DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation” • Hacker News Board

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#371

Post by empthought » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:19 PM UTC

deltarholamda wrote: post #364

vkou wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's some kind of backroom secret that most media, US, Russian, or otherwise, is utter shit. It should be pretty evident from looking at its coverage of any subject of which you have a better-than-average understanding of, or from contrasting how media produced in different parts of the world looks at the same exact events. Or even from applying a little bit of critical thinking. From looking at what it…

>Unfortunately, the alternatives to mainstream media (Q-idiots, Zero Hedge, Info Wars, random dude with an opinionated blog, some pot comedian's podcast, viral memes on facebook, etc) The alternative to one source of dubious information is not another source of dubious information. The alternative is to have access to all sorts of information, and piece together what you think is true, using your own critical thinkin…

> The alternative is to have access to all sorts of information, and piece together what you think is true, using your own critical thinking skills and ability to sniff out BS.

This strategy is vulnerable to supply-chain attacks on your information sources... which is exactly what Russian information warfare carries out.

The credibility of American and European "mainstream media" is oft-maligned but rarely actually demonstrated to be suspect at a large scale in the news departments. Editorial choices of what to cover and when are the most common complaint, which is a far cry from astroturfing and falsehoods made out of whole cloth that Russian sources typically engage in.

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#372

Post by ricardo81 » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:19 PM UTC

Imnimo wrote: post #359

ricardo81 wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

define prank. dictionary definition (according to Google) >a practical joke or mischievous act. Maybe if that's the definition then all Twitter parody accounts need to be removed. Would you agree?

Well that depends. If my position were that you have to act via "web-wide decisions" and "universal solutions", then I might conclude that my only options were to leave up all prank sites, including those damaging the usefulness of my search results, or remove everything including harmless parody accounts. On the other hand, if I were to accept that it's valid to target individual sites or subsets of sites only as th…

> I might conclude that my only options

I guess the point is that you were able to conclude that in the first place. You concluded there are options. An algorithm/decision removing one side of it means you do not, more so if you do not even get to understand why that choice was removed when you're making that choice.

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#373

Post by coastflow » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:19 PM UTC

thepasswordis wrote: post #351

awb wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Do you do this in other elements of your life? “I’m not going to drink this veggie smoothie because they started adding honey and I don’t think sugar is healthy. I’m going to drink soda where at least they don’t try to hide that you’re drinking sugar.”

Yes, I do this with other parts of my life. One of the most frustrating experiences I ever had grocery shopping was when I tried to buy "fancy" mayonnaise at whole foods. I was trying to cook something "nice" and wanted to get the good stuff, so that's where I went. The package said in bold letters, "Mayonnaise!" or some such, and what I didn't realize until I got home was that it wasn't actually mayonnaise, but some…

This is interesting. From Wikipedia on "Just Mayo" [0]:

"On October 31, 2014, Unilever (parent company of competing brand Hellmann's/Best Foods) filed a lawsuit against Hampton Creek for false advertising, arguing that Just Mayo cannot be marketed as mayonnaise because it does not meet the definition of the product specified by the Food and Drug Administration.[citation needed] The FDA requires that "mayonnaise" contain 65% vegetable oil and at least one egg yolk-containing ingredient; Just Mayo contains ingredients such as pea protein, beta-carotene, and modified food starch, none of which are used in mayonnaise according to FDA standards.[19] Unilever also noted the use of egg-oriented imagery in its promotional materials, and stated that its false claims were "part of a larger campaign and pattern of unfair competition by Hampton Creek to falsely promote Just Mayo spread as tasting better than, and being superior to, Best Foods and Hellmann's mayonnaise." Hampton Creek CEO Josh Tetrick denied any wrongdoing, believing that Unilever's lawsuit was meant to solely hinder competition.[13][20]

"On December 18, 2014, Unilever dropped the lawsuit so Hampton Creek could work with "industry groups and appropriate regulatory authorities" on resolving its labelling, while also complimenting the company for its "commitment to innovation and its inspired corporate purpose."[21] In August 2015, the FDA sent Hampton Creek a formal warning that Just Mayo's labeling was misleading due to the product not meeting the standards for "mayonnaise", and because of wording on the packaging and promotional materials that contained an "implied health claim that these products can reduce the risk of heart disease due to the absence of cholesterol," which cannot be included as it contains too much fat to be promoted with such statements.[19]

"In December 2015, Hampton Creek announced that it had agreed to revise its packaging for Just Mayo in order to comply with the FDA's recommendations. The new label contains more prominent statements surrounding the nature of the product, and contains an explanation that the word "Just" in the product's name is defined as being "guided by reason, justice, and fairness."[22][23]"

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Mayo

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#374

Post by moltke » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:21 PM UTC

helen___keller wrote: post #338

moltke wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's never going to work for that though. This is like changing a hammer design because some people are hurting themselves using it as a comb.

It does work for that. For a large number of searches, on relatively uncontroversial topics, search engines have effectively become oracles of truth. This is how google ended up with their modern design that discourages website clicks, they did research into their users and realized most people searching “Abraham Lincoln’s birthday” want to see the top result “February 12, 1809” and not the top result “ https://www.l…

>It does work for that.

It does not. I used the moon thing from last year as an example. Here[1] is a very noncontroversial query that still yields factually incorrect results in the box at the top. Yes if you read the results carefully and think about it you'll realize it's wrong but then you're doing the same thing you would be doing otherwise.

[1] https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=APq-WBv0RNgr6Q3zUOjDc1lM...

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#375

Post by vogre » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:21 PM UTC

adventured wrote: post #246

qiskit wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Search results should return good information that is relevant to your query Then they would also filter ukrainian, NATO, EU, US, etc disinformation. Almost all the disinformation that you see on social media ( western ) is ukrainian, NATO, EU, US, etc disinformation since russia has self-isolated itself to some degree and much of russian media/propaganda has been banned. If DDG said we will down-rank sites associa…

Not all disinformation is created equal, and that's a critical difference. The Russian and Ukrainian sides are not moral equals. If Russia says Ukraine is full of drug addicts, whores and nazis, and that bombing hospitals is necessary to protect itself from Ukraine - that's of course disinformation. If Ukraine says they have killed 10,000 Russian soldiers, when the real number is closer to 5,000 - that too is disinfo…

>If Russia says ... that bombing hospitals is necessary to protect itself from Ukraine - that's of course disinformation.

Actually this story is really "wag the dog" style https://waronfakes.com/civil/fake-russian-aviation-struck-a-...

Every story you read now is propaganda. West is just better and more experienced in this stuff than Russia.

>I'm interested in Russia losing in humiliating fashion, getting isolated, having its economy chopped down by 75%, and in the coming decades seeing the nation split into three or four countries and overall massively weakened

This scenario includes about 150 millions of people dead/suffering and world economy wrecked. How is this "moral"?

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#376

Post by shadowgovt » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:22 PM UTC

HideousKojima wrote: post #149

burnished wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So like, what, everyones keeping this big secret and its just schlubs like you and me kept in the dark?

It's not a conspiracy (few things are because they just don't scale well). It's more what I call "assholes with similar motives/incentives." It has a lot of the appearance of coordination without needing secret meetings in smoke-filled rooms. That said, sometimes it actually is coordination. Just look at the JournoList scandal.

Isn't the "JournoList scandal" just "There was a Google Group that lots of journalists on the left subscribed to?"

Journalists have always talked to each other. The fact that we have an auditable mailing list of one instance of it just tells us something we already know.

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#377

Post by jaywalk » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:23 PM UTC

michaelmrose wrote: post #303

jaywalk wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're literally just spouting the West's approved propaganda and don't even realize it.

Actually I have followed a plethora of information from individuals on the ground and historical information from multiple sources. What I have posted is as close to objective reality as I can obtain and I am very confident it its veracity.

The fact that you have information from "individuals on the ground" and from "multiple sources" doesn't make the information correct or unbiased. What you posted may as well have come directly from Ukrainian state media.

"Putin was jealous that Ukraine was doing so much better than Russia, so he attacked them for no reason to bring them back down" is just a laughable take on the situation.

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#378

Post by empthought » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:23 PM UTC

mardifoufs wrote: post #328

coffeefirst wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but Al Jazeera is more like the BBC than it is like RT. I don't see anyone making a quality-based argument to downrank it, and I would disagree with them if they did.

Aljazeera is literally the Qatari state media. That means they are the media outlet of a slave state controlled by an absolute monarchy . Tell anyone in the Arabic world that aljazeera is neutral or BBC like and you will get laughed at. Even RT is probably not on as short of an editorial leash than al jazeera. Your comment is actually an amazing example of why we should absolutely avoid media censorship (like the EU…

The BBC is literally the UK state media.

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#379

Post by ilikehurdles » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:24 PM UTC

deltarholamda wrote: post #364

vkou wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's some kind of backroom secret that most media, US, Russian, or otherwise, is utter shit. It should be pretty evident from looking at its coverage of any subject of which you have a better-than-average understanding of, or from contrasting how media produced in different parts of the world looks at the same exact events. Or even from applying a little bit of critical thinking. From looking at what it…

>Unfortunately, the alternatives to mainstream media (Q-idiots, Zero Hedge, Info Wars, random dude with an opinionated blog, some pot comedian's podcast, viral memes on facebook, etc) The alternative to one source of dubious information is not another source of dubious information. The alternative is to have access to all sorts of information, and piece together what you think is true, using your own critical thinkin…

I would be interested in seeing perspectives of North Korean leadership and current events shared by their state media apparatuses purely for educational/entertainment value.

In general, however, truthful and accurate information is more valuable for learning about a topic. I’m not going to rely on getting that from a regime that imprisons people for sharing data and analyses that challenge the regime’s narrative. It’s inherently more untrustworthy than a society that protects free press.

When these regimes target their media for foreign audiences like you and me, it’s in their best interest to mask the origin of that content. Becoming more informed becomes harder when this context is unavailable to us.

Ranking those sources lower specifically improves the end product and results in a better informed user.

Re: DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

#380

Post by supergirl » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 8:24 PM UTC

when shit hits the fan, the West is no better than a dictatorship. it's only a fluffy democracy when there is no danger and the war is far away. we got the "free" media blasting every line from the government without any scrutiny and social media silently censoring and re-ranking posts to fit the central party's narrative.