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

Google turned me into a serial killer

hristo-georgiev.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 313 posts

Re: Google turned me into a serial killer

#221

Post by JasonFruit »

gatorcode wrote: post #169
agumonkey wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> takes everything it reads on the internet at face value. it's terrible but a lot of people [0] think digital information, and thus internet, is truth [0] and if google itself falls for this.. no wonder if people do too

Google isn’t interested in truth, they are interested in information. They are provide a search engine not a truth engine. Sarcasm aside, how do we propose they determine what is truth? If we assume the internet is full of information and more truthful than not, then Google’s assumption could be accurate. Of course they do try and solve this with the knowledge graph and expert curation. Connections to verified inform…

That doesn't need to be sarcasm, because it's true: at its core, Google's search is a method of finding information, not a method of directly ascertaining truth. It's not really possible for it to be a truth engine, and if you realize that, it's not even a flaw. You're left with a way of finding information you will need to evaluate for yourself, which is fine.

The problem is in the presentation: Google's tools in general, not limited to search, present themselves as though they can identify truth. That's the flaw, the lie, if you prefer.

Re: Google turned me into a serial killer

#222

Post by cratermoon »

gundmc wrote: post #25
cratermoon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and a dozen or two people, mostly white males, control the company.

I'm not sure what the implication here is, but regardless it doesn't seem to be true. According to this source, only 3 of the 10 "key people" are white and male. https://craft.co/alphabet/executives

Board members don't have the direct control that you think. Neither do all the C-level officers. It's a basic fact of organizations that people that make the key decisions aren't necessarily the ones with the titles.

Re: Google turned me into a serial killer

#223

Post by spoonjim »

If you find the right lawyer you will get at least $1 million out of this. Even if you don't feel like doing this, PLEASE do it for the greater good. Google will only start caring about these things if it costs them money. Money is the only language a corporation is fundamentally equipped to understand.

Re: Google turned me into a serial killer

#224

Post by neartheplain »

cntrmmbrpsswrd wrote: post #209
_etyf wrote: post #132

Google's Knowledge Graph info boxes are automatically-generated and littered with errors. I've been burned twice on operating hours, once for my local bank and once for a convenience store, driving over each time only to find the place closed. In both cases, the correct hours were posted on the business's website. I've also seen bad KG results for medical conditions, listing the wrong symptoms or describing easily-tr…

This is not true. While the content may initially be auto-generated, the Google KG is worked on extensively by real people. There are regional teams which work to verify and source the information that is out there. My sister works on the traditional Chinese team (mostly out of Taiwan or Taiwanese ABCs). These teams, as far as I know, are WFH contract workers.

Can users tell when info box answers have been auto-generated vs. curated? How often is KG content updated or re-verified, as in the case of businesses changing their operating hours? Are KG verifiers subject matter experts, e.g. medical professionals, or unskilled workers?

Re: Google turned me into a serial killer

#225

Post by jhbadger »

temp8964 wrote: post #214
cwkoss wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Google wrongly called me a serial killer" is a story many news outlets would love to run. He has the capacity to give them massive amounts of bad press, in a time where US regulators and politicians are closely looking at the dangers of automated algorithms from tech monopolies. I think he has a very good chance of receiving a settlement , Google will not want to take this to court.

We are lucky because Google is not running a DNA service. Otherwise, who knows whether they will link to him to a serial killer.

Although weirdly enough 23 & Me's CEO Anne Wojcicki is Sergey Brin's ex-wife.

Re: Google turned me into a serial killer

#226

Post by ddulaney »

smsm42 wrote: post #188
jetrink wrote: post #42

The info boxes sometimes contain surprising errors. I recently searched for Picasa and was informed that it was invented by Pablo Picasso in 2002! Google 'knows' Picasso died in the 1970s and it 'knows' he released a popular software program in 2002. That's an obvious contradiction requiring the simplest of rules to detect, but the system is just a dumb text extractor. (Interestingly, Google assistant gave the correc…

It's obvious for you, a human. There's no human curating those results (it's completely infeasible at Google's scales) and their graph building algorithms are extremely dumb. They are proprietary, but all of them are, so I'm sure Google's are too. The rules that could be added are obvious for each case, but there are trillions of possible cases, and there's no feasible way to create rules for even a small percent of…

I’d push back on the idea that human curation is infeasable at Google’s scales. It might be more costly, but remember that Wikipedia did roughly the same task (accurate-enough text + image descriptions for every reasonable topic) with only volunteer time. There are under 10 million wiki pages, and nobody would claim English Wikipedia has any major uncovered areas. For a large-but-doable investment of, say, a billion USD, Google could spend $100 worth of human curation per Wikipedia topic. That represents a few minutes time for a skilled expert or a few hours time for an unskilled reviewer. Once you start refining your topic list, you can do even better than that.

Re: Google turned me into a serial killer

#227

Post by AdamGibbins »

cwkoss wrote: post #185

You should seriously consider suing for defamation if this isn't fixed within a few days. This is an egregious error, especially if it was done by an automated system (and this could be a systemic issue affecting many others). I think you have a decent chance of getting a five figure+ settlement from this. Talk to a lawyer about your options. EDIT: When I search "Hristo Georgiev" (from US IP) there is no longer an im…

In many countries you can't sue for defamation as easily as you appear to be able to the US. In the UK its required that you demonstrate loss or reputational damage, given how obvious it is that this is a mistake and the speed in which it was fixed, I think its highly unlikely to stand up in court. Simply calling someone a name isn't enough.

OP appears to be in Switzerland, where I'm not familiar with the laws.

Re: Google turned me into a serial killer

#228

Post by jhbadger »

baron816 wrote: post #136
a-and wrote: post #22

What's unfortunate is that Hristo Georgiev is a very common Bulgarian name. This isn't a case where a highly uncommon name can lead to a high degree of certainty in association.

This is why the media usually refers to well known criminals by their full (first middle last) names.

Which sometimes gives the false impression that criminals naturally go by all three names. A lot of TV shows will create a fictional serial killer named something like John Michael Doe because that sounds more "sinister" than just John Doe.

Re: Google turned me into a serial killer

#230

Post by sleepytimetea »

a-and wrote: post #22

What's unfortunate is that Hristo Georgiev is a very common Bulgarian name. This isn't a case where a highly uncommon name can lead to a high degree of certainty in association.

Its good to get this data point - from my familiarity with first names and last names, both Hristo and Georgiev are fairly unique and almost unheard of. The combination of both would qualify as a VERY unique name in my worldview. But, in Bulgaria, eh, very common :-).
Post reply on HN