Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DuckDuckGo “down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 865 posts

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

#531

Post by vkou »

archagon wrote: post #498
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…

If you compare mainstream Russian media to mainstream US media and come to the conclusion that they're equally "utter shit", then you have no idea what you're talking about.

I didn't say they are equally bad, but they are both, objectively, quite bad. They can also both be worth reading, but you need to both know the history, and think about what you are reading, why it was written, and who it was written for.

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

#532

Post by bastardoperator »

HeckFeck wrote: post #153
freediver wrote: post #22

I 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.

For me, this move by DDG will have the opposite effect of what is intended. I will now trust my own media and sources even less, if they rely on silencing the competition and insist on controlling what I access "for my own good". Such dirty tactics are insulting, even more so when delivered under a sneering benevolent guise. As if they have perfect knowledge of my motives and wishes. What if I'm genuinely curious as…

Sounds like you could just navigate to those sites and skip the search all together?

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

#533

Post by archagon »

ensan wrote: post #527
archagon wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The question is, why is DDG okay with amplifying Ukranian/NATO propaganda and not Russian propaganda? Because one side is busy shelling and starving civilians right now? Are you seriously suggesting that "NATO propaganda" (WTF?) and Russian propaganda are somehow equivalent? There is very, very obviously a "bad guy" here, and most of the world (even outside the US/NATO sphere of influence) seems to agree on this po…

Quoted post unavailable.

> No, there is absolutely not.

Yes, there absolutely is: the side preemptively invading a sovereign nation, annihilating cities, and murdering civilians. A transgression that's an order of magnitude more deplorable than any justification you can cook up.

Regardless of the causes, and unlike in previous wars, you can see the atrocities with your own eyes if you care to look. Thousands of people dying, cease-fire agreements being violated, evacuation corridors being shelled, millions of lives shattered.

> And if you want to see actual shelling and starvation of citizens, search for atrocities in Yemen, Gaza, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., all directly committed or supported by the west.

Great, let's sanction the bastards responsible there, too. Evil is evil.

> even allowing protests in Ukrainian cities they're controlling

What a joke. Given how protesters have been treated in Russia and Belarus, do you really think they would tolerate this if the Russian army wasn't vastly outnumbered and overstretched? Dissent will be quashed brutally if the invasion succeeds.

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

#534

Post by paulmd »

freediver wrote: post #450
CactusOnFire wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. Fundamentally, there is no unbiased search engine. Ranking results by definition innately creates a bias. (To be a pedant on my own post: I guess you could do a search engine that collates all search results relating to a keyword and then just shows you a random one first, but I doubt that's what the people want).

The source and purpose of the bias matters for a search engine. One thing to be biased against duplicate content and stuffed keywords, another thing is to have bias against blue widgets because the CEO of the company does not like blue widgets.

flat-earthers would probably also feel they're being unfairly downranked because "the CEO does not like flat-earthers", however. Factual untruth is a good reason for a result to be considered low-relevance to a tangentially related search.

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

#535

Post by awb »

RealStickman_ wrote: post #476
awb wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has search and I’ve used it as one.

Hacker News is a site with a specific niche audience. If this is your only source of news I'm afraid you're getting a very one-side picture on many topics. A search engine on the other hand is supposed to present the information you seek from various sources, so you can read different opinions.

Maybe that’s your definition of a search engine. Mine is that it returns high quality results that achieve my goals.

If I’m asking a question, I want the answer to the question. If I’m researching a topic, I want a mix of simple and robust reliable information.

I use HN as a search engine for things tech/startup related. It’s curated and that works well.

I have no problem using a search engine that down-votes unreliable sources, yet still provides access to them if I search directly. That more correlates with helping me solve my problems than making me filter out spam, scams and propaganda.

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

#537

Post by mardifoufs »

pvaldes wrote: post #457
mardifoufs wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you can go to jail for supporting the russian invasion in some european countries right now too.

If supporting means driving a tank in Berlin and bombing an hospital, yes, most probably you will go to jail. For a long, long, time. If it means saying that Russia is right, definitely not.

Not really, it really is just supporting russia even without any violence. For example in lithuania:

>The decision bans to organize or gather at assemblies “aimed at supporting, in any form or scope, the actions of the Russian Federation and/or the Republic of Belarus, which caused the introduction of the state of emergency” while this state of emergency remains in place.

https://www.baltictimes.com/lithuania_extends_state_of_emerg...

>The new legislation, which passed parliament with 71 votes in favour out of 117 cast, banned public events in support of "Russia or Belarus actions which led to this state of emergency".

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/lithuania-tightens-stat...

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

#538

Post by misslibby »

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…

" their successes have been remarkable and have shown Russia to be mismanaged, incompetent, weak, and everything else one would expect of a typical authoritarian regime"

And doesn't make you excited for the war and enthusiastic about joining the fight for Ukraine? Great - but having only information and announcements from one side would give me pause. Somehow the war hasn't ended yet, despite of the zillions of Russian tanks that have been destroyed by now.

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

#539

Post by freediver »

danShumway wrote: post #529
freediver wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you make the jump from disapproval of DDG's standard for misinformation and how it's applied to the idea that they shouldn't be involved in filtering of misinformation at all? It is quite easy to disapprove their current standard on record because according to it, misinformation can be coming from a "Russian" source only and we all know there is much more misinformation in the world than that. Can we agree o…

Sure. I think it's reasonable to ask DuckDuckGo to apply more rigorous standards across the board. I'll offer a weak note in their defense that I suspect part of the reason they don't is specifically to avoid sliding down a slippery slope and breaking this balance between neutrality and editorial decisions about content. I suspect that DuckDuckGo would say that there is a volume and kind of misinformation happening h…

> However, I don't think it's unreasonable at all to disagree with them on that assessment, and I think it's extremely reasonable to ask why DuckDuckGo feels safer about downranking certain kinds of misinformation and feels nervous about taking stances about other misinformation.

It may look like that on a first glance, but assuming even spread of 100M DDG users, those users from Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Middle east may be more sensitive to other kind (in this case western media) of misinformation.

Since this is easily half of the world population I would argue that stance they took could also be easily seen as an 'extremely unreasonable' at the same time.

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

#540

Post by misslibby »

eli wrote: post #238
willcipriano wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All you have to do is scroll past the US misinformation, on past EU misinformation and you'll find it right there. Easy.

Sorry but it just isn't the same. Russia made it illegal -- punishable by 15 years in prison -- to accurately describe their invasion of Ukraine.

Officially they made it illegal to inaccurately describe their invasion.
Post reply on HN