they began changing prices [over 2.5 million times]( a day. The strategy has pushed its competitors to do the same — and this isn’t just businesses on the Internet. Brick-and-mortar retailers [have been adopting electronic price tags]( so they can also flexibly change their prices. Most economists believe flexible pricing is good for society, at least when it comes to overall economic efficiency and growth. When companies can tailor prices to people, more trades get done and more stuff gets made. While some consumers have to pay more, others get to pay less. Algorithmic pricing could also help prevent waste by, for example, lowering prices on produce as it gets closer to going bad. Algoregulation Calvano says there are three schools of thought about how to regulate the use of these new algorithms. The free-market camp believes it’s not the government’s job to tell companies how to set their prices, and that the market will ultimately fix itself. While companies are gaining more power with these superhuman tools, consumers will also increasingly be able to leverage algorithmic power to make purchasing decisions. Services like Groupon, LivingSocial, CamelCamelCamel, and Honey already exist to help you find bargains. If you use Kayak to buy airline tickets, there’s a simple algorithm that helps you decide whether it’s the right time to buy tickets. It’s sort of a clunky feature, but it’s likely that such algorithms will get better in the future. A second camp, Calvano says, believes we should create a new regulatory authority that treats algorithms like drugs. It’d be sort of like the FDA, but for algorithms. They would test these algorithms in government computers before allowing them into the marketplace. Calvano says he and his colleagues fit into a third camp. “Let’s allow firms to innovate and deploy these algorithms in marketplaces because they can do a lot of good,” he says. Then, he says, the government’s antitrust authorities should monitor them and intervene if there’s a case they’re being used anti-competitively. Such an approach, however, might require modernizing our dusty antitrust laws. This Week From Planet Money --------------------------------------------------------------- How Much Money Should The Tooth Fairy Leave? — Planet Money Shorts investigates the eternal struggle of parenting, and an overlooked economic indicator. For the past two decades, the price of a tooth has been going up much faster than inflation. [Watch here](. The Phoebus Cartel — Planet Money partnered with our neighbors at [Throughline]( the new NPR history podcast, to tell the story of the effort to kill long-lasting light bulbs. It’s an early and riveting case study in planned obsolescence. [Listen here](. An Economist in Caracas: Day In The Life — The Indicator speaks with an economist based in Venezuela who is seeing the country’s economy crumble around her. [Listen here](. What We're Learning --------------------------------------------------------------- Planet Money Correspondent Sarah Gonzalez recently [read a tweet]( from American astronaut Anne McClain that blew her mind. McClain is currently whizzing around the earth on the International Space Station and revealed, “I am 2 inches taller than when I launched!” People’s vertebraes [apparently]( expand when they’re in the low-gravity environment of space, but then they shrink back down when come back to earth. --------------------------------------------------------------- What do you think of today's email? We'd love to hear your thoughts, questions and feedback: [planetmoney@npr.org](mailto:planetmoney@npr.org?subject=Newsletter%20Feedback) Enjoying this newsletter? Forward to a friend! They can [sign up here](. [Check out all of NPR's newsletter offerings]( — including Daily News, Politics, Health and more! You received this message because you're subscribed to our Planet Money emails. | [Unsubscribe]( | [Privacy Policy]( | NPR 1111 N. CAPITOL ST. NE WASHINGTON DC 20002 [NPR]

Marketing emails from npr.org

View More
Sent On

26/06/2023

Sent On

26/06/2023

Sent On

26/06/2023

Sent On

25/06/2023

Sent On

25/06/2023

Sent On

24/06/2023

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2025 SimilarMail.