+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 3
Results 41 to 51 of 51

Thread: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

  1. Link to Post #41
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,409
    Thanks
    58,152
    Thanked 92,172 times in 15,113 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    Breaking ranks: Facebook engineer quits over company's 'intolerant, political monoculture'

    Sputnik
    Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:18 UTC



    US social media firms are often accused by conservatives of deliberately silencing and censoring non-liberal voices on their platforms.

    The Facebook engineer who sparked a major controversy at the company with his criticism of what he called a "political monoculture" that is "intolerant" of conservatism, is leaving the company.
    "We claim to welcome all perspectives, but are quick to attack - often in mobs - anyone who presents a view that appears to be in opposition to left-leaning ideology," Brian Amerige, an engineering manager for product usability wrote in an August 2018 internal memo to his colleagues.
    He decried Facebook's policy of balancing offensive and hateful speech with free expression and its acceptance of government regulation.
    "We've refused to defend ourselves in the press. Our policy strategy is pragmatism - not clear, implementable long-term principles - and our PR strategy is appeasement - not morally earned pride and self-defense," Amerige emphasized.

    "I disagree too strongly with where we're heading on these issues to watch what happens next," he added.

    Facebook engineer Brian Amerige has called out the site's political 'intolerance', claiming staff attack colleagues who do not conform to liberal opinions.

    The memo led to the creation of an internal group, on Facebook's Workplace message board, "FB'ers for Political Diversity," where hundreds of conservative employees vented their frustration over the company's practices.

    Some Facebook employees are known to have refused to work with or talk to certain colleagues because of their political beliefs.

    Democrats and other liberals refute allegations of anti-conservative bias at tech firms using as an example a recent party celebrating conservative Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation to the US Supreme Court that was hosted by a top Facebook lobbyist.

    They also point to the donations made by Google to the conservative group Federalist Society.

    Silicon Valley, which is at the heart of America's high-tech industry, has been accused of liberal bias.

    Many Republicans are faulting social media firms for deliberately silencing and censoring non-liberal voices on their platforms, which the companies deny.

    In September, President Donald Trump said that algorithms developed by the likes of Google and Facebook fail to offer consumers politically-balanced news about American politics and his presidency.

    In July 2017, Google found itself at the center of a political scandal after engineer James Damore wrote an internal post slamming what he described as "Google's Ideological Echo Chamber," in which he argued that women are underrepresented in tech not because they face bias and discrimination in the workplace, but because of inherent psychological differences between men and women.

    The memo and Damore's subsequent dismissal in August 2017 were widely discussed in the media.


    Related:
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (16th January 2019), Bruno (12th October 2018), Sophocles (11th October 2018), Tintin (11th October 2018)

  3. Link to Post #42
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,409
    Thanks
    58,152
    Thanked 92,172 times in 15,113 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    Supreme Court hearing case that could end Internet censorship, expand scope of the First Amendment

    Carmine Sabia Citizen Truth
    Wed, 17 Oct 2018 06:21 UTC



    After the recent purge of over 800 independent media outlets on Facebook, the Supreme Court is now hearing a case that could have ramifications for any future attempts at similar purges.

    The United States Supreme Court has agreed to take a case that could change free speech on the Internet forever.

    Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, No. 17-702, the case that it has agreed to take, will decide if the private operator of a public access network is considered a state actor, CNBC reported.

    The case could affect how companies like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Google and YouTube are governed. If the Court were to issue a far-reaching ruling it could subject such companies to First Amendment lawsuits and force them to allow a much broader scope of free speech from its users.

    The Court decided to take the case on Friday and it is the first case that was taken after Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the Court.

    DeeDee Halleck and Jesus Melendez claimed that they were fired from Manhattan Neighborhood Network for speaking critically of the network. And, though the case does not involve the Internet giants, it could create a ruling that expands the First Amendment beyond the government.
    "We stand at a moment when the very issue at the heart of this case - the interplay between private entities, nontraditional media, and the First Amendment - has been playing out in the courts, in other branches of government, and in the media itself," the attorneys from MNN wrote in their letter to the Court asking it to take the case.
    The Court could either rule in MNN's favor, rule against it in a narrow scope that does not affect other companies, or it could rule in a broad manner that would prevent the abilities of private networks and Internet companies to limit or censor speech on their platforms.

    Censorship, Free Speech or Enforcing Company Policy
    It comes at a time when Facebook has purged around 800 independent media pages in one day. The media outlets ranged the spectrum from far left to far right and many that either had no political affiliation or were not extreme in their politics. Facebook claimed that the pages were engaged in "inauthentic behavior" and as a private company it does not have to answer to anyone regarding how it enforces its terms of service.

    ACLU attorney Vera Eidelman said Facebook, as a private company, can enforce their terms however it sees fit, but that could result in serious free speech consequences.
    "Drawing the line between 'real' and 'inauthentic' views is a difficult enterprise that could put everything from important political parody to genuine but outlandish views on the chopping block," Eidelman said.

    "It could also chill individuals who only feel safe speaking out anonymously or pseudonymously."
    The MNN case could change that and force Facebook, and other companies, to protect users First Amendment rights.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (16th January 2019), Tintin (25th November 2018)

  5. Link to Post #43
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,759
    Thanks
    26,251
    Thanked 45,754 times in 9,343 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    Social Media Plot and The Demise of Our Future (Grannon-Vaknin Conversation)
    Sam Vaknin
    Published on Nov 22, 2018

    "Social media were designed with addiction, aggression, and monetizing... in mind. The result is a clear and present danger to the very survival of the human species."



    Fans of the threads on narcissism will recognize Sam Vaknin, a brilliant researcher and psychologist.
    Last edited by onawah; 28th November 2018 at 21:17.

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (23rd November 2018), Bill Ryan (16th January 2019), Delight (9th December 2018), Franny (24th November 2018), Tintin (25th November 2018)

  7. Link to Post #44
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,759
    Thanks
    26,251
    Thanked 45,754 times in 9,343 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    Queen - Bohemian Rhapsody Parody (Opinion Rhapsody)
    11/6/18

    Interesting how a song can bring a point home better than so many other mediums.
    This one certainly helped make me realize how we've been manipulated and divided by social media.
    Hopefully that will be part of the next step in the great awakening.
    Last edited by onawah; 25th November 2018 at 00:46.

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (16th January 2019), Dennis Leahy (25th November 2018), Tintin (14th August 2019)

  9. Link to Post #45
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,409
    Thanks
    58,152
    Thanked 92,172 times in 15,113 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    ...

    About Google's Russian competitor:


    US-based investment fund triples its stake in Russia's internet giant Yandex

    RT
    Wed, 16 Jan 2019 12:31 UTC


    © Sputnik / Valeriy Melnikov

    The Oppenheimer family of investment funds has increased its stake in Russian tech corporation Yandex, according to the latest filing submitted to the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

    The company that identifies itself as one of the world's most reputable investment firms reportedly boosted its stake from 1.8 percent to 6.41 percent, which represents about 18.365 million shares, as of December 31, 2018.

    Yandex closed trading in the US at $29.55 per share on Monday so the entire OppenheimerFunds stake in the Russian company is currently worth $542.7 million.

    In 2015, the New York-based investment company entirely eliminated its stake in Yandex. Prior to that OppenheimerFunds had been the largest portfolio investors in the Russian corporation holding 36.4 million class A shares (11.48 percent of equity, 4.2 percent of votes) in Yandex.

    The fund resumed investment in the Russian firm in the fourth quarter of 2017, having bought 5.1 million shares.

    Based in Moscow, Yandex operates an Internet website and a search engine in Russia. The company offers news, shopping information, blogging, photography, music and video services. It also provides online taxi and food delivery services. The company reportedly gets most of its revenues from online advertising.

    In August, Yandex announced the test launch of a new autonomous ride-hailing service in the special economic zone of Innopolis. In December, the internet giant released its first smartphone, called Yandex.Phone, and launched its own home assistant smart speaker.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  10. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (16th January 2019), Bill Ryan (16th January 2019), Sophocles (14th August 2019), Tintin (16th January 2019)

  11. Link to Post #46
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,409
    Thanks
    58,152
    Thanked 92,172 times in 15,113 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    Exclusive: Google Insider Turns Over 950 Pages Of Docs And Laptop To DOJ

    By Sara Carter -
    August 13, 2019



    A former Google insider claiming the company created algorithms to hide its political bias within artificial intelligence platforms – in effect targeting particular words, phrases and contexts to promote, alter, reference or manipulate perceptions of Internet content – delivered roughly 950 pages of documents to the Department of Justice’s Antitrust division Friday.

    The former Google insider, who has already spoken in to the nonprofit organization Project Veritas, met with SaraACarter.com on several occasions last week. He was interviewed in silhouette, to conceal his identity, in group’s latest film, which they say exposes bias inside the social media platform.

    Several weeks prior, the insider mailed a laptop to the DOJ containing the same information delivered on Friday, they said. The former insider is choosing to remain anonymous until Project Verita’s James O’Keefe reveals his identity tomorrow (Wednesday).

    He told this reporter on his recent trip to Washington D.C. that the documents he turned over to the Justice Department will provide proof that Google has been manipulating the algorithms and the evidence of how it was done, the insider said.Google CEO Sundar Pichai told the House Judiciary Committee in December, 2018, that the search engine was not biased against conservatives. Pichai explained what algorithm’s are said Google’s algorithm was not offensive to conservatives because its artificial intelligence does not operate in that manner. He told lawmakers, “things like relevance, freshness, popularity, how other people are using it” are what drives the search results. Pichai said even if his programmers were anti-Republican, the process is so intricate that the artificial intelligence could not be manipulated and it was to complicated to train the algorithm to fit their bias.

    Google did not immediately respond for comment on the insider’s claims, however, this story will be updated if comment is provided.

    The insider says Google is aware most people are unaware or not knowledgeable about these advanced IT systems and therefore unable to determine who is telling the truth.
    “I honestly think that a free market can fix this issue,” he told this reporter at a meeting in Washington D.C.

    “The issue is that the free market has been distorted and what’s happened is that the distortion is so grotesque and the engineering is so repulsive, all we need to do is just expose what’s going on. People can hear that it is bad but that can be bias. But when they see what Google has actually written with the documents, this will actually be taught in universities of what totalitarian states can do with this type of capability.”

    “It will be so revolting that it doesn’t matter what the solution is, a solution will just form as a reaction to this manipulation they have done,” the Google insider said.
    He said he’s asked himself many times if he’s overreacting
    “and every time I simply look back at the documents and realize that I am not.”

    “It’s that bad,” he said.

    “Disclosing Google’s own words to the American public is something I am, must do, if I am to consider myself a good person. The world that google is building is not a place I, or you or our children want to live in.”
    Another Google insider, who has come forward already, told O’Keefe and other media outlets recently that it is the programers at Google who use the algorithms to manipulate the information to advance its leftist agenda.

    Greg Coppola, a software engineer, told Project Veritas that he doesn’t “have a smoking gun.”

    However,
    “I’ve just been coding since I was ten, I have a Ph.D., I have five years of experience at Google, and I just know how algorithms are. They don’t write themselves. We write them to make them do what we want them to do.”

    “I look at Search and I look at Google News, and I see what it’s doing,” he said.

    “I see Google executives go to Congress and say … that it’s not political, and I’m just so sure that that’s not true.”
    The unnamed Google insider first spoke to O’Keefe’s Project Veritas. O’Keefe has been criticized by the left for outing the political bias of executives and employees of Google and other social media companies.

    In the nonprofits most recent video, Project Veritas uses their undercover techniques to get Google employees to talk openly about their disdain for Trump and how their artificial intelligence operates.

    Jenn Gennai, who heads Google’s Responsible Innovation Team, did not know she was being filmed by O’Keefe’s group. She told the undercover journalist that
    “the reason we launched our AI principals is because we’re not putting our line in the sand. They were not saying what’s fair and what’s equitable so we’re like, well we’re a big company, we’re going to say it.”
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  12. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (14th August 2019), Cara (14th August 2019), Metaphor (14th August 2019), petra (14th August 2019), Sophocles (14th August 2019), Star Mariner (16th August 2019), Tintin (14th August 2019), Valerie Villars (14th August 2019)

  13. Link to Post #47
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    7th July 2016
    Location
    Newfoundland, Canada
    Age
    39
    Posts
    1,400
    Thanks
    5,054
    Thanked 4,527 times in 1,257 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    Revolting, repulsive... never thought I'd hear those terms used in regards to use of technology, but here we are.
    Good Job, Google Insider

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to petra For This Post:

    avid (14th August 2019), Hervé (14th August 2019), Tintin (14th August 2019)

  15. Link to Post #48
    Canada Avalon Member frankstien's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th March 2019
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    226
    Thanks
    196
    Thanked 956 times in 214 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    "Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives."
    --John Lennon

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to frankstien For This Post:

    gord (18th August 2019), Tintin (18th August 2019)

  17. Link to Post #49
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,409
    Thanks
    58,152
    Thanked 92,172 times in 15,113 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    Google whistleblower: Same scheme may have been used for suspending Jordan Peterson, Tulsi Gabbard

    Egor Efimchik Sputnik
    Fri, 16 Aug 2019 10:01 UTC


    © REUTERS / Scott Morgan

    Tulsi Gabbard, a vocal proponent of breaking up the tech monopolies, had her campaign's advertising account suspended by Google after the Democratic debate in late June and is currently seeking $50 million in damages.

    Zach Vorhies, a former Google employee who has been leaking documents suggesting political biases within the company, has rendered assistance to the representatives of 2020 Democratic candidate Tulsi Gabbard, who is suing Google for disabling her search ads account.

    In an open letter on the social media network Minds, Vorhies said that he had investigated the suspension of the Google account of conservative thinker Jordan Peterson in 2017.

    He wrote: "What I found was that Google had a technical vulnerability that, when exploited, would take any gmail account down. Certain unknown 3rd party actors are aware of this secret vulnerability and exploit it."

    According to the whistle-blower, "malicious actors" would change one letter in a target's email address to create a "spoof" account and repeat this process until there is a network of bogus accounts.

    These accounts, not linked with the original one in any way except for their similar name, would then start generating spam emails, triggering an AI system which fixed the problem by taking down the spam accounts and also Jordan Peterson's original account.

    "To my knowledge, this bug has never been fixed," Vorhies said. "When Google says an account was deactivated because of 'suspicious' activity, this is how they often do it."

    While his revelation does not mean that Google itself was behind the scheme, it indicates that the company had failed to address the vulnerability in a timely manner.

    He suggested that this knowledge may be of use to Tulsi Gabbard's attorneys.

    Tulsi Vs. Google Suit
    The Hawaii congresswoman's 2020 campaign advertising account went offline for six hours shortly after the first Democratic debate on 27 and 28 June, cutting her campaign site off from millions of potential voters.

    Gabbard, who is campaigning against online censorship and calls for the breakup of big tech monopolies, accused Google of suppressing her voice and filed a lawsuit against the company in federal court.

    Quote
    Tulsi Gabbard @TulsiGabbard

    TULSI2020: In the hours following the 1st debate, while millions of Americans searched for info about Tulsi, Google suspended her search ad account w/o explanation. It is vital to our democracy that big tech companies can’t affect the outcome of elections http://tulsi.to/tulsi-vs-google

    7:33 PM - Jul 25, 2019
    In the lawsuit, her campaign team said Google had "not provided a straight answer" as to what happened, and is seeking $50 million in damages and an injunction to stop the company from "further inter-meddling" in the 2020 election.

    Google reportedly cited "problems with billing information or violations of our advertising policies," later stating there was "suspicious behaviour in the payment activity in your account" before reinstating it.

    Leaked Google Docs
    Media watchdog Project Veritas has recently revealed Vorhies as a Google insider, who had leaked internal documents exposing how its decision-makers discussed cracking down on conservative commentators.

    He has also leaked what he called a "black list" of over 400 websites - among them conservative news sites - aiming to exclude them from appearing on news feeds for some Android Google products.

    Google maintains that its search algorithms cannot determine the nuances between different agendas and therefore are devoid of a political bias.

    Vorhies, however, told Project Veritas that he had been collecting the documents for over a year after he "saw something dark and nefarious going on with the company".

    He was eventually unmasked by an anonymous account which he believes was run by a Google employee, and was approached by police for a "wellness check" after a call from his employers.

    Vorhies recounted that the cops "got inside the gate... and they started banging on my door... And so the police decided that they were going to call in additional forces. They called in the FBI, they called in the SWAT team. And they called in a bomb squad."

    "[T]his is a large way in which [Google tries to] intimidate their employees that go rogue on the company," he was quoted as saying.

    Last week, he reportedly turned over 950 pages of documents about Google's alleged political bias to the Department of Justice.

    "It will be so revolting that it doesn't matter what the solution is, a solution will just form as a reaction to this manipulation they have done," he said.


    Related:
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (16th August 2019), meeradas (16th August 2019), petra (16th August 2019), Tintin (16th August 2019)

  19. Link to Post #50
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    7th July 2016
    Location
    Newfoundland, Canada
    Age
    39
    Posts
    1,400
    Thanks
    5,054
    Thanked 4,527 times in 1,257 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    Quote "It will be so revolting that it doesn't matter what the solution is, a solution will just form as a reaction to this manipulation they have done" he said.
    That part about reaction to manipulation makes me shudder, and almost burst with cynicism, at the same time. If we're not living inside a manipulation already... sounds like we're coming pretty close to it now!!!

    Also... solutions don't just form themselves, now do they. That sounds like innuendo.

    AI is already smart enough to understand people's porn habits, and that seems to tie in. The article said that Google maintains their algorithms cannot determine particular nuances, but I call bull **** on that one.

    AI is getting VERY smart when it comes to people's psychology, and as much as I'm impressed by it, I'm equally scared of it too. I think that could be a lot of why it's so revolting - being impressed by awful stuff is just revolting.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to petra For This Post:

    Tintin (18th August 2019)

  21. Link to Post #51
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    20,545
    Thanks
    68,002
    Thanked 260,033 times in 19,009 posts

    Default Re: How Google, Facebook, Yahoo decide what you're going to see

    Alex Jones and Infowars, 16 August 2019:

    Google Engineers Exclusively Expose Big Tech's Plan To Steal 2020 Election - FULL SHOW

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    Tintin (18th August 2019), Yoda (18th August 2019)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts