Trump investigating Google

[ballsofsteel]

Conservative bias against Trump.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/business/media/google-trump-news-results.html

Mexico will pay for the wall.

[Vas Deferens]

REGULATE THEM!

[Mike M (the other one)]

Can't tell you how many times I have searched for news, and have to go to the 2nd or 3rd pages to get past the bs click bait/biased articles just to find a reasonably non-biased group.

[Vas Deferens]

(08-28-2018, 07:01 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Can't tell you how many times I have searched for news, and have to go to the 2nd or 3rd pages to get past the bs click bait/biased articles just to find a reasonably non-biased group.

How are you "searching for news"

[GMDino]

(08-28-2018, 07:01 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Can't tell you how many times I have searched for news, and have to go to the 2nd or 3rd pages to get past the bs click bait/biased articles just to find a reasonably non-biased group.

I shared a link in another thread about this.  He simply repeated one story he saw.

That he and an aide would even mention "regulating" search engines gives you an idea of his mindset.

[fredtoast]

(08-28-2018, 07:01 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Can't tell you how many times I have searched for news, and have to go to the 2nd or 3rd pages to get past the bs click bait/biased articles just to find a reasonably non-biased group.

Brietbart buried on the second page? I never noticed that.

[GMDino]

Like he'd read a book.  

[*michaelsean*]

I just use Ask Jeeves.

[Yojimbo]

(08-28-2018, 08:09 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I just use Ask Jeeves.

Try DuckDuckGo. No cookies or tracking.

[*Nately120*]

Can't Trump just work really hard and start his own search engine that makes Google look like an outdated encyclopedia sitting on a shelf at the junk store?

[THE Bigzoman]

Good.


Google and other companies like that are close to a monopoly on information. There's way to regulate them without increasing the barrier to entry for other startups.

[NATI BENGALS]

Are you saying the Republican party wants to increase regulations on a private business for political purposes and control what American citizens see?

Sure sounds like the death of the Republican party to me

[NATI BENGALS]

(08-28-2018, 10:38 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Are you saying the Republican party wants to increase regulations on a private business for political purposes and control what American citizens see?

Sure sounds like the death of the Republican party to me

Wait wait wait. I take that back. I forgot the majority of republicans i know have a backward broken uninformed thought process. For some reason they chose a bimbo conman to lead the party. And back him up like he saved their life multiple times

Maybe Alex Jones was right and there really is something to this  IQ reducing fluoride mind control and super rich globalists trying to take over the world.

[Vlad]

Aww this is nothing, no big deal.

https://www.projectveritas.com/2018/01/11/undercover-video-twitter-engineers-to-ban-a-way-of-talking-through-shadow-banning-algorithms-to-censor-opposing-political-opinions/

Steven Pierre, Twitter engineer explains “shadow banning,” says “it’s going to ban a way of talking”


Former Twitter software engineer Abhinav Vadrevu on shadow banning: “they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it”

Former Twitter Content Review Agent Mo Norai explains banning process: “if it was a pro-Trump thing and I’m anti-Trump… I banned his whole account… it’s at your discretion”

W[b]hen asked if banning process was an unwritten rule, Norai adds “Very. A lot of unwritten rules… It was never written it was more said”
[/b]
Olinda Hassan, Policy Manager for Twitter Trust and Safety explains, “we’re trying to ‘down rank’… shitty people to not show up,” “we’re working [that] on right now”

“Shadow banning” to be used to stealthily target political views- former Twitter engineer says, “that’s a thing”
Censorship of certain political viewpoints to be automated via “machine learning” according to Twitter software engineer

Parnay Singh, Twitter Direct Messaging Engineer, on machine learning algorithms, “you have like five thousand keywords to describe a redneck…” “the majority of it are for Republicans”
(San Francisco) In the latest undercover Project Veritas video investigation, current and former Twitter employees are on camera explaining steps the social media giant is taking to censor political content that they don’t like.

[GMDino]

(08-28-2018, 11:02 PM)Vlad Wrote: Aww this is nothing, no big deal.

https://www.projectveritas.com/2018/01/11/undercover-video-twitter-engineers-to-ban-a-way-of-talking-through-shadow-banning-algorithms-to-censor-opposing-political-opinions/

Steven Pierre, Twitter engineer explains “shadow banning,” says “it’s going to ban a way of talking”


Former Twitter software engineer Abhinav Vadrevu on shadow banning: “they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it”

Former Twitter Content Review Agent Mo Norai explains banning process: “if it was a pro-Trump thing and I’m anti-Trump… I banned his whole account… it’s at your discretion”

W[b]hen asked if banning process was an unwritten rule, Norai adds “Very. A lot of unwritten rules… It was never written it was more said”
[/b]
Olinda Hassan, Policy Manager for Twitter Trust and Safety explains, “we’re trying to ‘down rank’… shitty people to not show up,” “we’re working [that] on right now”

“Shadow banning” to be used to stealthily target political views- former Twitter engineer says, “that’s a thing”
Censorship of certain political viewpoints to be automated via “machine learning” according to Twitter software engineer

Parnay Singh, Twitter Direct Messaging Engineer, on machine learning algorithms, “you have like five thousand keywords to describe a redneck…” “the majority of it are for Republicans”
(San Francisco) In the latest undercover Project Veritas video investigation, current and former Twitter employees are on camera explaining steps the social media giant is taking to censor political content that they don’t like.

James LOLKeefe.

[NATI BENGALS]

(08-28-2018, 11:02 PM)Vlad Wrote: Aww this is nothing, no big deal.

https://www.projectveritas.com/2018/01/11/undercover-video-twitter-engineers-to-ban-a-way-of-talking-through-shadow-banning-algorithms-to-censor-opposing-political-opinions/

Steven Pierre, Twitter engineer explains “shadow banning,” says “it’s going to ban a way of talking”


Former Twitter software engineer Abhinav Vadrevu on shadow banning: “they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it”

Former Twitter Content Review Agent Mo Norai explains banning process: “if it was a pro-Trump thing and I’m anti-Trump… I banned his whole account… it’s at your discretion”

W[b]hen asked if banning process was an unwritten rule, Norai adds “Very. A lot of unwritten rules… It was never written it was more said”
[/b]
Olinda Hassan, Policy Manager for Twitter Trust and Safety explains, “we’re trying to ‘down rank’… shitty people to not show up,” “we’re working [that] on right now”

“Shadow banning” to be used to stealthily target political views- former Twitter engineer says, “that’s a thing”
Censorship of certain political viewpoints to be automated via “machine learning” according to Twitter software engineer

Parnay Singh, Twitter Direct Messaging Engineer, on machine learning algorithms, “you have like five thousand keywords to describe a redneck…” “the majority of it are for Republicans”
(San Francisco) In the latest undercover Project Veritas video investigation, current and former Twitter employees are on camera explaining steps the social media giant is taking to censor political content that they don’t like.

Would any of that overlap with a private company working to prevent an unfriendly foreign adversary from interfering in a countries political process by using their platform to wage cyber psychological warfare?

[ballsofsteel]

I agree with my freind Vlad. No big deal. This is nothing more than a diversion to take the heat off Trump for his childish behavior concerning McCain death.

[Au165]

So we don't want net neutrality......except when we want net neutrality. Got it.

[fredtoast]

(08-28-2018, 10:14 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Good.


Google and other companies like that are close to a monopoly on information. There's way to regulate them without increasing the barrier to entry for other startups.

Please enlighten me opn the ways to regulat Google so that the stories that disagree with trump get bumped to the back of the line.

[BmorePat87]

I feel bad for the aide that had to try to explain Google's algorithm to him to no avail