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

Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

breitbart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 486 posts

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#291

Post by threeseed »

tkmo wrote: post #277
justaaron wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But no, Google news is not ignoring or de-prioritizing their filth-cum-journalism. I am obviously not their target reader, and yet my news.google.com feed contains plenty of Fox propaganda. Google obviously has no qualms about a "moron tax" sheesh, look at Youtube. it's full of alt-right tripe.

Of course this thread is guaranteed to be an absolute shit show, but it's revealing the level of intense emotiveness shown by your post and the one before it, and most of all by the Google execs. Were this directed at a tiny ideological fraction of the population it could be OK, but we are talking about give or take half of the voters of the USA, UK, Poland, Hungary, Austria, etc., etc. And when Google has such a nea…

Not sure where you’re getting the numbers to back up your 50% claim. At most it is around 15% in UK, 30% in the US and somewhat higher in the Eastern European countries.

Alt right conservatism is not a mainstream ideology anywhere in the world. Nor will it ever the way things are going.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#292

Post by oriol16 »

davedx wrote: post #290
oriol16 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Talking politics at work is only ok if it's left wing. Mocking Trump and his voters, calling people racist and morons, that gets you an applause. Showing understanding for the opposite site gets you in trouble. That's chapter one of "surviving in the workplace in 2018".

The opposite side, with its “very fine people”?

50 million voters in US only with above average income/education. The fact they voted for Trump doesn't mean they would share all his faults, and it doesn't even mean that you can describe them before you can critizice them, call them offenders, and a long list of "very fine things".

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#293

Post by dash2 »

mc32 wrote: post #196
geofft wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But from a tech perspective its always destabilizing to endorse a political ideology just like it is destabilizing to endorse a religious ideology in what is a collective for economic output. Is it destabilizing at all? The British Empire, one of the world's most economically successful projects, had its own religious ideology. The US has a "Protestant work ethic." When have we historically seen the adoption of rel…

Didn't catholics in britain have a hard time og it for some period? Didn't that contribute to internal instability? Or am i misrecalling history lessons?

This is true but whether it was profitable is a separate question. On which see Weber 1905 and the recent economics literature!

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#294

Post by toofy »

raxxorrax wrote: post #224
ehsankia wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically there doesn't exist a good solution for this. That's why every single site out there with user content that is large enough is struggling with moderation. There is no solution that scales up to billions of users, and while it's true that AI most likely won't work, it is the best they've got right now. Do you have a better solution? Because Google has hired some of the smartest people and even then they…

> Do you have a better solution? Let the receiver evaluate the information? Sure, some will have false believes. Cannot change that and you shouldn't even attempt to do so. Because authority has been wrong to an equal degree. The whole premise falls flat in my opinion. There won't be any viable solution, if the problem cannot even be defined. Currently it is based on a feeling that there are mean and false statements…

> Let the receiver evaluate the information

This ignores one of Google's primary missions. As jlebar posted in a different comment

> evaluating trust on the internet using computers (call it AI or not) is literally Google's core competency.

This idea that we should pretend as if there is no problem to solve seems incredibly strange to me. Particularly when we know unreliable information is being weaponized by bad actors to influence entire populations of people. This is a very real problem which needs solving.

Humans have limited time for research and we value reliability. Consider all of the hype around the recent severe decline in trust of authenticity and reliability of products purchased through Amazon. We tend to prefer shopping at places where we know the products we purchase will be of a certain standard. We go to trusted sources (as amazon was previously) because we don't have the time to carefully evaluate each of the many many items we purchase every week. We choose a store we trust will have already done that quality check.

It seems as if Google believes it is important for it's business that the information it prioritizes has a certain quality or reliability level. Google prefers their information be more like a Target store than a back alley tent. And if the amount of people who shop at Target stores over back alley tents is any indicator, I'm guessing Google is probably on to something.

I'm certainly skeptical about who should be able to decide what is "true" on subjective issues, but I don't see how we can pretend as if there isn't a very real problem of actual provably false information being weaponized.

I for one am fairly busy and just as I don't have time to do a deep dive of research into whether or not the shampoo, deodorant, milk, cereal, orange juice, whiskey, dish soap, cold medicine etc etc etc are fake; I also don't have time to deep dive research if the 30+ articles I skim everyday are provable outright lies. Not only don't I have the time, I don't necessarily have the inclination.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#295

Post by dash2 »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #282

HN can be a huge traffic generator, so can we change the URL to youtube instead of sending traffic to breitbart?

I think if the story is worth reading then Breitbart deserves credit for breaking it, whether or not you think they are bad guys.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#296

Post by tkmo »

threeseed wrote: post #291
tkmo wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course this thread is guaranteed to be an absolute shit show, but it's revealing the level of intense emotiveness shown by your post and the one before it, and most of all by the Google execs. Were this directed at a tiny ideological fraction of the population it could be OK, but we are talking about give or take half of the voters of the USA, UK, Poland, Hungary, Austria, etc., etc. And when Google has such a nea…

Not sure where you’re getting the numbers to back up your 50% claim. At most it is around 15% in UK, 30% in the US and somewhat higher in the Eastern European countries. Alt right conservatism is not a mainstream ideology anywhere in the world. Nor will it ever the way things are going.

In proper terms, perhaps, but things like Trump, Brexit, and strongly anti-immigrant, populist conservative, leaders like Salvini, Orban, etc., in Europe, are all generally placed in the same camp by the media.

Ultimately we are discussing the visible rage and despisement towards the winnning side of a national US election vote. That is incredibly concerning coming from a company as powerful as Google, and we know the same sentiment is shared across Hollywood and the mass media.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#297

Post by clarkevans »

camelite wrote: post #288
igravious wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That’s something the Breitbart audience can’t wrap their mind around, as they’d never do the same. Which clearly reveals _your_ bias. Well done. You can't compare Google to the ACLU. The ACLU has a track record defending free speech and freedom of expression. As long as the speech and expression does not contravene any laws the ACLU will defend it – it's irrelevant to them what values the speech and expression they…

> As long as the speech and expression does not contravene any laws the ACLU will defend it – it's irrelevant to them what values the speech and expression they are defending promotes or espouses. Not anymore: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/20180621ACL...

There is an interesting overview of the ACLU as part of the labor movement On Sept 7th's On The Media, entitled One Hundred Years Of Free Speech. https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/one-hundred-years-free-spe...

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#298

Post by threeseed »

tkmo wrote: post #296
threeseed wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure where you’re getting the numbers to back up your 50% claim. At most it is around 15% in UK, 30% in the US and somewhat higher in the Eastern European countries. Alt right conservatism is not a mainstream ideology anywhere in the world. Nor will it ever the way things are going.

In proper terms, perhaps, but things like Trump, Brexit, and strongly anti-immigrant, populist conservative, leaders like Salvini, Orban, etc., in Europe, are all generally placed in the same camp by the media. Ultimately we are discussing the visible rage and despisement towards the winnning side of a national US election vote. That is incredibly concerning coming from a company as powerful as Google, and we know th…

The concern around Trump extends to close to 70% of the electorate according to recent polling. It isn’t isolated.

And given Trump’s anti-immigrant stance Google executives being immigrants themselves would have every right to voice their concern.

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#299

Post by tkmo »

randyrand wrote: post #50
jiojfdsal3 wrote: post #20

"(00:54:33) An employee asks what Google is going to do about “misinformation” and “fake news” shared by “low-information voters.” Pichai responds by stating that “investments in machine learning and AI” are a “big opportunity” to fix the problem." Anyone find this disturbing? They're trying to use AI to manipulate what users 'should' see?

It does bother me that they never acknowledge the more knowledgeable and informed trump voters. To think they don’t exist is almost as ignorant as the people they’re referring to.

Interestingly, Credit Rating is one of the strongest predictors of voting Republican

Re: Google’s first all-hands after 2016 election [video]

#300

Post by hef19898 »

tkmo wrote: post #277
justaaron wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But no, Google news is not ignoring or de-prioritizing their filth-cum-journalism. I am obviously not their target reader, and yet my news.google.com feed contains plenty of Fox propaganda. Google obviously has no qualms about a "moron tax" sheesh, look at Youtube. it's full of alt-right tripe.

Of course this thread is guaranteed to be an absolute shit show, but it's revealing the level of intense emotiveness shown by your post and the one before it, and most of all by the Google execs. Were this directed at a tiny ideological fraction of the population it could be OK, but we are talking about give or take half of the voters of the USA, UK, Poland, Hungary, Austria, etc., etc. And when Google has such a nea…

Just two things. First, any hatred directed any group regardless of size is simply not acceptable in a free, modern society as it would undermine democratic principles.

Second, in a free and modern society it is ok to have diametrical oppossed views to any other Group. Which is an integral part of Democracy.

Funny enough, there are always people, mostly with pretty radical views, that are severly infuriated by contrarian views. The other way round it is just fine.

Post reply on HN