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

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

#371

Post by hef19898 » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 1:53 PM UTC

qwerty11111 wrote: post #366

hef19898 wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is one of the worst examples ever. It was so highly politizised at the time. But you have point, it actually helped to form a certain narrative and a lot of people followed that narrative.

How is it a bad example? From Wikipedia itself... > On 7 June, a Federal Criminal Police Office report confirmed that most of the perpetrators were of North African origin and had arrived in Germany during the European migrant crisis. Investigative results about the perpetrators were congruent with witnesses' statements.[48]

Because it was one particular case and the numbers have been looked at isolated. That and the fact that the first reports have been exagerated. Not to even speak about the way right wing groups used these reports...

I'll leave it to you to research crime numbers like rape, theft andn such for carneval in Cologne or the Oktoberfest in Munich. Because These are the numbers that provide the context.

Disclaimer: That does not in the slightest way imply that any of These cases are defendable, the least of all rape. Still, context helps to prevent knee-jerk reactions.

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

#372

Post by mc32 » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 1:57 PM UTC

mcny wrote: post #326

mc32 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

No argument here, except to say not all instructors are good teachers. Sometimes we’re lucky and get good ones who despite their biases teach us the fundamentals.

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

#373

Post by mirror_mirror » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 1:58 PM UTC

woodruffw wrote: post #38

For those interested in watching the video without feeding into Brietbart's ad/engagement numbers, I've mirrored it here: https://yossarian.net/google.mp4

I'm not positive I've done this correctly, but I tried uploading it to IPFS. If someone could let me know if that works, I'd appreciate it.

QmX5wjpMyWrtwHQnJ6L8BMAnUGgxwJqnoLbTCJbmWD1gqG - 720p

QmNPNYTMD95vc6PZtH5QFgLTj22cNkWm6TTCi7YGKY3kD3 - 270p

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

#374

Post by fcarraldo » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 2:02 PM UTC

qwerty11111 wrote: post #361

calcifer wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm curious why these countries don't receive the same flak for their "ethno-nationalist" views against immigrants. There are no boycotts against buying goods from these countries as they are with Trump hotels. This is text book whataboutism. Just because someone isn't publicly complaining about Y doesn't make their criticism of X any less relevant.

Y is more far oppressive but is coddled while X gets all the flak and is stifled. Conservative sites like Breitbart are essentially stifled on Google while the oppressive Chinese government can manipulate any Google search results it wants. What is Google's reasoning for this?

This isn’t a fair comparison. The Chinese government cannot manipulate search results outside of China, where companies must either comply with local law or be eliminated via the Great Firewall.

This policy, while controversial in itself, has nothing to do with what you perceive as “stifling” of Breitbart in, I presume, American search results. I’d argue that this is nearly blatantly untrue - try searching for a term that Breitbart has written about, and you’ll find results at the top [0] or for Breitbart itself, and you’ll get a full-featured overview of Breitbart content and articles [1].

What evidence is there that Breitbart is stifled by Google?

[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+may+use+military+to+bu...

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=breitbart

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

#375

Post by cjcole » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 2:08 PM UTC

paganel wrote: post #231

petermcneeley wrote: post #165

Twice it was mentioned that the cause of WWII was boredom. Is this actually a real theory?

> Is this actually a real theory? I'm not a professional historian by any means, but I think Ernst Nolte's opinion (he was a German historian) that WW2 was actually an European Civil War fought between fascism and communism is right (you can read an introduction into the whole discussion on his wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Nolte ). His basic idea was summed up by another historian, Norman Davies (yo…

"the Germans were still thinking about the big bad man coming from the East"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_Soviet_occupat...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_...

'The majority of the assaults were committed in the Soviet occupation zone; estimates of the numbers of German women raped by Soviet soldiers have ranged up to 2 million.[7][8][9][10] According to historian William Hitchcock, in many cases women were the victims of repeated rapes, some as many as 60 to 70 times.[11] At least 100,000 women are believed to have been raped in Berlin, based on surging abortion rates in the following months and contemporary hospital reports,[9] with an estimated 10,000 women dying in the aftermath.[12] Female deaths in connection with the rapes in Germany, overall, are estimated at 240,000.[1][13] Antony Beevor describes it as the "greatest phenomenon of mass rape in history", and has concluded that at least 1.4 million women were raped in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia alone.[14] According to Natalya Gesse, Soviet soldiers raped German females from eight to eighty years old. Soviet and Polish women were not spared either.[15][16][17] When General Tsygankov, head of the political department of the First Ukrainian Front, reported to Moscow the mass rape of Soviet women deported to East Germany for forced labour, he recommended that the Soviet women be prevented from describing their ordeal on their return to Russia.[18]'

"as far as I could heard no mention was made in the same announcement about the "Amerikaner"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes

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

#376

Post by TangoTrotFox » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 2:09 PM UTC

tcbawo wrote: post #86

rsj_hn wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, corporations are in it for the money, and they are hypocrites, etc. I don't think most people have a problem with that (except maybe those who think corporations are moral agents), but what's been happening recently is very concerning: 1. Corporations, always wanting to appeal to younger voters because brand loyalty is sticky, naturally try to position themselves externally as hip/woke/whatever. That means espou…

Technology and information overload are driving everybody to think their viewpoint is the suppressed majority, feeding a victim mentality. We seem to be working towards more of a massively individual polyculture than monoculture. Also, we shouldn't always project everything into right and left, as there are other orthogonal dimensions for framing policy (eg. authoritarian and individualistic). That's a hidden cost of…

There's an interesting thought experiment. Break America in half by general partisan divide - allow for free migration based on political ideology alone. How long would it take before these now wholly 'unified' halves then turn to bitter and polar divisiveness? What would be the new divisive topics?

There's probably roughly a 0% chance of success, but Calexit would be a phenomenal social experiment and perhaps something people could learn an immense amount from. On the other hand, there's already an immense amount of information and history people could learn from today. But anything that's inconvenient to 'the' ideology is irrelevant, of course.

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

#377

Post by comesee » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 2:17 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #265

comesee wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that conservatively biased media is necessarily either stupid or cynically manipulative. Bastards is a strong word. Can you really not imagine an intelligent decent person genuinely holding conservative beliefs? You seem to have strong feelings against Breitbart. Why?

> Can you really not imagine an intelligent decent person genuinely holding conservative beliefs? Sure, but that has nothing to do with the heady mix of garbage and conspiracy that the likes of Breitbart like to stir up in order to appeal to emotion rather than to ratio. > You seem to have strong feelings against Breitbart. Why? By trying to frame this as an emotional affair you've just killed my appetite for continu…

I'm not trying to frame this as an emotional affair. Feelings was just an expression in that case. I don't have an ulterior motive here, I'm sincerely asking in good faith. What are your objective issues with Breitbart? Nothing in Breitbart seems that extraordinary to me. Let me rephrase, Can you really not imagine an intelligent decent person subscribing to Breitbart?

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

#378

Post by comesee » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 2:20 PM UTC

happytoexplain wrote: post #356

comesee wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that conservatively biased media is necessarily either stupid or cynically manipulative. Bastards is a strong word. Can you really not imagine an intelligent decent person genuinely holding conservative beliefs? You seem to have strong feelings against Breitbart. Why?

>Can you really not imagine an intelligent decent person genuinely holding conservative beliefs? Why do people jump to this wild ideological attack? I don't see anywhere in the parent post that implied otherwise. If you feel that calling Breitbart and Rupert Murdoch out for what they are is a statement akin to "all conservatives are stupid or indecent", isn't that just instigating a flamewar for no reason, rather tha…

Not trying to instigate a flame war, thanks for correcting my language if that's what it seems like. I'm earnestly trying to understand what it is about Breitbart that causes Jacques to have the opinion that the people who produce are either stupid or cynical manipulators (not my words). Let me rephrase, can you really not imagine an intelligent decent person subscribing to Breitbart?

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

#379

Post by comesee » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 2:21 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #357

comesee wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that conservatively biased media is necessarily either stupid or cynically manipulative. Bastards is a strong word. Can you really not imagine an intelligent decent person genuinely holding conservative beliefs? You seem to have strong feelings against Breitbart. Why?

I know lots of right wing people and they loathe Breitbart. Why are you insisting that conservative people must support racist media outlets?

I'm not. I didn't realize people thought Breitbart was racist. Forget conservatives. Let me rephrase, can you really not imagine an intelligent decent person subscribing to Breitbart?

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

#380

Post by otterley » Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 2:36 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #352

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…

You should disclose that you are a Google employee in your comment.

Why? There's no potential conflict of interest.