White House investigating Google after Trump accuses it of bias

[Berkshire]

10 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

And there it is.

Your tin-foil hat is showing as soon as you mention Soros!!

Any other argument (valid or not) now diminishes as soon as you mention this often debunked theory.

 

 

Right wing nutbags tend to cling onto their crazy conspiracy theories even after they've been disproven over and over again.  It's as if they "need" to believe it.  Yes, Soros is one, but also the Obama birther/Muslim thing, Pizzagate, Hillary Benghazi/e-mail server/uranium 1, etc.  I'm not sure if it's sheer stupidity or just some tribal thing.  But I do feel ashamed that these rubes call themselves Americans.

[asiamaster]

2 hours ago, Becker said:

Or I could just do a search on paranoia and other related mental illnesses.

You mean TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) ?

[asiamaster]

19 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Right wing nutbags tend to cling onto their crazy conspiracy theories even after they've been disproven over and over again.  It's as if they "need" to believe it.  Yes, Soros is one, but also the Obama birther/Muslim thing, Pizzagate, Hillary Benghazi/e-mail server/uranium 1, etc.  I'm not sure if it's sheer stupidity or just some tribal thing.  But I do feel ashamed that these rubes call themselves Americans.

The left has now by far surpassed the right when it comes to conspiracy theories

[Chomper Higgot]

White House investigating Google.

 

S.H-S uses Google to see if she can find dirt on Google.

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, asiamaster said:

You mean TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) ?

TDS actually refers to "trump" supporters that continue to support that corrupt clown no matter how horrible his behavior. 

[Jingthing]

People really need to listen to "trump" on such matters. He's a constitutional scholar. Who knew?

 

Quote

The common thread to Trumpian law: Stuff he and his allies do is legal, even if previously outlawed; stuff his opponents do is illegal, even if previously kosher.
...
Of course, there’s a more compelling explanation than search-engine bias for all the bad news Trump is finding on the Web. It’s called reality. But that doesn’t matter. As Article XII of the Constitution clearly states, the merits of the case do not affect the verdict.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whatever-trump-dislikes-should-be-illegal/2018/08/28/9a689962-aaf8-11e8-a8d7-0f63ab8b1370_story.html

[Ron19]

Of topic post removed.

[wayned]

If he wants positive news he could just google "Trump News on FOX".

[Foexie]

You will see:

 

the Russians or North korea will be behind this fake news.

[uncleeagle]

Trump is right, I am convinced they are building in deliberate biases in favour of their PC left wing views. And for Google, why would this be a surprise, they have fired people for expressing logical, scientifically  correct views that were not in any way sexist but did not 100% tow their ideological line. Is this really any different than Nazi burning of books? I dont think so.

[attrayant]

5 minutes ago, Foexie said:

You will see: the Russians or North Korea will be behind this fake news.

 

We already know Russians are trying to sow doubt and discord among the public with respect to the safest foundations of our sciences like vaccines, genetic modification of crops and other well-established scientific underpinnings of society:
 

Kremlin spreads lies about MMR jab:

 

"Kremlin-sponsored social media accounts have promoted discredited theories about the MMR jab as part of an effort to sow doubt in the West over the safety of vaccines.  Russian government “trolls” voiced support for a film made by Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who was struck off after falsely claiming that the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine caused autism."

 

 

Russia wants you to hate GMOs:

 

"Researchers from Iowa State University found that RT and Sputnik, two state-funded Russian news sites, were full of GMO-related articles—as many as Huffington Post, Fox News, CNN, Breitbart News, and MSNBC combined. Most of the articles included “negative or distasteful” information about GMOs, according to the Des Moines Register. Others peddled fake conspiracy theories. One read: “GMO mosquitoes could be the cause of Zika outbreak, critics say.” 

 

 

Propaganda's New Goals: Create Confusion, Sow Doubt:

 

"IF PRO-KREMLIN MEDIA stories are to be believed, Ukraine is at risk of being taken over by Nazis, Germany has criminalized the criticism of immigration laws and Austrian courts are acquitting refugees of child rape. Propaganda's new mission is not necessarily to be believable, but to sow doubt."

 

 

They are trying to get people to switch off and not believe anything they hear, from ANY source.  Then, everything in the world will be a conspiracy.

 

Funded by George Soros, no doubt.

[Becker]

1 hour ago, asiamaster said:

You mean TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) ?

Yes, I guess that's a good term for those who believe anything coming from the proven compulsive liar currently fouling the WH. Well done!

[attrayant]

5 minutes ago, uncleeagle said:

Google [has] fired people for expressing logical, scientifically  correct views that were not in any way sexist but did not 100% tow their ideological line.

 

Link to this event?  Are you referring to this: Google engineer wrote a memo stating that women are biologically unsuited for engineering and other tech industry jobs.

 

5 minutes ago, uncleeagle said:

Is this really any different than Nazi burning of books? I dont think so.

 

Yes, it is different.  It's totally, completely different.

[uncleeagle]

1 hour ago, attrayant said:

 

Link to this event?  Are you referring to this: Google engineer wrote a memo stating that women are biologically unsuited for engineering and other tech industry jobs.

 

 

Yes, it is different.  It's totally, completely different.

First of all the Google guy did not say women were unsuited to engineering, why dont you read what he actually wrote instead of quoting some garbage that deliberately misquoted him and twisted what he actually did say. What he actually said was biological differences exist and that they may slightly bias men and women towards different subjects. He was scientifically correct, logical and reasonable in what he said.

 

As for the similarity to Nazi burning of books...Nazis burned books that contained metarial they didnt like...Google censors and fired people for saying things they dont like...you seriously cant see the similarity? Wow, talk about small mindedness....streeeeuuuthhhh.....

 

[Berkshire]

1 hour ago, uncleeagle said:

As for the similarity to Nazi burning of books...Nazis burned books that contained metarial they didnt like...Google censors and fired people for saying things they dont like...you seriously cant see the similarity? Wow, talk about small mindedness....streeeeuuuthhhh.....

 

You're right, Nazis are evil.  But in the present day political landscape, which party do American Nazis typically belong to?  Republicans correct?  Aren't neo-Nazis pretty much all Trump supporters?  Just noting the irony of you bringing up Nazis. 

[mtls2005]

I guess this "story" gestated at the rightwing nutjob site PJ MEdia.

 

From there it probably got legs on Fox Opinion where tRUmp likely saw it.

 

Three days from farm (manure) to table.

 

 

 

 

 

96 Percent of Google Search Results for 'Trump' News Are from Liberal Media Outlets

 

Is Google manipulating its algorithm to prioritize left-leaning news outlets in their coverage of President Trump? It sure looks that way based on recent search results for news on the president.

 

Conservatives and Trump supporters have for the last several years questioned whether Google was deprioritizing conservative news sites, hiding them from users who utilize their search engine.  

 

https://pjmedia.com/trending/google-search-results-show-pervasive-anti-trump-anti-conservative-bias/

 

Edited August 30, 2018 by metisdead
Edited as per fair use policy.

[attrayant]

1 hour ago, uncleeagle said:

First of all the Google guy did not say women were unsuited to engineering, why dont you read what he actually wrote instead of quoting some garbage that deliberately misquoted him and twisted what he actually did say. What he actually said was biological differences exist and that they may slightly bias men and women towards different subjects. He was scientifically correct, logical and reasonable in what he said.

 

As for the similarity to Nazi burning of books...Nazis burned books that contained metarial they didnt like...Google censors and fired people for saying things they dont like...you seriously cant see the similarity? Wow, talk about small mindedness....streeeeuuuthhhh.....

 

 

And the authors of those books could just go to a different publishing house and avoid the Nazi bond fires, right?

 

No, it's not the same at all.  That engineer still has his free speech rights - he hasn't been silenced and he can find employment elsewhere.  According to his LinkedIn profile, he's running his own startup now.  If anything, he's been given a spot light and a louder voice because of the publicity.

 

Just like the Nazis would have done, right?

[attrayant]

20 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

96 Percent of Google Search Results for 'Trump' News Are from Liberal Media Outlets

 

Is Google manipulating its algorithm to prioritize left-leaning news outlets in their coverage of President Trump? It sure looks that way based on recent search results for news on the president.

 

And in other news, study finds that vaccines are biased against 99% of viruses.

 

"It's not fair, said C. Diphtheriae, of Silicon Valley.  Those darn vaccines never go after lymphocytes, mast cells or macrophages.  They're totally biased against us!"

[uncleeagle]

43 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

And the authors of those books could just go to a different publishing house and avoid the Nazi bond fires, right?

 

No, it's not the same at all.  That engineer still has his free speech rights - he hasn't been silenced and he can find employment elsewhere.  According to his LinkedIn profile, he's running his own startup now.  If anything, he's been given a spot light and a louder voice because of the publicity.

 

Just like the Nazis would have done, right?

 

Not so easy, Google and Facebook are most of the market, close to being a total monopoly. As for it being ok to have fired the Google guy, ask him that, I imagine hed say no.

 

Google is creating biased search results, much the same as fake news, They are censoring free speech and are intolerant of views different to their own.

 

You now appear to be agreeing with me and to have conceded your errors but are saying its ok anyway, up to them.

 

Well, no it isnt, they are de facto news organisations and are not expected to be rewriting news and history. There job is to tell it like it is.

 

And as employers they are not supposed to be discriminating based on creed...colour...religion....OR BELIEFS...so why are they being allowed to get away with all these things?

[attrayant]

29 minutes ago, uncleeagle said:

You now appear to be agreeing with me and to have conceded your errors but are saying its ok anyway, up to them.

 

Whoa, where did you get that from?  He was on company time and company property, and said company chose not to be associated with those abhorrent views.  No different than if I work for Company A, and marched around their building carrying signs saying "Company A sucks".  I'm free to say that, as long as I'm not on their time or property, but they are also free to let me go.

 

 

29 minutes ago, uncleeagle said:

And as employers they are not supposed to be discriminating based on creed...colour...religion....OR BELIEFS...so why are they being allowed to get away with all these things?

 

This discrimination practice is for hiring and promotion purposes.  As long as they do the same thing to other employees who behave in the same way, it's not discrimination based on any of those criteria.

[mtls2005]

39 minutes ago, uncleeagle said:

Google is creating biased search results, much the same as fake news, They are censoring free speech and are intolerant of views different to their own.

 

This is a very broad-based OPINION, presumably one you've arrived at all on your own.

 

Could you expound at all on how and why Google is "creating" biased search results?

 

Why are search results like "fake news"?

 

How are they censoring free speech?

 

How can a company have "intolerant" views?

 

I'd love to get a view inside your bubble, as long as I don't catch anything.

 

 

 

 

[attrayant]

And you know what?  This is after Trump's FCC rescinded net neutrality rules so that telecom carriers can - drum roll - treat different companies differently by prioritizing certain traffic over others.  Essentially granting unfair privileges to certain companies.

 

Talk about unfair bias - this is bias approved the Trump administration.

[Peterw42]

Interesting exercise, just google one word "idiot". then switch to images in the results.

[attrayant]

1 hour ago, Peterw42 said:

Interesting exercise, just google one word "idiot". then switch to images in the results.

 

That's called a Google Bomb, and is engineered by users, not by search engine providers.  If users often click on a picture of Trump after searching on the term "idiot", the search algorithms "learn" that selection and start to rank that result higher and higher as more people perform the same actions.

 

About ten years ago, Google made some changes to make this much harder to do, which suggests those results are organic, rather than engineered.

[johnnybangkok]

6 hours ago, uncleeagle said:

First of all the Google guy did not say women were unsuited to engineering, why dont you read what he actually wrote instead of quoting some garbage that deliberately misquoted him and twisted what he actually did say. What he actually said was biological differences exist and that they may slightly bias men and women towards different subjects. He was scientifically correct, logical and reasonable in what he said.

 

As for the similarity to Nazi burning of books...Nazis burned books that contained metarial they didnt like...Google censors and fired people for saying things they dont like...you seriously cant see the similarity? Wow, talk about small mindedness....streeeeuuuthhhh.....

 

So let’s start here:

“What he actually said was biological differences exist and that they may slightly bias men and women towards different subjects. He was scientifically correct, logical and reasonable in what he said.”

 

The only reason wonem are “biased towards a different subject” is because men have told them they can’t excel in anything (other than child rearing) since time immemorial.  However academic studies have shown for decades that women can and do, out perform men in the classroom. It them comes down to timing. Women have a biological clock that makes producing babies after 35 SUPER difficult. In other words you cant have both career and family particularly easily. Never an issue for men.

Secondly, If he worked for me I’d have sacked him as long time ago. More for voicing a very obviously 1950,s opion than anything clever. All companies have to portray moving forward. It’s good business sense and right to do. If you want to publicly go against a world  philosophy then you might as well say you hate handicaps, old people, blacks, gays and Jews. It’s the same. 

As for the rest of your posts based on free speech. You may have a poInt. 

 

Its a difficult dividing line. What becomes taboo and what is considered  inciting of hatred. Do we allow obvious contentious “shock jocks” like Alex Jones to spew their obvious nonsense when that nonsense starts to invite violence? When innocent people can and have been harmed? Or do we always side on the side of free speech and however repulsive your views are, they have to be heard?

I’ve thought long and hard on this and I reckon that if someone is being harmed by these words then you have to suspend your self righteousness and protect the person. No one allows ISIS to spout their nonsense- as I’m sure you would agree- so they rightly get stopped for the harm it can do others. I see no difference. 

The line however is VERY worrying and can be easily manipulated. Trump is a no brainer but other legitimate voices can be silenced through “national security” and other political bias as  we have seen in Thailand for example. 

The genies is out the box for sure. Hopefully sane minds will prevail. 

[Opl]

2 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

Interesting exercise, just google one word "idiot". then switch to images in the results.

i googled "moron", images  

so bias!

 

Edited August 29, 2018 by Opl

[candide]

3 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

Interesting exercise, just google one word "idiot". then switch to images in the results.

I googled "liar" and got a lot of Pinocchio's pictures. Obvious bias!

[Opl]

I googled "best president ever"

no fake news - no bias

Edited August 29, 2018 by Opl

[uncleeagle]

5 hours ago, attrayant said:

 

Whoa, where did you get that from?  He was on company time and company property, and said company chose not to be associated with those abhorrent views.  No different than if I work for Company A, and marched around their building carrying signs saying "Company A sucks".  I'm free to say that, as long as I'm not on their time or property, but they are also free to let me go.

 

 

 

This discrimination practice is for hiring and promotion purposes.  As long as they do the same thing to other employees who behave in the same way, it's not discrimination based on any of those criteria.

Which abhorrent views are you talking about? Can you actually quote one thing he said that was abhorrent? He  said nothing that was remotely offensive, illogical or incorrect. As for it being om company time and property, it was a company forum for employees to use to discuss politics and other issues amongst themselves.

 

Are you just a troll or genuinly have these “thoughts”? 

 

He expressed views that were perfectly reasonable and legal and was fired for having those views, which is no different from a company whose employees are mostly democrats for firing someone they find is a republican.That would be illegal and so is firing this guy.

 

 

[uncleeagle]

2 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

So let’s start here:

“What he actually said was biological differences exist and that they may slightly bias men and women towards different subjects. He was scientifically correct, logical and reasonable in what he said.”

 

The only reason wonem are “biased towards a different subject” is because men have told them they can’t excel in anything (other than child rearing) since time immemorial.  However academic studies have shown for decades that women can and do, out perform men in the classroom. It them comes down to timing. Women have a biological clock that makes producing babies after 35 SUPER difficult. In other words you cant have both career and family particularly easily. Never an issue for men.

Secondly, If he worked for me I’d have sacked him as long time ago. More for voicing a very obviously 1950,s opion than anything clever. All companies have to portray moving forward. It’s good business sense and right to do. If you want to publicly go against a world  philosophy then you might as well say you hate handicaps, old people, blacks, gays and Jews. It’s the same. 

As for the rest of your posts based on free speech. You may have a poInt. 

 

Its a difficult dividing line. What becomes taboo and what is considered  inciting of hatred. Do we allow obvious contentious “shock jocks” like Alex Jones to spew their obvious nonsense when that nonsense starts to invite violence? When innocent people can and have been harmed? Or do we always side on the side of free speech and however repulsive your views are, they have to be heard?

I’ve thought long and hard on this and I reckon that if someone is being harmed by these words then you have to suspend your self righteousness and protect the person. No one allows ISIS to spout their nonsense- as I’m sure you would agree- so they rightly get stopped for the harm it can do others. I see no difference. 

The line however is VERY worrying and can be easily manipulated. Trump is a no brainer but other legitimate voices can be silenced through “national security” and other political bias as  we have seen in Thailand for example. 

The genies is out the box for sure. Hopefully sane minds will prevail. 

He didnt express a 50s view and it isnt true that women are biased because of male oppression or being told they cant do X but they can do Y. The same biases exist in countries such as Sweden which have been pushing hard line gender equality and opportunity for decades. His view simply reflected known and accepted scientific fact that biological differences exist and men and women do not make the same choices. 

 

He was fired for stating accepted scientific fact...science of the 2000s not the 1950s.