Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you can go to jail for supporting the russian invasion in some european countries right now too.
Is there a source for this?
I'll just do a quick search on DDG for that...
DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
341–350 of 865 posts
Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
#342Earlier quoted context omitted.
"unbiased" doesn't mean "unfiltered". For example, I don't want spam or malware in my search results. Search results should return good information that is relevant to your query, and filter out anything that is not that.
> "unbiased" doesn't mean "unfiltered". For example, I don't want spam or malware in my search results. That seems like a cop-out to me. They're not filtering "spam or malware", they're filtering "Russian disinformation". What's next? Maybe OAN is "right-wing disinformation" and we should "filter" that too? What about fox news? How far can you use that excuse to say you're not biased?
If I search cure for cancer the pro bleach crowed will be annoyed that bleach doesn't comes up before chemotherapy. I'm assuming you haven't actually looked at the disinformation that Russian propagandists are putting out. They aren't just saying "Russia is justified in ensuring the independence of areas with people who consider themselves traditionally Soviets" this is "Ukraine is bombing itself to make Russia look bad".
If you're arguing search engines should bias for what you want to see then it shouldn't be ranking russian propaganda highly for western audiences, if you are arguing search engines should bias for facts then by definition it shouldn't be ranking russian propaganda highly.
Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
#343Why not provide a toggle that allows unfiltered results for those who want that?
This way, they can both filter out propaganda away from those who might be vulnerable and still let those who want it have it.
Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
#344Earlier quoted context omitted.
The free market will decide what's a valuable search result or not, and I trust the freedom and liberty of people over any kind of curated, mutated ranking system.
Is people choosing which search engine they use based off the results it returns not the free market in action?
It is not transparent what kind of curations take place to return the results. You cannot have a free market without transparency, and while DDG are announcing this now, they have no obligation to in the future. Previously the status quo was "we don't curate", now it's "we curate but announce it". What's the chance that they will no longer announce it in the future?
Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
"unbiased" doesn't mean "unfiltered". For example, I don't want spam or malware in my search results. Search results should return good information that is relevant to your query, and filter out anything that is not that.
> "unbiased" doesn't mean "unfiltered". For example, I don't want spam or malware in my search results. That seems like a cop-out to me. They're not filtering "spam or malware", they're filtering "Russian disinformation". What's next? Maybe OAN is "right-wing disinformation" and we should "filter" that too? What about fox news? How far can you use that excuse to say you're not biased?
You have rediscovered why it is difficult to make a search engine. This is a problem that applies to all search results, not just politically charged content: human judgement is always required to write a search algorithm.
Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
#346Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intelligent people are better off not patronized - and fighting disinformation through censorship rather than rebuttal is a pathetic reflection on the state of society. This type of censorship makes it harder for intelligent people to make clear rebuttals and reinforces a culture of tarring people taking the first step of looking into the other side for this purpose.
This is always the line but it ignores that it's more vastly more effort to correct disinformation and propaganda than it is to spew it. Don't patronize intelligent people by making them have to spend literally their entire day having to fight this garbage rather than doing useful work.
Or you could do the obvious: give people capable of contextualizing search results unnerfed tools.
Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
#347I guess this did not age well: “[W]hen you search, you expect unbiased results, but that’s not what you get on Google,” @matthewde_silva quotes @yegg https://twitter.com/DuckDuckGo/status/1114524914227253249 Also, they probably do not realize that they will have to start with Twitter if to be consistent.
If people started using the word 'false' instead of disinformation I think the distinction would be clearer.
We aren't talking about good results versus bad results here surely? When did bias come into it? Merely falsehoods versus truths? Or have we got to the point where no one actually believes in such anymore and it depends on your political opinion on whether something is true or false?
Fact or fiction. Let your political direction decide.
Surely removing fictious results should be a bonus for everyone?
I give up. World has gone pure stone mad.
Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
#348I guess this did not age well: “[W]hen you search, you expect unbiased results, but that’s not what you get on Google,” @matthewde_silva quotes @yegg https://twitter.com/DuckDuckGo/status/1114524914227253249 Also, they probably do not realize that they will have to start with Twitter if to be consistent.
Even before that it was just a bing.com fronted. Now it is a censored bing.com frontend lol.
Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you think censorship is wrong then it follows that you would think that the Russian state is wrong given that they are going as far as denying this is even a war, and actively censoring those that call it one. Are you saying that you're still keen for them to be allowed to do so?
That’s a complete derailment. This is about the experience that search users should have. If they want to search for “russia official statements ukraine” then they should get results about that. The fact that Russia has decided to outlaw the truth is completely besides the point.
Results on Google and DDG for that query are pretty similar and mostly Western sources written in English, responding to Russian official statements.
I’d be curious if there were other search terms that had a clearer difference in rankings between Google and DDG based on this new policy.
Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”
#350Good! One more reason for me to remain a DDG user. This is the behaviour of responsible and accountable adults. "Censoring" is a word very badly understood and prone to manipulation. There are a lot of circumstances where suppression of information/opinion is justified: protecting intellectual property and copyrights, blocking doxing, prevent haters from doing harm against others, protection of military secrets or pe…
> In case someone hasn't noticed, there is a war going on in Europe. That is a circumstance where some of these cases apply. There's a saying: "Truth is the first casualty in war." The last thing I want during a war is censorship. Why should I magically start trusting the government and media now? > If this sounds just like "legalese" to you consider this: a newspaper has the right to select and editorialize the news…
> They are a search engine.
Exactly. people go to search engines looking for information about things. If the search engine returns lies it's completely failed.
> who cares if the results are manipulated?
Not sure if you've noticed, but there's an entire industry built around manipulating search engine results. If the search engines don't fight back the only thing that will be left is corporate and government bullshit.