121–130 of 295 posts
In other words, this is not Google's fault and is mostly just an ugly reflection of our collective problematic values.
> “p-ssy,” as a noun You are allowed to say fuck on the internet. Also, does it really count if you skip out one letter? I never understood this. You're still all but saying the word. Nobody is being protected here lol. A kid can cycle through the five vowels in about half a second to figure out what the word is, and one of them is also kinda a swear - pissy. EDIT: "n 2012, I wrote an article for Bitch Magazine" now…
Different publications have different style books. This is Time, which, given it's history as a mainstream magazine, likely has a more conservative editorial style than more recent, online-only publications.
Meh, likely the answer is unknown, mostly I'm just commenting
I like the underlying question that the author brings up - what's google algorithm, and who's responsible for it? In the old days it was "most linked page with those keywords," right? So if you searched "gay man" and got a bunch of gay porn, is it necessarily google's fault that the internet is more gay porn that it is resources for gay men to discuss LGBT issues? Is it google's fault that news agencies more typicall…
It is Google's site and Google's (very much) proprietary algorithm so of course Google is at fault. Your argument is a variant of the "uploader defense." It was used by the TPB operators to claim that they weren't responsible for what was featured on their site because it was uploaded by users. But legally (or morally) they realized that they were, because they removed child porn even though they let Hollywood movies…
Because they are not. And neither is Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn‘t this precisely why safe search was invented? I find the „unprofessional hairstyle“ example much harder - you‘d have to first classify all pictures according to minority groups, determine the mix of minority group mix located in the search locale of the user, decide whether the mix should be local, regional, national or international in this case, and then correct the bias in the results accordingly. Seems quite…
Yes, but I'm surprised that there isn't some self correction there. My understanding is that one of the primary metrics goole uses is which link you click on last after searching. If the majority of people searching are white and all people want to see people who look like them, then the top result should be white. But I expect that when black women search, they will keep scrolling until they find the picture that th…
So if the top ten results are black women (or Asian guys, or British royalties, or whatever), and if they look funny enough, then users will be satisfied and stop looking further. So whatever pictures that went up there first stays there.
Oh.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I think Google is responsible in 2018, now that they offer extremely tailored results. Duckduckgo, maybe not. But if Google is going to say "we're going to show you listings for restaurants in SF in your simple 'restaurants' search because we know you live in SF," I think they should also say "we're going to show you results for LGBT resources when you search for 'gay men' because nothing about your query indicates…
> This seems like a bad idea to me, especially in the context of a discussion about how to reduce the political/social influence of Google. It seems to me that there's an enormous contingent of people who wants to yell about the influence of Google and Facebook and then yell even louder about how they're not actively intervening to skew content towards their political preferences (ie increase their influence massivel…
It happens even more easily if you're lumping people into a single group, but the individuals that you see speaking out about one topic are different than the individuals that you see speaking out about another.
The upshot is that from your described experience you cannot conclude that any group is being self-contradictory unless you personally witness the same person contradicting themselves in different discussions.
I tried replicating the searches described in this article, in an incognito window. Most of the searches described inthe article are quite dated; they're also spread over a significant amount of time. None of the searches I tried came out the way the article described. There was no porn in the results for "black girls"; the third result for "professor style" was a black man, and there was a black woman further down o…