After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next? • Hacker News Board

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#21

Post by pjc50 » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:15 PM UTC

The key here is the reccomendation engine. Is an automatically-generated reccomendation an endorsement?

If someone is watching "non-extreme" material and suddenly gets a conspiracy, far right, or propaganda video suggested to them, what responsibility does Google have for that reccomendation? To what extent is it possible for people to "self radicalise" from Youtube?

(I've experienced this myself; an innocuous gaming video had a column of reccomended videos all relating to the same game .. and a livestream of Tommy Robinson. Why? Is Google radicalising gamers accidentally?)

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#22

Post by Sir_Substance » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:15 PM UTC

aphextron wrote: post #16

I trust Google, but it's only because I have to. Their tools are 10x better than anything else for many cases, so you're simply doing yourself a disservice to not use them. It's not like Facebook where I can just email my friends or whatever. Google search is a fundamentally life changing technology that is untouched by any competitor.

>Their tools are 10x better than anything else for many cases, so you're simply doing yourself a disservice to not use them.

I think that at this point that's basically only true for mapping, and they are losing ground on that, slowly. You've got stockholm syndrome.

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#23

Post by pjc50 » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:16 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #9

> Child advocates have also raised alarms about the ease with which smartphone-equipped children are exposed to inappropriate videos and deceptive advertising. COPPA has unfortunate consequences. My 7 year old child watches youtube. He can't have an account, so he uses my account. Youtube thinks an > 18 year old is watching the videos, and so places ads for gambling and alcohol on the videos he watches. There's no me…

It sounds like an adblocker would be responsible parenting best practice here.

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#24

Post by oflannabhra » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:17 PM UTC

The spark that triggered the current firestorm Facebook is facing has nothing to do with Facebook’s practices—those have been apparent and obvious since before Facebook is as even a company.

The spark was the confluence of divisive political headwinds and an outrage-driven news cycle.

I’m thankful that spark has resulted in sustained scrutiny of Facebook, but without a similar environment and controversy, I doubt Google will find itself in a hot seat.

Maybe such a controversy is waiting for Google. I hope so, they’ve gathered far more data about me and my interests than Facebook ever will.

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#25

Post by prepend » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:18 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #9

> Child advocates have also raised alarms about the ease with which smartphone-equipped children are exposed to inappropriate videos and deceptive advertising. COPPA has unfortunate consequences. My 7 year old child watches youtube. He can't have an account, so he uses my account. Youtube thinks an > 18 year old is watching the videos, and so places ads for gambling and alcohol on the videos he watches. There's no me…

That’s because Google doesn’t care because you let him watch. Lots of companies comply with coppa (Amazon, Netflix, Apple, Microsoft) and Google could if they carded enough. But even if their kids app was available on your laptop, it’s still inappropriate for kids.

So you letting your kid watch YouTube as an 18 year old is a personal decision and not much to do with coppa existing or not existing.

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#26

Post by rlv-dan » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:18 PM UTC

aphextron wrote: post #16

I trust Google, but it's only because I have to. Their tools are 10x better than anything else for many cases, so you're simply doing yourself a disservice to not use them. It's not like Facebook where I can just email my friends or whatever. Google search is a fundamentally life changing technology that is untouched by any competitor.

Google may be better than everyone else. The question is though, do you really need all that "betterness"? Because if you don't, there are actually plenty of alternatives to choose from. They may not be as good as Google, but they do their job pretty well. Giving up some of the (perceived) "Google awesomeness" in favor for say privacy, may be worth considering. Just a thought.

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#27

Post by prolikewhoa » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:20 PM UTC

opportune wrote: post #6

This article is about (in favor of) censoring the youtube platform to make life easier for advertisers. That doesn't seem very related to the information leaks and level of granular individualized advertising that the Facebook platform provides and which can be used to negative effect by advertisers. To me this is a clumsy, lazy attempt to make lazy platform censorship seem "good" in the way that regulating how Faceb…

That CNN article they quote is nothing more than CNN disliking that Youtube is challenging them in viewers and ad money. CNN isn't exactly the bastion of legitimacy and journalistic standards either. They're also trying to take down true left wing media like Jimmy Dore, painting him as a 'conspiracy theorist' for not being certain about the Syrian gas attacks before the OPCW was even there, as real journalists should do -- not just take talking points from the Pentagon. Cenk Uygur had to step in on TYT and denounce that stupid CNN article advocating for censorship and bring Jimmy out of that hole.

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#28

Post by Zhenya » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:21 PM UTC

Sir_Substance wrote: post #22

aphextron wrote: post #16

I trust Google, but it's only because I have to. Their tools are 10x better than anything else for many cases, so you're simply doing yourself a disservice to not use them. It's not like Facebook where I can just email my friends or whatever. Google search is a fundamentally life changing technology that is untouched by any competitor.

>Their tools are 10x better than anything else for many cases, so you're simply doing yourself a disservice to not use them. I think that at this point that's basically only true for mapping, and they are losing ground on that, slowly. You've got stockholm syndrome.

I'll bite.

What's actually better than:

* Gmail

* Search

* Docs

And all of the Integration that works cross platform for all of those.

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#29

Post by dijit » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:21 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #21

The key here is the reccomendation engine. Is an automatically-generated reccomendation an endorsement? If someone is watching "non-extreme" material and suddenly gets a conspiracy, far right, or propaganda video suggested to them, what responsibility does Google have for that reccomendation? To what extent is it possible for people to "self radicalise" from Youtube? (I've experienced this myself; an innocuous gaming…

I have similar anecdotes regarding youtube. My feed often randomly recommends "SJW owned compilation" and "feminism fails". I may have watched one or two videos from prominent feminists and their supposed opposition in 2011 but google is really waiting for me to get back to that particular political fight for some reason.

How long do I have to ignore something before it goes away? It reminds me of how in the UK the tabloid newspapers have audacious headlines but you're forced to read them because they are in the entrance of every store. I dont want to read about this. Leave me alone and stop filling my head with garbage.

Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?

#30

Post by leeoniya » Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 5:22 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #15

leeoniya wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's unlikely to happen in any administration. proactive monitoring is cost prohibitive compared to reactive punishment and a legal framework for doing so. as you said, the latter is unlikely to be meaningfully strengthened. fines and enforcement must present a significantly larger liability than profit opportunity for any real changes to ever take place. else it's just written down as another expense of doing busine…

> proactive monitoring is cost prohibitive compared to reactive punishment and a legal framework for doing so Counterfactual: finance, another high-margin industry with a penchant for bad decision making, funds a proactive and multi-pronged regulatory apparatus. We are all safer for it.

in large part this is made easier because most money travels by known and monitored channels (banks, businesses certified to be money transmitters, etc) with very little going via cash.

data on the other hand is a much more diverse & fluid asset that travels via a million unmonitored/encrypted channels and can be copied easily. if all money could be easily copied and most transactions were in cash, proactive regulation would be too expensive. i think.