Opinion Google, Facebook, and the ‘Creepy Line’

Lord Coke

Silver Belt
@Silver
Joined
Aug 18, 2003
Messages
10,789
Reaction score
13,458
Who here thinks we need to pass legislation to deal with google. I am beginning increasingly uncomfortable about google's power. I think China has been really smart to keep google out and promote local companies.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018...iig-U0cxPrSXZ6FVfjlAtH3IV5b4OpI6S9Coh6qpUIEEE

On Google, I just typed in “top races Republican,” and the word “races” got a squiggly underline suggesting I had misspelled the word. Beneath it ran Google’s helpful correction: “top racist Republican.” With “top races Democrat,” no such veering into the gutter. No squiggly line. The word “racist” did not insinuate itself into my field of vision. Oh, and before I completed the phrase, with just “top races Democra,” two lines below ran the following little hint: “best Democratic races to donate to.” Huh? Who said anything about donating? I’ve never donated to a political candidate in my life, and if I did, I wouldn’t donate to Democrats. Again, no parallel on the Republican side. No steering me to fundraisers.

The documentary The Creepy Line takes its name from a shockingly unguarded remark by the former Google CEO Eric Schmidt. He is smiling and relaxed in a conference as he explains that Google has (had?) a nickname for excessive invasiveness. “Google policy on a lot of these things,” Schmidt says, “is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it.”

How is that going so far? The Creepy Line, a terrifying and important 80-minute documentary now streaming on Amazon Prime, is an attempt to answer that question.

The film delves into some of the troubling habits of our two Internet masters, Facebook and especially Google. An early segment of the film, produced and partly narrated by the journalist Peter Schweizer, illustrates how your search history gives Google an enormous, permanent cache of information about you, everything from what things you like to buy to what you like in bed. Naturally Google uses the data mainly to fine-tune ad sales. But what else might they do with it? Who knows?

Google, noticing that people would leave the search engine to roam the Internet, came up with a browser, Chrome. Now everything you do online through Chrome is logged by Google. But Google wants to know what you’re doing even when you’re not online. Hence: Android. As soon as you log on, Android uploads a complete picture of everywhere your phone has been that day. “These are all free services but obviously they’re not,” notes professor Jordan Peterson, another talking head in the doc. It’s a surveillance business model. Google Maps, Google Docs, Gmail . . . Google knows more about you than your spouse does. It even has drafts of emails you didn’t send. Oh, and they have the power to block information from reaching you too. Just by bumping undesirable stuff to the second page of search, Google can more or less make it disappear. Hey, good thing Google doesn’t have any overt political or cultural preferences you might not agree with, right? Peterson says Google shut off access to his Gmail and his YouTube channel when the corporation decided it didn’t like what he was saying. Ten minutes into the movie, you’ll pause it and switch all of your devices to non-Google search engines. (Try DuckDuckGo, which vows not to track you and also promises unbiased search results.)

NOW WATCH: 'McConnell Rejects Vote On Bill To Protect Mueller'






























Facebook has become the No. 1 source of news for Americans, and has already been revealed to censor conservative news items and downplay trending stories that were favorable to conservatives. Engineers also said they were inserting stories into the news feed that they preferred people to see. Facebook could influence elections invisibly by sending out messages only to certain individuals urging them to get out and register to vote. Even the Guardian used the term “Orwellian” to describe Facebook’s tactics. But as the tech guru and author Jaron Lanier notes, we’re not citizens of Facebook, so we have no vote in how it runs, no access to the details about how it decides what information to show us. There is no transparency about what’s going on.

COMMENTS
Between them, Google and Facebook are effectively a duopoly with unprecedented influence over American lives and minds. The federal government is, meanwhile, a heavy user of Google products, and has shown little interest in oversight. We’ve only begun to take notice of the way the state is merging with the most powerful corporations. Psychologist and Google critic Robert Epstein found that, by sheer coincidence, the day after he wrote an article called “Could Google Tilt a Close Election?” he couldn’t access the Internet through any browser. An especially chilling passage shows Epstein explaining how his research shows that manipulation of search algorithms to favor a given candidate could easily shift people’s voting intentions, with few noticing the bias. He suspects such manipulation in searches for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign, which Google has denied.

“If they have this kind of power then democracy is an illusion,” says Epstein (who describes himself as apolitical but allows that he thought Clinton was a more qualified presidential candidate than Donald Trump). “There have to be in place numerous safeguards to make sure not only that they don’t exercise these powers but that they can’t exercise these powers.” Adds Schweizer, “These tech giants have a level of control and an ability to manipulate us that Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Mussolini could only have dreamed of.”
 
Really takes some fuckin' balls to pretend to be outraged after all of the Republican data mining/Facebook targeting last election (and that's without getting into the help from Daddy Vladdy). I've never, not once, seen a Trump-friendly conservative complain about that alongside these dubious anti-free market screeds about social media and search engines.
 
Really takes some fuckin' balls to pretend to be outraged after all of the Republican data mining/Facebook targeting last election (and that's without getting into the help from Daddy Vladdy). I've never, not once, seen a Trump-friendly conservative complain about that alongside these dubious anti-free market screeds about social media and search engines.

So you agree that there is a problem that needs to be addressed correct?
 
So you agree that there is a problem that needs to be addressed correct?
Let's put our feet back on Earth and then we can talk real challenges.

For instance, Search Engine Optimization ain't a goddamn liberal plot, "hiding" information from you. I mean really, when the argument starts there, where is it supposed to go?
 
My friend Fenwick has this cat and it's so obese and he posts these pictures all over the facebook and I don't like them intentionally
 
Google's search outcomes are not and have never been "neutral". Google provides the answers that most reflect what people are searching for and what they click on. It's constantly updating based on those results.

So, when you type "top races Republicans" and it replaces races with "racist", it's because most people are searching for "racist" when they search for "Republican" and Google is attempting to align your search with the predominant searches associated with that term. It's a massive sorting algorithm that attempts to predict what you want.

It's basically the same technology that tells your phone what words to suggest when you write a text.

This has always been the case with Google. People should be aware of that so that they don't confuse Google with a site that provides the most accurate answers. Instead, it provides the most popular answers. In many cases, they are the same thing. However, in plenty of other cases, what most people are searching for isn't the answer to what you are searching for.

To that end, you can add a bunch of modifiers to your search terms like "", or "-" to tell Google how important specific terms are.

TLDR: There's nothing unusual happening here once people understand how these technologies actually work and have always worked.
 
Google's search outcomes are not and have never been "neutral". Google provides the answers that most reflect what people are searching for and what they click on. It's constantly updating based on those results.

So, when you type "top races Republicans" and it replaces races with "racist", it's because most people are searching for "racist" when they search for "Republican" and Google is attempting to align your search with the predominant searches associated with that term. It's a massive sorting algorithm that attempts to predict what you want.

It's basically the same technology that tells your phone what words to suggest when you write a text.

This has always been the case with Google. People should be aware of that so that they don't confuse Google with a site that provides the most accurate answers. Instead, it provides the most popular answers. In many cases, they are the same thing. However, in plenty of other cases, what most people are searching for isn't the answer to what you are searching for.

To that end, you can add a bunch of modifiers to your search terms like "", or "-" to tell Google how important specific terms are.

TLDR: There's nothing unusual happening here once people understand how these technologies actually work and have always worked.
Bolded; it's still not even true and that needs to be stressed. Anybody can type that into a google search bar and see that it's a lie. We don't even reach the point of having reasoned arguments about algorithms and optimization of sites. It's like arguing about the hair color of the shooter on the grassy knoll.
 
Not sure how much ‘right wingers are prosecuted’ I can handly anymore.
 
Not sure how much ‘right wingers are prosecuted’ I can handly anymore.
"victimhood" has invaded everyone.

I'm so sick of it. You can't talk to "victims" about solutions because they are entitled, special and owed.
 
Bolded; it's still not even true and that needs to be stressed. Anybody can type that into a google search bar and see that it's a lie. We don't even reach the point of having reasoned arguments about algorithms and optimization of sites. It's like arguing about the hair color of the shooter on the grassy knoll.
Thank you. I should have just done that first.
 
I stopped using google when I found that its true that they do press negative links based on personal bias. Search anything Trump on Google and then Bing. Its pretty blatant.
 
I stopped using google when I found that its true that they do press negative links based on personal bias. Search anything Trump on Google and then Bing. Its pretty blatant.
I started using DDG
 
Google supresses search content.
Duckduckgo is better.
I agree with TS, Googles monopoly on information is not a good thing and I dont see how any thinking person would be ok with it, regardless of political stripe.
 
Back
Top