Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Irish Google Exec Reveal Plan to Prevent A Trump situation in 2020

13»

Comments

  • #102
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    B0jangles wrote: »
    I was just thinking that; if you have to look back almost 60 years to find a time when the party you support was behaving reasonably well, you might want to reconsider your support for that party...
    What MAJOR social accomplishments have been achieved since then?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #103
    splashuum
    Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭splashuum


    Google,Facebook and Youtube have HUNDREDS of lawsuits currently filed against them for censorship and manipulation type issues.
    How on earth are people in this thread adamant that they are all so squeaky clean? Bizarre frame of thought.

    https://www.foxnews.com/tech/prageru-files-new-lawsuit-against-google-in-youtube-censorship-row


  • #104
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    notobtuse wrote: »
    What MAJOR social accomplishments have been achieved since then?

    Gay rights, violence against women act and Roe Versus Wade... All substantial in own respect. And just thought of them off hand.


  • #105
    JohnMc1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,987 ✭✭✭JohnMc1


    splashuum wrote: »
    Google,Facebook and Youtube have HUNDREDS of lawsuits currently filed against them for censorship and manipulation type issues.
    How on earth are people in this thread adamant that they are all so squeaky clean? Bizarre frame of thought.

    https://www.foxnews.com/tech/prageru-files-new-lawsuit-against-google-in-youtube-censorship-row

    The official bird for Liberals should be the Ostrich since they always bury their heads in the sand when reality goes against their narrative.


  • #106
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    batgoat wrote: »
    Gay rights, violence against women act and Roe Versus Wade... All substantial in own respect. And just thought of them off hand.
    What legislation covers those things you speak of? Roe vs Wade was determined by the SCOTUS, not legislation, and it was bad judicial reasoning and will eventually come again before SCOTUS... if they were ever brave enough to hear any of the lawsuits going on.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #107
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    notobtuse wrote: »
    What legislation covers those things you speak of? Roe vs Wade was determined by the SCOTUS, not legislation, and it was bad judicial reasoning and will eventually come again before SCOTUS... if they were ever brave enough to hear any of the lawsuits going on.

    Firstly, the parties positions on those issues are what matters. You asked for social accomplishments and I've listed ones. All of which the GOP have actively opposed to various degrees.

    Gay rights, don't act don't tell was removed under Obama administration. His administration also actively opposed DOMA. Same cannot generally be said of the GOP members. In fact, plenty tend to campaign on the right to discriminate.

    The renewal of the violence against women act renewal was opposed by 150+ Republicans in the last few months.

    That's your view on Roe V Wade, meanwhile SCOTUS decisions don't tend to get overturned so if they choose to go after it. That's a dangerous precedent. In addition, I would say the GOP views on abortion tend to show a general low regard for women.


  • #108
    Love_BBC
    Site Banned Posts: 11 ✭Love_BBC


    It's scary how much power these corps have.

    Reddit have quarantined (meaning it's not searchable, not viewable unless logged in etc.) the_donald subreddit, Twitter have just introduced a thing where they can tag "abusive" posts by politicians expecting to impact trump, Google are making comments like this, Facebook well we know what they're like...

    So much power and influence.


  • #109
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    Love_BBC wrote: »
    It's scary how much power these corps have.

    Reddit have quarantined (meaning it's not searchable, not viewable unless logged in etc.) the_donald subreddit, Twitter have just introduced a thing where they can tag "abusive" posts by politicians expecting to impact trump, Google are making comments like this, Facebook well we know what they're like...

    So much power and influence.

    The Donald subreddit is frankly a cesspit...


  • #110
    rossie1977
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,365 ✭✭✭✭rossie1977


    It's almost like these private companies have rules or something https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy


  • #111
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    batgoat wrote: »
    Firstly, the parties positions on those issues are what matters. You asked for social accomplishments and I've listed ones. All of which the GOP have actively opposed to various degrees.

    Gay rights, don't act don't tell was removed under Obama administration. His administration also actively opposed DOMA. Same cannot generally be said of the GOP members. In fact, plenty tend to campaign on the right to discriminate.

    The renewal of the violence against women act renewal was opposed by 150+ Republicans in the last few months.

    That's your view on Roe V Wade, meanwhile SCOTUS decisions don't tend to get overturned so if they choose to go after it. That's a dangerous precedent. In addition, I would say the GOP views on abortion tend to show a general low regard for women.
    Again, DOMA was struck down by the SCOTUS, not legislation.

    That violence against women act was passed with bipartisan support. But when the renewal came up Democrats added such things as visas for illegal aliens and gun confiscation. If it would have been left alone it would have flown through with bipartisan support once again.

    You can argue that GOP views on abortion tend to show a high regard for life.

    By your logic I guess we can say the Republican tax cuts and repeals of crippling regulations was the most significant social bit of legislation since the 60’s. It has done more for the poor, and reduced unemployment levels for blacks and Hispanics to unprecedented levels, than anything else done in the last 60 years.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    Love_BBC wrote: »
    It's scary how much power these corps have.

    Reddit have quarantined (meaning it's not searchable, not viewable unless logged in etc.) the_donald subreddit, Twitter have just introduced a thing where they can tag "abusive" posts by politicians expecting to impact trump, Google are making comments like this, Facebook well we know what they're like...

    So much power and influence.

    Ugh, I know you're a troll but here we go.

    The_donald was quarantined, not banned. It was put in place due to repeated posts from people inciting violence, getting much worse than usual in the last few months, including direct threats against the police and AOC and Bernie Sanders.

    It's still there, just requires an additional step before you can view. eg, you press a button saying "Yes"

    Big old edit:

    For the people arguing about the Democrats and Republicans back in the 60's and earlier, you have to remember the parties were quite a bit different to now.

    Both parties would be considered quite right wing by todays standards, the key difference between the two was their idea of social economics. Republicans had a focus on small government, light taxation and an overall more Libertarian view. Democrats veered more towards heavier government, higher taxes and better social services/care.

    By all means, argue that the Democrats were voting against things we wouldn't expect them to vote against now, but it's literally just showing your own ignorance of their history and the changes in society. The majority of 'right wing' views are Republican -now-. There's no point arguing over something 50+ years ago.


  • #113
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    I think the outrage would be at Defcon 1 here if reports like these gave credence to Google targeting liberal and progressive organizations as harmful, or if searches on the Irish referendum gave priority to pro-life sources.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #114
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I think the outrage would be at Defcon 1 here if reports like these gave credence to Google targeting liberal and progressive organizations as harmful, or if searches on the Irish referendum gave priority to pro-life sources.

    I'm not outraged, and wouldn't be either way. I'm absolutely concerned if it's true.

    However, all we've seen so far (and ever from Project Veritas) is a highly edited and spliced video. If it's all so damning, I'd like to see the full thing. I might be wrong here, but I'm yet to see that.

    James O'Keefe himself was arrested and prosecuted for attempting to tamper with the phone of a US Senator and has previously been called out for editing his videos to make people look far worse.

    By all means, don't trust Google or any other big tech 100% but question the source of the information too. The man is a famous liar, why trust him more than anyone else?

    Oh wait! Here's another thing for those who call out for openness.

    How about the Trump Foundation donating to Project Veritas in 2016.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe#U.S._Presidential_elections_(2016)


  • #115
    Love_BBC
    Site Banned Posts: 11 ✭Love_BBC


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    Ugh, I know you're a troll but here we go.

    The_donald was quarantined, not banned. It was put in place due to repeated posts from people inciting violence, getting much worse than usual in the last few months, including direct threats against the police and AOC and Bernie Sanders.

    It's still there, just requires an additional step before you can view. eg, you press a button saying "Yes"

    Big old edit:

    For the people arguing about the Democrats and Republicans back in the 60's and earlier, you have to remember the parties were quite a bit different to now.

    Both parties would be considered quite right wing by todays standards, the key difference between the two was their idea of social economics. Republicans had a focus on small government, light taxation and an overall more Libertarian view. Democrats veered more towards heavier government, higher taxes and better social services/care.

    By all means, argue that the Democrats were voting against things we wouldn't expect them to vote against now, but it's literally just showing your own ignorance of their history and the changes in society. The majority of 'right wing' views are Republican -now-. There's no point arguing over something 50+ years ago.

    Yeah I know it was quarantined, hence why I said it was quarantined.

    There's numerous subs that incite hatred that aren't touched. Hell, look at all the anti trump subs.


  • #116
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    Love_BBC wrote: »
    Yeah I know it was quarantined, hence why I said it was quarantined.

    There's numerous subs that incite hatred that aren't touched. Hell, look at all the anti trump subs.

    Fair point, I'll admit I misread your post.

    I literally can't think of any anti-Trump subreddit with the same level of vitriol and aggressiveness as T_D.

    Places like /r/Conservative and /r/Libertarian are still totally available and have a strong support for Donald Trump. The difference is the general posting and attitude of it's posters and mods.


  • #117
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    I'm not outraged, and wouldn't be either way. I'm absolutely concerned if it's true.

    However, all we've seen so far (and ever from Project Veritas) is a highly edited and spliced video. If it's all so damning, I'd like to see the full thing. I might be wrong here, but I'm yet to see that.

    James O'Keefe himself was arrested and prosecuted for attempting to tamper with the phone of a US Senator and has previously been called out for editing his videos to make people look far worse.

    By all means, don't trust Google or any other big tech 100% but question the source of the information too. The man is a famous liar, why trust him more than anyone else?

    Oh wait! Here's another thing for those who call out for openness.

    How about the Trump Foundation donating to Project Veritas in 2016.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe#U.S._Presidential_elections_(2016)
    Even if people do see the full video and it substantiates the edited version, I doubt it will make any difference whatsoever towards the Ad Hominem attacks we see here so often against any right leaning entity.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #118
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    frankly bringing up OKeeffe's dodgy past is irrelevant, all you need to know comes out of the Google exec's own mouths right there on the video .


  • #119
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    Love_BBC wrote: »
    Yeah I know it was quarantined, hence why I said it was quarantined.

    There's numerous subs that incite hatred that aren't touched. Hell, look at all the anti trump subs.


    Reddit has been extremely light on sanctioning that sub in the past. They got away with a lot. It should have been banned after Charlottesville. But they committed the cardinal sin, they brought bad publicity to the site. They couldn't turn a blind eye any more.


  • #120
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    frankly bringing up OKeeffe's dodgy past is irrelevant, all you need to know comes out of the Google exec's own mouths right there on the video .

    What?

    It's completely and utterly relevant to the topic. The man has previously been caught on numerous occasions editing his videos in a way that suit his bias and then releasing them as fact.

    How can you possibly claim it's irrelevant?


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Even if people do see the full video and it substantiates the edited version, I doubt it will make any difference whatsoever towards the Ad Hominem attacks we see here so often against any right leaning entity.

    I'm actually inclined to agree with you. But, I'd also say exactly the same could be said for either side.

    People tend to side with 'their people'. For example, despite all the allegations against a certain President and the pussy grabbing tape, his supporters claim it's no big deal, but will happily push a conspiracy about Joe Biden.


  • #122
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    I'm actually inclined to agree with you. But, I'd also say exactly the same could be said for either side.

    People tend to side with 'their people'. For example, despite all the allegations against a certain President and the pussy grabbing tape, his supporters claim it's no big deal, but will happily push a conspiracy about Joe Biden.
    I honestly don't see many Ad Hominem attacks by the right here. But with the left is appears to be a standing operating procedure. Those Trump comments were stupid, but stupid comments seem to be normal from powerful people. Take Joe Biden's comment of working with Segregationists... I don’t get why everyone is on about him. It was generations ago and they were powerful at the time. If you wanted to get anything positive achieved you had to work with them to get it done. Biden was actually the best true GOP candidate before his recent lurch to the left to appease the Democrats radical progressive base that have controlled the primary process in the last few elections. If you condemn Biden for working with Segregationists you should also condemn Obama for working with North Korea. But I get it... It's all politics.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #123
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I honestly don't see many Ad Hominem attacks by the right here. But with the left is appears to be a standing operating procedure. Those Trump comments were stupid, but stupid comments seem to be normal from powerful people. Take Joe Biden's comment of working with Segregationists... I don’t get why everyone is on about him. It was generations ago and they were powerful at the time. If you wanted to get anything positive achieved you had to work with them to get it done. Biden was actually the best true GOP candidate before his recent lurch to the left to appease the Democrats radical progressive base that have controlled the primary process in the last few elections. If you condemn Biden for working with Segregationists you should also condemn Obama for working with North Korea. But I get it... It's all politics.

    I'm not going to go trawling through After Hours to find the dozens of Ad hominem attacks and comments I can think of, but suffice to say if you see the words "PC gone mad" you'll see it there.

    There's truly no point in debating it. It's just a natural thing that people do, we tend to be more 'forgiving' of those who are on the same political spectrum as us. There are of course exceptions to this.


  • #124
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    I'm not going to go trawling through After Hours to find the dozens of Ad hominem attacks and comments I can think of, but suffice to say if you see the words "PC gone mad" you'll see it there.

    There's truly no point in debating it. It's just a natural thing that people do, we tend to be more 'forgiving' of those who are on the same political spectrum as us. There are of course exceptions to this.
    I'm sure you're right, but it should be noted and called out when exhibited in Current Affairs.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #125
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I'm sure you're right, but it should be noted and called out when exhibited in Current Affairs.

    You can go back to page one or two of this very thread and you'll see the confirmation bias immediately.

    Google bad because liberal.
    James O'Keefe good because he's taking on Google.


  • #126
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    You can go back to page one or two of this very thread and you'll see the confirmation bias immediately.

    Google bad because liberal.
    James O'Keefe good because he's taking on Google.

    What I see more in this instance is Google bad because their bias in searches negatively targets Republicans. James O'Keefe good because he is exposing it.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Seanachai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,544 ✭✭✭Seanachai


    I don't think the bell can be unrung here, Trump's support base are ideologically opposed to the 'progressive' part of the population. Not having access to certain media won't change this.


  • #128
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    An interesting article from a engineer who used to work for Google. He looked into why some search results apparently didn’t make sense. He uncovered the exact change where Google had altered the search results for abortion. He found where a change essentially used an alternative algorithm that delivers alternative search results. He also mentions the referendum in Ireland to repeal the 8th Amendment…

    “The second change touches on the referendum in Ireland to repeal the 8th Amendment and legalize abortion, which took place on May 25, 2018. A little over a week before this election took place, over 100 entries were added to the blacklist on May 17. These entries were related to both abortion and the referendum; Project Veritas would later obtain a document containing the list of those entries. YouTube had started serving users alternative search results in the middle of an election campaign.”


    So basically it’s all crap Google is feeding us that they don't manually interfere in search results to push an internal agenda.

    https://medium.com/@mikewacker/googles-manual-interventions-in-search-results-a3b0cfd3e26c

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #129
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    notobtuse wrote: »
    An interesting article from a engineer who used to work for Google. He looked into why some search results apparently didn’t make sense. He uncovered the exact change where Google had altered the search results for abortion. He found where a change essentially used an alternative algorithm that delivers alternative search results. He also mentions the referendum in Ireland to repeal the 8th Amendment…



    So basically it’s all crap Google is feeding us that they don't manually interfere in search results to push an internal agenda.

    https://medium.com/@mikewacker/googles-manual-interventions-in-search-results-a3b0cfd3e26c


    That's not really damning in itself. Google are based in Ireland and we have strict laws around information published on referendums. I would think tech firms based here have to take measures to comply with our rules.


  • #130
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    MrFresh wrote: »
    That's not really damning in itself. Google are based in Ireland and we have strict laws around information published on referendums. I would think tech firms based here have to take measures to comply with our rules.
    I think they're only based in Ireland for tax purposes. I think the majority of the engineering is done in CA, USA. First, what are those strict rules? Do the manual results generated go against those laws? From the reading of the article it doesn't appear the engineer was based in Ireland, so why should it affect search results in the US?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #131
    Calhoun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    It will be interesting to see how something like this goes, Trump and other world leaders do want to get a handle on what the likes of google ect are doing.

    Google would not want to paint a target on its back, more than it already has by just existing.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    uptherebels
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,738 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    notobtuse wrote: »
    An interesting article from a engineer who used to work for Google. He looked into why some search results apparently didn’t make sense. He uncovered the exact change where Google had altered the search results for abortion. He found where a change essentially used an alternative algorithm that delivers alternative search results. He also mentions the referendum in Ireland to repeal the 8th Amendment…



    So basically it’s all crap Google is feeding us that they don't manually interfere in search results to push an internal agenda.

    https://medium.com/@mikewacker/googles-manual-interventions-in-search-results-a3b0cfd3e26c

    What is their internal agenda? Do you have an issue with controlling misinformation?


  • #133
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    uptherebels wrote: »
    What is their internal agenda? Do you have an issue with controlling misinformation?
    I have an issue with them controlling the information you receive based on their own biased views... and then lying about it.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #134
    Seanachai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,544 ✭✭✭Seanachai


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I have an issue with them controlling the information you receive based on their own biased views... and then lying about it.

    There's definitely been changes in the cached search results that show up, I don't think it's going to steer people's political or other views though. The cat's out of the bag at this stage.


  • #135
    splashuum
    Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭splashuum


    Massive news regarding tech billionaire Peter Thiel’s concerns over treasonous activity by Google. FBI investigations now seem imminent according th the US president.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2019/07/15/peter-thiel-says-cia-should-investigate-google-for-being-treasonous

    But I’m assuming many of the posters here will bury their head in the sand and continue to fawn over Google.


  • #136
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    splashuum wrote: »
    Massive news regarding tech billionaire Peter Thiel’s concerns over treasonous activity by Google. FBI investigations now seem imminent according th the US president.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2019/07/15/peter-thiel-says-cia-should-investigate-google-for-being-treasonous

    But I’m assuming many of the posters here will bury their head in the sand and continue to fawn over Google.


    Google will find itself locked up next to Hillary Clinton.


  • #137
    splashuum
    Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭splashuum


    https://twitter.com/project_veritas/status/1154010284543094784?s=21
    Wow! Google engineer now admitting the mass election interference and algorithm manipulation.

    What are the deniers opinion on this ?


  • #138
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    splashuum wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/project_veritas/status/1154010284543094784?s=21
    Wow! Google engineer now admitting the mass election interference and algorithm manipulation.

    What are the deniers opinion on this ?


    Does he actually work on the algorithm?


  • #139
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,331 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    MrFresh wrote: »
    Does he actually work on the algorithm?

    How do you know it's a he?


  • #140
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    How do you know it's a he?


    Are you that upset about not being able to misgender people in the trans thread you followed me in here for that?


  • #141
    Boggles
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    B0jangles wrote: »
    Don't Project Veritas have a long and extremely shady history of creating heavily edited and very misleading videos?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqDP8SnPVA0


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    splashuum
    Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭splashuum


    WOW !
    Google insider provided 950 documents proving googles bias. Googles “machine learning” Has basically shadowbanned hundreds of sites in order to interfere with elections. Overwhelming evidence at this stage. Radical leftists still fawning over google makes me vomit.

    https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/08/14/project-veritas-google-whistleblower-on-going-public-i-saw-something-dark-and-nefarious-going-on/

    https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/08/14/google-machine-learning-fairness-whistleblower-goes-public-says-burden-lifted-off-of-my-soul/


  • #143
    Zillah
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    I'd really like to see the full video of her conversation without all of the absurd theatrics and cheesy dramatisation; the miniscule segments cut out of any context are meaningless, and a very bad sign of the report's integrity.

    At the very least, the bit I did see, she seems to be referring to Trump's election as synonymous with Russian interference, targetted advertising using illegally harvested data (Cambridge Analytica) and other sources of blatantly false reporting to manipulate people into voting Trump, and that is what she's referring to when she discusses Google having to mediate "fairness". She thought she was speaking with like-minded people, and as such didn't need to explain those details - an oversight the Right is going to have a (deeply disingenuous) field day with.


  • #144
    uptherebels
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,738 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I have an issue with them controlling the information you receive based on their own biased views... and then lying about it.

    You didn't answer either question


  • #145
    Blowfish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,112 ✭✭✭Blowfish


    splashuum wrote: »
    WOW !
    Google insider provided 950 documents proving googles bias. Googles “machine learning” Has basically shadowbanned hundreds of sites in order to interfere with elections. Overwhelming evidence at this stage. Radical leftists still fawning over google makes me vomit.

    https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/08/14/project-veritas-google-whistleblower-on-going-public-i-saw-something-dark-and-nefarious-going-on/

    https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/08/14/google-machine-learning-fairness-whistleblower-goes-public-says-burden-lifted-off-of-my-soul/
    So I've read a bunch of these and I'm genuinely struggling to see what the issue is. Google wants it's ML etc. to not discriminate, big deal. It's to prevent stuff like this.


  • #146
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,053 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    Eh, it's a pretty damning video. But I'm really put off by just how much editing happens in it.

    There's massive cuts, jumps to other people and a lot of out of place

    Because it’s Project Veritas.

    Their track record is utter garbage. Their editing is done to make the report they want, not that of context based reality


  • #147
    splashuum
    Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭splashuum


    Overheal wrote: »
    Sonics2k wrote: »
    Eh, it's a pretty damning video. But I'm really put off by just how much editing happens in it.

    There's massive cuts, jumps to other people and a lot of out of place

    Because it’s Project Veritas.

    Their track record is utter garbage. Their editing is done to make the report they want, not that of context based reality

    What do you mean by “editing” ? It’s a 20 minute interview where a former Google engineer explains in detail how they possess a huge election bias along with mass manipulating your searches.


  • #148
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    splashuum wrote: »
    What do you mean by “editing” ? It’s a 20 minute interview where a former Google engineer explains in detail how they possess a huge election bias along with mass manipulating your searches.
    Yeah it makes no sense until you understand the left's entire logic and reason for existence these days is... Orange Man Bad.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #149
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    Interesting timing considering there were reports a few days ago about the White House coming up with a plan to exert control over social media.


  • #150
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    MrFresh wrote: »
    Interesting timing considering there were reports a few days ago about the White House coming up with a plan to exert control over social media.
    Someone needs to oversee the disgusting and biased tactics of the likes of Google, Facebook, Twitter and such. Or break them up under antitrust laws. They seem to be worse than Russia in their efforts to affect our elections.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • #151
    Calhoun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Someone needs to oversee the disgusting and biased tactics of the likes of Google, Facebook, Twitter and such. Or break them up under antitrust laws. They seem to be worse than Russia in their efforts to affect our elections.

    The danger is that they will actually be used by the powers at be rather than dismantled.

    I would say the only issue is they don't control what is being said about them.


Advertisement