Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#321

Post by liftbigweights » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:07 PM UTC

sehugg wrote: post #308

titzer wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really the top rated comment? sigh , I think we can do better. > We owe no consideration to deliberately-destructive trolls... Oh man, here we go. Look, there are trolls and there are populists and fascists and neo-Nazis and anarchists and racists and scumbags and dickheads and all of those NAMES out there. Yeah! Fuck those NAMES ! BURN! ..it fixes nothing to piss further into the pool. And then to turn aroun…

Breitbart openly advocates for the destruction of the press, which they call the "Democrat-media complex". Hard to deal in good faith under those circumstances.

Which is their right as press.

Also, you are forgetting it's a two way street. The other side is calling for the destruction of the press as well.

The only difference is that CNN and NYTimes have the power to destroy other press. Smaller companies like Breitbart and Infowars cannot.

How about we protect free speech and free press?

> Hard to deal in good faith under those circumstances.

Exactly. It's why nobody trusts media anymore. It's a real concern for society. And nobody in media appears to want to address it. Rather they are doubling down and making the situation even worse.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#322

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:09 PM UTC

minwcnt5 wrote: post #237

greyman wrote: post #225

To be honest, it caught me by surprise how politically unified the whole top management is, and how strong their political convictions are. It is publicly known that Eric Schmidt for example supports democrats, but I (wrongly) supposed that is mostly his personal affinity. Now it seems that not; the company as a whole supports one political party. Now the question is how is this reflected in their products (search, G…

Isn't it more that they're against Trump, and what the Republican party has become? They are only for one political party because there is only one alternative. Back in the day, I know that their leadership was close with people like Colin Powell and Kissinger, so there are probably some traditional republican values held, it's just that in recent years the party has become completely toxic.

[deleted]

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#323

Post by test001only » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:10 PM UTC

cromwellian wrote: post #319

Seems no one understands Popper's Paradox. Lots of talk about it being unfair that a workplace is intolerant of people who are intolerant. There are just some values that are not negotiable for a modern, civilized, homogeneous society. We're not talking about debates about the level of social welfare, or regulation, we're talking about common decency of treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or eth…

This exactly. The common playbook now seems to be to hide racism and intolerance under the blanket of conservative and accusing anyone who opposes that to be against free speech and conservatives. These nonnegotiable values do not belong to the left or right, it belongs to the society as a whole.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#324

Post by toofy » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:10 PM UTC

jlebar wrote: post #245

roenxi wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I value political neutrality in the workplace, so I have a lot of in-principle issues with what is being shown here right from the get-go. I didn't wind the video back to find the exact quote, but we now have publicised evidence of senior leadership at Google who stood up and said 'obviously our values are not the same as a big chunk of Americans'. Clearly a lot of them are specific Hillary supporters, a candidate so…

> EDIT I'm just going to add this in because it just doesn't sit well. It shouldn't acceptable for leadership in a workplace to stand up and express pain and dismay at the outcome of a democratic process. Isn't this exactly what they do whenever they lobby to change an existing law?

Yeah, companies make political statements all the time, on a regular basis, on all political "sides".

-- Whether it is a hunting accessories business advocating for 2nd amendment rights,

-- An enormous craft supply store (hobby lobby) using religious beliefs to decide what their employees insurance will cover,

-- A shoe company (Nike) hiring a controversial spokesperson (Kaepernick),

-- A coffee company (Starbucks) choosing to say holiday rather than pander to a religious sect,

-- A bakery refusing to sell cakes to lgbtq folks,

-- Enormous corps spending massive money to disrupt any employees attempts to discuss whether or not they wish to unionize,

-- A software ceo donating sums of money to groups trying to ban lgbtq marriage,

-- Fossil fuel spending billions to support candidates who support their business interests,

-- Renewable energy industries supporting candidates who support renewable energy projects,

-- A famous software ceo providing substantial funding for lawsuits to bring down popular liberal media sites he disagrees with,

I find it incredibly confusing why people pretend like this is a new thing, or that silicon valley is alone in this, or that the left shouldn't be allowed to use the same tools.

To be clear, I think all business interests and influence should be severely limited from politics, but that just isn't the world in which we live. The world we live in allows a disproportionate amount of influence from all industries, with plenty of real world examples from across the entire political spectrum.

If we want to have a conversation about removing corporate interests entirely, I'm game, but I'm not willing to entertain some false notion that only liberals use these tools and certainly not willing to say only conservatives can use those tools as cudgels.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#325

Post by theossuary » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:10 PM UTC

Domenic_S wrote: post #199

pen2l wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in a research hospital, I went through a lot of similar meetings, and a lot of emails talking about where to get help if you're feeling down. I remember thinking hey this is a bit over-blown... but then I talked to this Iranian guy on my floor: he was extremely shocked and depressed. He had a situation on his hands -- he wanted his wife to come to America, but was afraid that wouldn't be possible and he was en…

What happened with your friend's wife? Did she come over?

Considering Trump is still in power, and the travel ban is still in effect, I'd say that's a no.

Americans have a short memory.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#326

Post by mcny » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:14 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #201

shams93 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is actually free college education for everyone who wants it, even if not everyone will be able to use it on their job the only solution is massively easier access to quality education that teaches you how to think, not what to think. The lack of critical thinking skills is a real problem but its largely by designs, some in DC think having an economic draft is a good thing and an educated population is n…

Will those intructors teach from both sides of the political spectrum and give both major philosophies similar time?

A good professor can have their bias but still encourage critical thinking. I'm from a university informally (?) affiliated to the Southern Baptist Convention in Texas. We often started our chemistry class with a reading of Psalms. We called the Paris Hilton tax/inheritance tax the "death tax" in our economics class as well as in our US History since 1867 class. In my limited experience, professors are able to teach students to think for themselves even when they disagree with me.

I learned a lot but I don't think college made me a "conservative". I was mortified to see our University president on TV demanding religious exemption from birth control in employee health insurance.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#327

Post by mcny » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:15 PM UTC

paulddraper wrote: post #110

shams93 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is actually free college education for everyone who wants it, even if not everyone will be able to use it on their job the only solution is massively easier access to quality education that teaches you how to think, not what to think. The lack of critical thinking skills is a real problem but its largely by designs, some in DC think having an economic draft is a good thing and an educated population is n…

Wait...how many years of free education do you need to learn "how to think"?

I don't know but I think I learned quite a bit just talking to fellow students in the hallways and in the dorm.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#328

Post by liftbigweights » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:18 PM UTC

gizmo686 wrote: post #35

jiojfdsal3 wrote: post #20

"(00:54:33) An employee asks what Google is going to do about “misinformation” and “fake news” shared by “low-information voters.” Pichai responds by stating that “investments in machine learning and AI” are a “big opportunity” to fix the problem." Anyone find this disturbing? They're trying to use AI to manipulate what users 'should' see?

That is literally what Google was founded on. Their core technology behind their initial success was pagerank, an algorithm whose sole purpose is to manipulate what people see. They have stayed dominant through a combination of market forces, and keeping their algorithm near (or, IMO at) the top of the market for generalized search [0], and have leveraged this competency in other markets (video, ads, etc). Beyond jus…

> That is literally what Google was founded on.

No it wasn't. Google was founded on being agnostic and giving you the most objective and representative view of the internet. If it didn't, it wouldn't have survived. Pagerank was not politically driven. It didn't care whether the links went to webpages that catered to larry page or brin's political ideology.

> [0] In actuality, I suspect that Google's "algorithm" involves a fair bit of "cheating" by having humans nudge the results.

We know it is. We know that they changed google news to appease large media companies. We know google seearch has been changed to appease large media companies. We know youtubee has been changed to appease large media companies.

The "do not evil" google of the 2000s died a long and slow death. The google of the 2010s has been quite biased. No longer is google objectively representing the internet as it is. It's representing the internet as page and brin wants it to be.

I don't know why people are celebrating it just because they are anti-trump. We know that there are tons of saudi, chinese and israeli money and influence in silicon valley. Do we really want a monopoly like google to be politically driven? Do we really want search and youtube to be politically driven?

Just because google is being manipulated in your favor today doesn't mean it is going to be manipulated in your favor tomorrow. It just surprises me so few people here seem to understand that.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#329

Post by jsjohnst » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:24 PM UTC

dreepDeam wrote: post #254

skybrian wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of humans involved in evaluating the algorithm. See my other post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17975122 If you mean humans rating every new page on the Internet in real time, this isn't possible. It's machines or nothing.

Ah, well, not to put too fine a point on it, but search engines don't even come close to rating every new page on the internet in real time. There are like days of lag, in search engine results, unless you eagerly, eagerly, eagerly force your way into strategic points of the existing index for each independent search engine, separately . Nevermind DNS replication, which is it's own beast. So, from domain registration…

> Nevermind DNS replication, which is it's own beast.

There’s a lot wrong with your post, but let’s start here. How do you think DNS works? Your statements about it indicate a complete lack of knowledge on the topic. I can register a new domain and have it resolveable anywhere in the world in minutes.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#330

Post by oriol16 » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 12:27 PM UTC

cromwellian wrote: post #319

Seems no one understands Popper's Paradox. Lots of talk about it being unfair that a workplace is intolerant of people who are intolerant. There are just some values that are not negotiable for a modern, civilized, homogeneous society. We're not talking about debates about the level of social welfare, or regulation, we're talking about common decency of treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or eth…

treating people equally, regardless of gender, sexuality, or ethnic origin

This is a very vague statement, you can apply to your convenience. You could say Damore broke the principle and justify any penalty against him. I could say you don't follow this civility premise by choosing your partner based on your gender.

Every country in the world has "ethno-nationalist views against immigrants", and things work fine.