Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
1–10 of 304 posts
Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
#2The watermark makes it really annoying to read, but unless it gets refuted by Google, it has to be real, right? (That's how these things work these days...?)
Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
#3The watermark makes it really annoying to read, but unless it gets refuted by Google, it has to be real, right? (That's how these things work these days...?)
The Breitbart watermark makes me very suspicious, I would treat it as probably worthless until we see more reliable sources.
Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
#4The watermark makes it really annoying to read, but unless it gets refuted by Google, it has to be real, right? (That's how these things work these days...?)
The Breitbart article states: "Responding to the leak, an official Google source said the document should be considered internal research, and not an official company position." So I suppose that's confirmation of authenticity (sort of). The article can be found here: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/09/the-good-censor-le...
Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
#5The underlying premise of this, if real, is that these companies and their centralized platforms ought to exist. "Never expect a man to understand something his salary depends upon him not understanding" and all that.
Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
#6Today I learnt OogleBot is ignoring the robots.txt file on my private Gitea server:
git[dot]habd.as/robots.txt
A quick search for "after dark habdas" reveals the second of two rules in the robots file, which explicitly blocks Oogle at the site root, is clearly being ignored.
Of course I created this rule before putting this server online and Andex is the only webmaster console I registered this site with. But that's besides the point. There's obviously a lack of respect for the robots file or a gross error in OogleBot as far as I can tell.
So now you know.
Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
#7Why did this have to be leaked? Seemed like a good summary on why things are the way it is with social media v moderation.
A whole lot of platforms could do with the conclusion.
Be consistent, be responsive and be transparent.
Who wouldn't love Google to be more transparent?
Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
#8The watermark makes it really annoying to read, but unless it gets refuted by Google, it has to be real, right? (That's how these things work these days...?)
I wonder if the same internal people who protested "project dragonfly" would object so vehemently to this "research" project as well. I would hope that they would, but I'm a bit hesitant to be sure --which is a bit frightening as it kind of would confirm people can hold two opposing views simultaneously as long as it fits their framework.
Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
#9The watermark makes it really annoying to read, but unless it gets refuted by Google, it has to be real, right? (That's how these things work these days...?)
The Breitbart article states: "Responding to the leak, an official Google source said the document should be considered internal research, and not an official company position." So I suppose that's confirmation of authenticity (sort of). The article can be found here: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/09/the-good-censor-le...
So where's the video? Or was that censored too?
Re: Leaked Google briefing, admitting a “shift towards censorship”
#10The most annoying part of this document is the watermark. It seems like a cogent summary of different ideas in the space - and doesn't advocate for "good censorship" (I think the title of the deck is provocative and unhelpful).