331–340 of 475 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the reasons I left google is precisely because they started downranking content for political reasons, just as DDG started doing.
Which search engine are you using now? I bet we will find them downranking for political reasons as well but I bet you are fine with their reasoning…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I'm gonna use a biased engine why use a shit one like DDG?
Can you explain how an unbiased search engine would work? Sounds like a billion dollar idea tbh.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it all comes down to the type of curation being done and if the choices are made out of objectivity of subjectivity. Like prioritizing a legitimate website over a scam website isn't punishing the scam website because of a controversial opinion or the search engine operator didn't like the content, it's because the website is objectively a scam, it's easy to objectively identify it as such, and everyone agrees…
> it's easy to objectively identify it as such [scams], and everyone agrees it's one. Is it actually easy to identify all scam content? Then why is it possible to find scams in search results? > When it comes to Ukraine vs. Russia and propaganda, it is entirely impossible to have objectivity. So should they treat every news outlet as equally ranked? Because I'm struggling to think of any news reporting that could be…
I think to a knowledgable observer and moderator, sure. Algorithmically it's probably more difficult, which is why you still see it in some search results. These scams are less prone to subjectivity, which is why you rarely see Twitter uproars about a bitcoin pyramid scheme being booted off a search engine.
>So should they treat every news outlet as equally ranked?
Yes....
>Because I'm struggling to think of any news reporting that could be said to be free of bias or could be said to be completely objective.
....and that is the reason for why they should be equally ranked. You can see on the initial page load the full spectrum of reporting from MSNBC to Fox News. Of course one of them has to be ranked above the other in the UI (it's a list of items) but that should relate to objective things like what words from the search query appear, etc.
>Is that what they did?
I think what people take issue with is that we're trusting these sites to determine what disinformation is. How is DDG deciding what is and isn't misinformation? Without a clearly defined process for misinformation, this becomes subjective.
>> "Weinberg didn’t elaborate on the decision, or how the down-ranking will work."
But other sites are simply doing a blanket ban:
>> "Since then, the internet industry has responded by blocking access to Russian state-sponsored media outlets such as RT and Sputnik News for users in the EU. In addition, Twitter has placed warning labels on tweets linking to Russian state media. (Google News decided to de-rank RT and Sputnik News back in 2017 for allegedly circulating propaganda.)"
>I don't think something being a top search results implies that it is an objective truth either, especially with ongoing news reports.
Not right now, no, and that's the issue. Most people assume it to be though.
so is ddg becoming a google ?
I thought yt-dlp was recommended over youtube-dl these days. Any chance DDG suppressing a less-preferred program?
What about archive.org? Will they delist that too? That definitely contains a lot of copyright-infringing data. Where will this end? Pirate Bay actually contains a lot of non-infringing items too. Who watches the watchers?
You can literally get Windows keys on archive.org, not that I use Windows anyways
a search using; anyterm :: torrent still returns alot of results for me sofar. and so does youtube-dl; top result is : github.com/ytdl-org