Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 138 posts

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#71

Post by Dylan16807 »

jiojfdsal3 wrote: post #65
erulabs wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or it's extremely basic text matching and "African American Inventors" more closely matches "American Inventors" (as it is an exact substring match) than web pages about "Inventors from the United States", which is probably a more common phrasing (see: https://www.google.com/search?q=Inventors+from+the+United+St... ) One of the biggest problems with Google as I see it, and facebook for that matter, is for the end use…

I added more search terms. Here are the results for "white inventor" on Google Images for example. https://www.google.com/search?q=white+inventor&tbm=isch

How many photos of white inventors have the word "white" near them, though? Image search isn't exactly parsing biographies. So it gets largely lost in noise compared to "inventor".

It's pretty common for certain words in certain image searches to be useless, and that's including a lot of very boring searches nobody has ever thought of.

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#72

Post by rfinney »

jiojfdsal3 wrote: post #7

To me, this is a strong sign of Google manipulating search results. https://www.google.com/search?q=american+inventors https://www.google.com/search?q=american+mathematicians https://www.google.com/search?q=american+scientists Image results: https://www.google.com/search?q=european+art+history&tbm=isc... https://www.google.com/search?q=white+couple&tbm=isch https://www.google.com/search?q=white+inventor&tbm=isch

Duckduckgo has similar results ...

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=american+inventors+&t=hj&ia=images...

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=european+art+history&t=hj&iar=imag...

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=white+inventor&t=hj&iar=images&iax...

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=white+couple&t=hj&iar=images&iax=i...

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#73

Post by quotemstr »

senthil_rajasek wrote: post #62
quotemstr wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conversely, if you're unsatisfied with yourself, making your mirror distort your reflection will only make things worse. I reserve a special level of contempt for people who think they can "fix" society by using force or authority to control how other people think, speak, and feel.

A distorting mirror is not what Vint is suggesting, the problem is not the mirror it's the subject, fix the subject is what I take out of that quote. Violence or force is not the only answer to fix society I have seen the light of knowledge work miracles on certain societal problems.

Vint isn't suggesting that we do that, but a lot of other people are. Nothing good can come of it; the article is part of the backlash against this impulse. (And that should be disconcerting: backlashes have a way of being worse than whatever it is they're fighting.)

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#74

Post by rpiguy »

Spooky23 wrote: post #51

Wait, I thought that Kudlow was a free-marketeer who didn’t want the government “picking winners”?

Wait, I thought the left hated giant corporations controlling their news? Guess its cool if you agree with what is being censored...

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#75

Post by liftbigweights »

Why single out google only? Isn't it an industry wide issue rather than a company one?

This is going to be interesting because recent moves by social media and tech companies have shifted them from a distribution platform to publisher which opens up an incredible amount of liability issues.

As much as I dislike Trump, I think recent moves by the tech industry were awful misteps. The extremes they went to and the obvious stifling of right wing voices really hurt their reputation and now opens them up for heavy regulation.

I use to feel that social media and tech were biased but fair or tried very hard to be fair. Now it's hard to trust anything ( posts, tweets, search results ) because these platforms have no fairness in them.

Normally, competition would be a deterrent against unfairness, but the days of excite, yahoo, askjeeves, altavista, etc competing with google are over. What else is left but regulation?

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#76

Post by beams_of_light »

lgleason wrote: post #28

Google, Facebook, Twitter, Patreon and others were able to grow to the size they did based on Safe Harbor provisions that exempted them from libel laws under the premise that they were neutral platforms that allowed anybody to post content etc.. Newspapers and television stations are held liable for their content. Once they started to editorialize by banning things under subjective pretexts such as "hate speech" they…

Google doesn't produce news, though. It aggregates it based on user preferences and history. Complaining that the aggregate of news doesn't cast you in a good light is more of a reflection of who you are than what the aggregator is, as a public figure.

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#77

Post by sp332 »

18pfsmt wrote: post #63
sp332 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We live in such a country now but that could change at any time. If the government starts dictating search results then we will not be a free country. Unfortunately causality doesn't go the other way.

As a republic, governed by the US Constitution, the 1st Amendment is clearly written to prevent such stupidity. I can't believe this is even being entertained on HN.

The first amendment is just a piece of paper unless someone enforces it. When the head of the executive branch of government starts talking openly about violating it, it's (past) time to take the threat seriously.

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#78

Post by pitaj »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #58
lgleason wrote: post #28

Google, Facebook, Twitter, Patreon and others were able to grow to the size they did based on Safe Harbor provisions that exempted them from libel laws under the premise that they were neutral platforms that allowed anybody to post content etc.. Newspapers and television stations are held liable for their content. Once they started to editorialize by banning things under subjective pretexts such as "hate speech" they…

Removing Section 230 immunity should be one of the country's legislative priorities. It's incredible that we've literally given a whole industry a blank check to do what they want and be completely exempt from responsibility for the damage they cause. Without Section 230, companies would be subject to the standard definitions of intent in the law, as to whether their actions were purposely, knowingly, recklessly, etc…

Wow that's incredible short-sided. Section 230 enabled the internet to grow and flourish with moderate freedom (the DMCA etc still exist). Removing it would heavily benefit large companies who can afford expensive monitoring and filtering software, while hurting small companies without enormous legal departments.

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#79

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

cphoover wrote: post #37

I have no doubt in my mind, if the United States was a country without checks and balances and the protection of the Constitution, we would be living under authoritarian dictatorship right now. The quickness by the administration to attack media, promote propaganda, and now censorship is frightening.

The frightening thing is that this would-be-king still has support from 40% of the populace. We're stuck with them and they are the greatest threat to the principles of American freedom. This country can't work with so many people happily supporting demagogues who pander to their pet issues and ignoring the damage they cause.

Re: ‘We’re taking a look’ at whether Google searches should be regulated

#80

Post by malvosenior »

beams_of_light wrote: post #76
lgleason wrote: post #28

Google, Facebook, Twitter, Patreon and others were able to grow to the size they did based on Safe Harbor provisions that exempted them from libel laws under the premise that they were neutral platforms that allowed anybody to post content etc.. Newspapers and television stations are held liable for their content. Once they started to editorialize by banning things under subjective pretexts such as "hate speech" they…

Google doesn't produce news, though. It aggregates it based on user preferences and history. Complaining that the aggregate of news doesn't cast you in a good light is more of a reflection of who you are than what the aggregator is, as a public figure.

It also filters some sources and promotes other sources based on opaque criteria that many suspect to have political bias.
Post reply on HN