+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 44

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

  1. Link to Post #1
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    18,382
    Thanks
    58,366
    Thanked 231,891 times in 16,812 posts

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

    HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. This short but very important TED talk by Eli Pariser starts with this alarming quote:



    Why is it alarming? Because Mark Zuckerberg will then decide to FILTER OUT your news about Africa, because your Facebook or online search history says you're more interested in squirrels.

    And you have no say... and you'll never know.

    Listen to this presentation very carefully. And this is from 2011 — over 6 long years ago.

    Last edited by Bill Ryan; 25th January 2018 at 20:07.

  2. The Following 71 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    7alon (26th January 2018), A Voice from the Mountains (13th April 2018), anandacate (26th January 2018), AriG (10th October 2018), Art (26th January 2018), astridmari (29th January 2018), avid (25th January 2018), Bassplayer1 (26th January 2018), bennycog (27th January 2018), Billy (27th January 2018), bluestflame (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), ceetee9 (26th January 2018), christian (26th January 2018), Conchita (11th October 2018), cursichella1 (27th November 2018), DNA (25th January 2018), drneglector (11th April 2018), Elen (28th January 2018), enigma3 (25th January 2018), Ewan (25th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (25th January 2018), Froddo (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), ghostrider (26th January 2018), happyuk (25th January 2018), Harley (26th January 2018), Hervé (26th January 2018), Inversion (25th January 2018), Ivanhoe (12th April 2018), Ivy23 (12th April 2018), Jantje (19th February 2018), justntime2learn (25th January 2018), kanishk (7th February 2018), KiwiElf (26th January 2018), Kryztian (26th January 2018), lastlegs (27th January 2018), Latti (20th February 2018), Lefty Dave (26th January 2018), mab777 (26th January 2018), Michelle Marie (25th January 2018), Mike (26th January 2018), mojo (25th January 2018), Nasu (25th January 2018), Navigator (25th January 2018), Noelle (25th January 2018), O Donna (25th January 2018), PathWalker (28th January 2018), petra (26th January 2018), Reinhard (26th January 2018), RunningDeer (25th January 2018), sanma (25th January 2018), Sophocles (25th January 2018), Spiral (26th January 2018), Spirithorse (27th January 2018), Star Mariner (25th January 2018), Star Tsar (26th January 2018), Sunny (10th October 2018), Sunny-side-up (27th January 2018), TargeT (25th January 2018), tessie999 (7th February 2018), The Crimson Horse Blanket (25th January 2018), Tintin (27th January 2018), toppy (26th January 2018), Watching from Cyprus (28th January 2018), william r sanford72 (26th January 2018), wisky (28th January 2018), wnlight (27th January 2018), Yetti (25th November 2018), YoYoYo (10th October 2018), ZenBaller (27th January 2018)

  3. Link to Post #2
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    39
    Posts
    7,232
    Thanks
    20,765
    Thanked 37,297 times in 6,763 posts

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

    Lots of great articles RE: this topic...

    Quote The New Censorship

    How did Google become the internet’s censor and master manipulator, blocking access to millions of websites?


    Google, Inc., isn't just the world's biggest purveyor of information; it is also the world's biggest censor.

    The company maintains at least nine different blacklists that impact our lives, generally without input or authority from any outside advisory group, industry association or government agency. Google is not the only company suppressing content on the internet. Reddit has frequently been accused of banning postings on specific topics, and a recent report suggests that Facebook has been deleting conservative news stories from its newsfeed, a practice that might have a significant effect on public opinion – even on voting. Google, though, is currently the biggest bully on the block.

    When Google's employees or algorithms decide to block our access to information about a news item, political candidate or business, opinions and votes can shift, reputations can be ruined and businesses can crash and burn. Because online censorship is entirely unregulated at the moment, victims have little or no recourse when they have been harmed. Eventually, authorities will almost certainly have to step in, just as they did when credit bureaus were regulated in 1970. The alternative would be to allow a large corporation to wield an especially destructive kind of power that should be exercised with great restraint and should belong only to the public: the power to shame or exclude.

    If Google were just another mom-and-pop shop with a sign saying "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone," that would be one thing. But as the golden gateway to all knowledge, Google has rapidly become an essential in people's lives – nearly as essential as air or water. We don't let public utilities make arbitrary and secretive decisions about denying people services; we shouldn't let Google do so either


    Let's start with the most trivial blacklist and work our way up. I'll save the biggest and baddest – one the public knows virtually nothing about but that gives Google an almost obscene amount of power over our economic well-being – until last.

    1. The autocomplete blacklist. This is a list of words and phrases that are excluded from the autocomplete feature in Google's search bar. The search bar instantly suggests multiple search options when you type words such as "democracy" or "watermelon," but it freezes when you type profanities, and, at times, it has frozen when people typed words like "torrent," "bisexual" and "penis." At this writing, it's freezing when I type "clitoris." The autocomplete blacklist can also be used to protect or discredit political candidates. As recently reported, at the moment autocomplete shows you "Ted" (for former GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz) when you type "lying," but it will not show you "Hillary" when you type "crooked" – not even, on my computer, anyway, when you type "crooked hill." (The nicknames for Clinton and Cruz coined by Donald Trump, of course.) If you add the "a," so you've got "crooked hilla," you get the very odd suggestion "crooked Hillary Bernie." When you type "crooked" on Bing, "crooked Hillary" pops up instantly. Google's list of forbidden terms varies by region and individual, so "clitoris" might work for you. (Can you resist checking?)




    2. The Google Maps blacklist. This list is a little more creepy, and if you are concerned about your privacy, it might be a good list to be on. The cameras of Google Earth and Google Maps have photographed your home for all to see. If you don't like that, "just move," Google's former CEO Eric Schmidt said. Google also maintains a list of properties it either blacks out or blurs out in its images. Some are probably military installations, some the residences of wealthy people, and some – well, who knows? Martian pre-invasion enclaves? Google doesn't say.



    3. The YouTube blacklist. YouTube, which is owned by Google, allows users to flag inappropriate videos, at which point Google censors weigh in and sometimes remove them, but not, according to a recent report by Gizmodo, with any great consistency – except perhaps when it comes to politics. Consistent with the company's strong and open support for liberal political candidates, Google employees seem far more apt to ban politically conservative videos than liberal ones. In December 2015, singer Joyce Bartholomew sued YouTube for removing her openly pro-life music video, but I can find no instances of pro-choice music being removed. YouTube also sometimes acquiesces to the censorship demands of foreign governments. Most recently, in return for overturning a three-year ban on YouTube in Pakistan, it agreed to allow Pakistan's government to determine which videos it can and cannot post.

    4. The Google account blacklist. A couple of years ago, Google consolidated a number of its products – Gmail, Google Docs, Google+, YouTube, Google Wallet and others – so you can access all of them through your one Google account. If you somehow violate Google's vague and intimidating terms of service agreement, you will join the ever-growing list of people who are shut out of their accounts, which means you'll lose access to all of these interconnected products. Because virtually no one has ever read this lengthy, legalistic agreement, however, people are shocked when they're shut out, in part because Google reserves the right to "stop providing Services to you … at any time." And because Google, one of the largest and richest companies in the world, has no customer service department, getting reinstated can be difficult. (Given, however, that all of these services gather personal information about you to sell to advertisers, losing one's Google account has been judged by some to be a blessing in disguise.)


    5. The Google News blacklist. If a librarian were caught trashing all the liberal newspapers before people could read them, he or she might get in a heap o' trouble. What happens when most of the librarians in the world have been replaced by a single company? Google is now the largest news aggregator in the world, tracking tens of thousands of news sources in more than thirty languages and recently adding thousands of small, local news sources to its inventory. It also selectively bans news sources as it pleases. In 2006, Google was accused of excluding conservative news sources that generated stories critical of Islam, and the company has also been accused of banning individual columnists and competing companies from its news feed. In December 2014, facing a new law in Spain that would have charged Google for scraping content from Spanish news sources (which, after all, have to pay to prepare their news), Google suddenly withdrew its news service from Spain, which led to an immediate drop in traffic to Spanish new stories. That drop in traffic is the problem: When a large aggregator bans you from its service, fewer people find your news stories, which means opinions will shift away from those you support. Selective blacklisting of news sources is a powerful way of promoting a political, religious or moral agenda, with no one the wiser.

    6. The Google AdWords blacklist. Now things get creepier. More than 70 percent of Google's $80 billion in annual revenue comes from its AdWords advertising service, which it implemented in 2000 by infringing on a similar system already patented by Overture Services. The way it works is simple: Businesses worldwide bid on the right to use certain keywords in short text ads that link to their websites (those text ads are the AdWords); when people click on the links, those businesses pay Google. These ads appear on Google.com and other Google websites and are also interwoven into the content of more than a million non-Google websites – Google's "Display Network." The problem here is that if a Google executive decides your business or industry doesn't meet its moral standards, it bans you from AdWords; these days, with Google's reach so large, that can quickly put you out of business. In 2011, Google blacklisted an Irish political group that defended sex workers but which did not provide them; after a protest, the company eventually backed down.

    In May 2016, Google blacklisted an entire industry – companies providing high-interest "payday" loans. As always, the company billed this dramatic move as an exercise in social responsibility, failing to note that it is a major investor in LendUp.com, which is in the same industry; if Google fails to blacklist LendUp (it's too early to tell), the industry ban might turn out to have been more of an anticompetitive move than one of conscience. That kind of hypocrisy has turned up before in AdWords activities. Whereas Google takes a moral stand, for example, in banning ads from companies promising quick weight loss, in 2011, Google forfeited a whopping $500 million to the U.S. Justice Department for having knowingly allowed Canadian drug companies to sell drugs illegally in the U.S. for years through the AdWords system, and several state attorneys general believe that Google has continued to engage in similar practices since 2011; investigations are ongoing.

    7. The Google AdSense blacklist. If your website has been approved by AdWords, you are eligible to sign up for Google AdSense, a system in which Google places ads for various products and services on your website. When people click on those ads, Google pays you. If you are good at driving traffic to your website, you can make millions of dollars a year running AdSense ads – all without having any products or services of your own. Meanwhile, Google makes a net profit by charging the companies behind the ads for bringing them customers; this accounts for about 18 percent of Google's income. Here, too, there is scandal: In April 2014, in two posts on PasteBin.com, someone claiming to be a former Google employee working in their AdSense department alleged the department engaged in a regular practice of dumping AdSense customers just before Google was scheduled to pay them. To this day, no one knows whether the person behind the posts was legit, but one thing is clear: Since that time, real lawsuits filed by real companies have, according to WebProNews, been "piling up" against Google, alleging the companies were unaccountably dumped at the last minute by AdSense just before large payments were due, in some cases payments as high as $500,000.


    8. The search engine blacklist. Google's ubiquitous search engine has indeed become the gateway to virtually all information, handling 90 percent of search in most countries. It dominates search because its index is so large: Google indexes more than 45 billion web pages; its next-biggest competitor, Microsoft's Bing, indexes a mere 14 billion, which helps to explain the poor quality of Bing's search results.

    Google's dominance in search is why businesses large and small live in constant "fear of Google," as Mathias Dopfner, CEO of Axel Springer, the largest publishing conglomerate in Europe, put it in an open letter to Eric Schmidt in 2014. According to Dopfner, when Google made one of its frequent adjustments to its search algorithm, one of his company's subsidiaries dropped dramatically in the search rankings and lost 70 percent of its traffic within a few days. Even worse than the vagaries of the adjustments, however, are the dire consequences that follow when Google employees somehow conclude you have violated their "guidelines": You either get banished to the rarely visited Netherlands of search pages beyond the first page (90 percent of all clicks go to links on that first page) or completely removed from the index. In 2011, Google took a "manual action" of a "corrective" nature against retailer J.C. Penney – punishment for Penney's alleged use of a legal SEO technique called "link building" that many companies employ to try to boost their rankings in Google's search results. Penney was demoted 60 positions or more in the rankings.

    Search ranking manipulations of this sort don't just ruin businesses; they also affect people's opinions, attitudes, beliefs and behavior, as my research on the Search Engine Manipulation Effect has demonstrated. Fortunately, definitive information about Google's punishment programs is likely to turn up over the next year or two thanks to legal challenges the company is facing. In 2014, a Florida company called e-Ventures Worldwide filed a lawsuit against Google for "completely removing almost every website" associated with the company from its search rankings. When the company's lawyers tried to get internal documents relevant to Google's actions though typical litigation discovery procedures, Google refused to comply. In July 2015, a judge ruled that Google had to honor e-Ventures' discovery requests, and that case is now moving forward. More significantly, in April 2016, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the attorney general of Mississippi – supported in his efforts by the attorneys general of 40 other states – has the right to proceed with broad discovery requests in his own investigations into Google's secretive and often arbitrary practices.

    This brings me, at last, to the biggest and potentially most dangerous of Google's blacklists – which Google's calls its "quarantine" list.

    9. The quarantine list. To get a sense of the scale of this list, I find it helpful to think about an old movie – the classic 1951 film "The Day the Earth Stood Still," which starred a huge metal robot named Gort. He had laser-weapon eyes, zapped terrified humans into oblivion and had the power to destroy the world. Klaatu, Gort's alien master, was trying to deliver an important message to earthlings, but they kept shooting him before he could. Finally, to get the world's attention, Klaatu demonstrated the enormous power of the alien races he represented by shutting down – at noon New York time – all of the electricity on earth for exactly 30 minutes. The earth stood still.

    Substitute "ogle" for "rt," and you get "Google," which is every bit as powerful as Gort but with a much better public relations department – so good, in fact, that you are probably unaware that on Jan. 31, 2009, Google blocked access to virtually the entire internet. And, as if not to be outdone by a 1951 science fiction move, it did so for 40 minutes.

    Impossible, you say. Why would do-no-evil Google do such an apocalyptic thing, and, for that matter, how, technically, could a single company block access to more than 100 million websites?


    The answer has to do with the dark and murky world of website blacklists – ever-changing lists of websites that contain malicious software that might infect or damage people's computers. There are many such lists – even tools, such as blacklistalert.org, that scan multiple blacklists to see if your IP address is on any of them. Some lists are kind of mickey-mouse – repositories where people submit the names or IP addresses of suspect sites. Others, usually maintained by security companies that help protect other companies, are more high-tech, relying on "crawlers" – computer programs that continuously comb the internet.

    But the best and longest list of suspect websites is Google's, launched in May 2007. Because Google is crawling the web more extensively than anyone else, it is also in the best position to find malicious websites. In 2012, Google acknowledged that each and every day it adds about 9,500 new websites to its quarantine list and displays malware warnings on the answers it gives to between 12 and 14 million search queries. It won't reveal the exact number of websites on the list, but it is certainly in the millions on any given day.

    In 2011, Google blocked an entire subdomain, co.cc, which alone contained 11 million websites, justifying its action by claiming that most of the websites in that domain appeared to be "spammy." According to Matt Cutts, still the leader of Google's web spam team, the company "reserves the right" to take such action when it deems it necessary. (The right? Who gave Google that right?)

    And that's nothing: According to The Guardian, on Saturday, Jan. 31, 2009, at 2:40 pm GMT, Google blocked the entire internet for those impressive 40 minutes, supposedly, said the company, because of "human error" by its employees. It would have been 6:40 am in Mountain View, California, where Google is headquartered. Was this time chosen because it is one of the few hours of the week when all of the world's stock markets are closed? Could this have been another of the many pranks for which Google employees are so famous? In 2008, Google invited the public to submit applications to join the "first permanent human colony on Mars." Sorry, Marsophiles; it was just a prank.

    When Google's search engine shows you a search result for a site it has quarantined, you see warnings such as, "The site ahead contains malware" or "This site may harm your computer" on the search result. That's useful information if that website actually contains malware, either because the website was set up by bad guys or because a legitimate site was infected with malware by hackers. But Google's crawlers often make mistakes, blacklisting websites that have merely been "hijacked," which means the website itself isn't dangerous but merely that accessing it through the search engine will forward you to a malicious site. My own website, http://drrobertepstein.com, was hijacked in this way in early 2012. Accessing the website directly wasn't dangerous, but trying to access it through the Google search engine forwarded users to a malicious website in Nigeria. When this happens, Google not only warns you about the infected website on its search engine (which makes sense), it also blocks you from accessing the website directly through multiple browsers – even non-Google browsers. (Hmm. Now that's odd. I'll get back to that point shortly.)



    The mistakes are just one problem. The bigger problem is that even though it takes only a fraction of a second for a crawler to list you, after your site has been cleaned up Google's crawlers sometimes take days or even weeks to delist you – long enough to threaten the existence of some businesses. This is quite bizarre considering how rapidly automated online systems operate these days. Within seconds after you pay for a plane ticket online, your seat is booked, your credit card is charged, your receipt is displayed and a confirmation email shows up in your inbox – a complex series of events involving multiple computers controlled by at least three or four separate companies. But when you inform Google's automated blacklist system that your website is now clean, you are simply advised to check back occasionally to see if any action has been taken. To get delisted after your website has been repaired, you either have to struggle with the company's online Webmaster tools, which are far from friendly, or you have to hire a security expert to do so – typically for a fee ranging between $1,000 and $10,000. No expert, however, can speed up the mysterious delisting process; the best he or she can do is set it in motion.

    So far, all I've told you is that Google's crawlers scan the internet, sometimes find what appear to be suspect websites and put those websites on a quarantine list. That information is then conveyed to users through the search engine. So far so good, except of course for the mistakes and the delisting problem; one might even say that Google is performing a public service, which is how some people who are familiar with the quarantine list defend it. But I also mentioned that Google somehow blocks people from accessing websites directly through multiple browsers. How on earth could it do that? How could Google block you when you are trying to access a website using Safari, an Apple product, or Firefox, a browser maintained by Mozilla, the self-proclaimed "nonprofit defender of the free and open internet"?

    The key here is browsers. No browser maker wants to send you to a malicious website, and because Google has the best blacklist, major browsers such as Safari and Firefox – and Chrome, of course, Google's own browser, as well as browsers that load through Android, Google's mobile operating system – check Google's quarantine list before they send you to a website. (In November 2014, Mozilla announced it will no longer list Google as its default search engine, but it also disclosed that it will continue to rely on Google's quarantine list to screen users' search requests.)


    If the site has been quarantined by Google, you see one of those big, scary images that say things like "Get me out of here!" or "Reported attack site!" At this point, given the default security settings on most browsers, most people will find it impossible to visit the site – but who would want to? If the site is not on Google's quarantine list, you are sent on your way.

    OK, that explains how Google blocks you even when you're using a non-Google browser, but why do they block you? In other words, how does blocking you feed the ravenous advertising machine – the sine qua non of Google's existence?

    Have you figured it out yet? The scam is as simple as it is brilliant: When a browser queries Google's quarantine list, it has just shared information with Google. With Chrome and Android, you are always giving up information to Google, but you are also doing so even if you are using non-Google browsers. That is where the money is – more information about search activity kindly provided by competing browser companies. How much information is shared will depend on the particular deal the browser company has with Google. In a maximum information deal, Google will learn the identity of the user; in a minimum information deal, Google will still learn which websites people want to visit – valuable data when one is in the business of ranking websites. Google can also charge fees for access to its quarantine list, of course, but that's not where the real gold is.

    Chrome, Android, Firefox and Safari currently carry about 92 percent of all browser traffic in the U.S. – 74 percent worldwide – and these numbers are increasing. As of this writing, that means Google is regularly collecting information through its quarantine list from more than 2.5 billion people. Given the recent pact between Microsoft and Google, in coming months we might learn that Microsoft – both to save money and to improve its services – has also started using Google's quarantine list in place of its own much smaller list; this would further increase the volume of information Google is receiving.

    To put this another way, Google has grown, and is still growing, on the backs of some of its competitors, with end users oblivious to Google's antics – as usual. It is yet another example of what I have called "Google's Dance" – the remarkable way in which Google puts a false and friendly public face on activities that serve only one purpose for the company: increasing profit. On the surface, Google's quarantine list is yet another way Google helps us, free of charge, breeze through our day safe and well-informed. Beneath the surface, that list is yet another way Google accumulates more information about us to sell to advertisers.

    You may disagree, but in my view Google's blacklisting practices put the company into the role of thuggish internet cop – a role that was never authorized by any government, nonprofit organization or industry association. It is as if the biggest bully in town suddenly put on a badge and started patrolling, shuttering businesses as it pleased, while also secretly peeping into windows, taking photos and selling them to the highest bidder.


    Consider: Heading into the holiday season in late 2013, an online handbag business suffered a 50 percent drop in business because of blacklisting. In 2009, it took an eco-friendly pest control company 60 days to leap the hurdles required to remove Google's warnings, long enough to nearly go broke. And sometimes the blacklisting process appears to be personal: In May 2013, the highly opinionated PC Magazine columnist John Dvorak wondered "When Did Google Become the Internet Police?" after both his website and podcast site were blacklisted. He also ran into the delisting problem: "It's funny," he wrote, "how the site can be blacklisted in a millisecond by an analysis but I have to wait forever to get cleared by the same analysis doing the same scan. Why is that?"

    Could Google really be arrogant enough to mess with a prominent journalist? According to CNN, in 2005 Google "blacklisted all CNET reporters for a year after the popular technology news website published personal information about one of Google's founders" – Eric Schmidt – "in a story about growing privacy concerns." The company declined to comment on CNN's story.

    Google's mysterious and self-serving practice of blacklisting is one of many reasons Google should be regulated, just as phone companies and credit bureaus are. The E.U.'s recent antitrust actions against Google, the recently leaked FTC staff report about Google's biased search rankings, President Obama's call for regulating internet service providers – all have merit, but they overlook another danger. No one company, which is accountable to its shareholders but not to the general public, should have the power to instantly put another company out of business or block access to any website in the world. How frequently Google acts irresponsibly is beside the point; it has the ability to do so, which means that in a matter of seconds any of Google's 37,000 employees with the right passwords or skills could laser a business or political candidate into oblivion or even freeze much of the world's economy.

    Some degree of censorship and blacklisting is probably necessary; I am not disputing that. But the suppression of information on the internet needs to be managed by, or at least subject to the regulations of, responsible public officials, with every aspect of their operations transparent to all.

    Updated on June 23, 2016: Readers have called my attention to a 10th Google blacklist, which the company applies to its shopping service. In 2012, the shopping service banned the sale of weapons-related items, including some items that could still be sold through AdWords. Google's shopping blacklisting policy, while reasonably banning the sale of counterfeit and copyrighted goods, also includes a catch-all category: Google can ban the sale of any product or service its employees deem to be "offensive or inappropriate." No means of recourse is stated.
    https://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...t-be-regulated
    There was a 1: 400,000,000,000,000 chance of you being born: what have you done with your miraculous life today?

  4. The Following 45 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (13th April 2018), Anchor (21st October 2018), avid (25th January 2018), Bassplayer1 (26th January 2018), Bill Ryan (25th January 2018), Billy (27th January 2018), bluestflame (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), ceetee9 (26th January 2018), Chip (23rd November 2018), christian (26th January 2018), chris_walker (25th November 2018), DNA (25th January 2018), earthdreamer (20th February 2018), Ecnal61 (28th January 2018), Elen (28th January 2018), enigma3 (25th January 2018), Ewan (26th January 2018), Fellow Aspirant (20th February 2018), Foxie Loxie (25th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), ghostrider (26th January 2018), Hervé (26th January 2018), Inversion (25th January 2018), Ivanhoe (12th April 2018), Ivy23 (12th April 2018), justntime2learn (25th January 2018), Lefty Dave (26th January 2018), Michelle Marie (25th January 2018), Mike (26th January 2018), mojo (25th January 2018), Nasu (25th January 2018), Navigator (25th January 2018), Noelle (26th January 2018), O Donna (25th January 2018), onevoice (25th January 2018), sanma (25th January 2018), Satori (26th January 2018), Sophocles (25th January 2018), Spiral (26th January 2018), Star Mariner (25th January 2018), Sunny (10th October 2018), The Crimson Horse Blanket (25th January 2018), toppy (26th January 2018), Valerie Villars (26th January 2018)

  5. Link to Post #3
    Avalon Member O Donna's Avatar
    Join Date
    9th January 2018
    Posts
    395
    Thanks
    2,206
    Thanked 2,430 times in 386 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    And you have no say... and you'll never know.
    Very important subject matter related to the WWW and beyond. Thank you for bringing it to our attention, Bill.

    The above I highlighted in the OP what particularly stands out to me.

    Will there come a day when future generations will never know what made the WWW a great vehicle for positive social change due to things like 'intelligent' filters and the destruction of net neutrality?

    "Our strategy is to destroy the enemy from within, to conquer him through himself." - Adolf Hitler

  6. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to O Donna For This Post:

    avid (25th January 2018), Bassplayer1 (26th January 2018), Bill Ryan (25th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), ceetee9 (26th January 2018), DNA (25th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (25th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Hym (27th January 2018), Ivanhoe (12th April 2018), lastlegs (27th January 2018), Michelle Marie (25th January 2018), Mike (26th January 2018), mojo (26th January 2018), Nasu (25th January 2018), Noelle (26th January 2018)

  7. Link to Post #4
    Avalon Member The Crimson Horse Blanket's Avatar
    Join Date
    21st May 2017
    Posts
    242
    Thanks
    227
    Thanked 1,495 times in 231 posts

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

    People are becoming lazy, relying on Google......... You gotta be more specific, for starter's you have to know what it is you want to find. To go forward, you gotta go back, at least for us who remember how it was, pre-internet, to find that info. There are still enough breadcrumbs, just, on the www, but granted, they are becoming less and less. We have become used to 'instant info' and it's gonna be a hard drug to shake if you don't want to be lied to and manipulated by the multi-nationals. The sheer amount of meta-data generated by an average citizen in the West is difficult to comprehend for most, and the collection capabilities and real-time data mining abilities of our parental intelligence agencies should keep any sane minded individual awake at least one night a week. F**k 'Em.

    Necessity IS the Mother of Invention, never forget that. There are small groups and networks popping-up to counter the very subject matter of the OP, this will only continue to grow in tandem with the manipulation of the www.

    ANALOGUE. It's in the past, but it is our future.
    Last edited by The Crimson Horse Blanket; 25th January 2018 at 21:32.

  8. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to The Crimson Horse Blanket For This Post:

    avid (25th January 2018), Bassplayer1 (26th January 2018), Bill Ryan (25th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), ceetee9 (26th January 2018), DNA (25th January 2018), East Sun (11th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (25th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Michelle Marie (25th January 2018), Mike (26th January 2018), Noelle (26th January 2018), O Donna (25th January 2018), Retief (2nd August 2018), TargeT (26th January 2018), Valerie Villars (26th January 2018)

  9. Link to Post #5
    United States Avalon Member DNA's Avatar
    Join Date
    8th May 2011
    Location
    Arizona
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,774
    Thanks
    24,869
    Thanked 19,315 times in 3,488 posts

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

    Look, I have no problem here looking like the naive one asking the dumb question.
    So here we go.
    What can we use in so far as a search engine is concerned that can replicate the capability of google?
    I've tried several, and I simply have the hardest time finding anything with these lesser search engines.
    The conquering of self is truly greater than were one to conquer many worlds.
    Edgar Cayce

  10. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to DNA For This Post:

    Bassplayer1 (26th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), East Sun (11th April 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Ivanhoe (12th April 2018), Mike (26th January 2018), Noelle (26th January 2018), Patient (26th January 2018), Spiral (26th January 2018), TargeT (26th January 2018)

  11. Link to Post #6
    United States Avalon Member DNA's Avatar
    Join Date
    8th May 2011
    Location
    Arizona
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,774
    Thanks
    24,869
    Thanked 19,315 times in 3,488 posts

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

    Just saw this on inforwars.
    Google is censoring "Jesus" and "Jesus Christ".
    Where as it will refer to Allah and other religious figures and answer based on their religious stature, with Jesus he is simply being referred to as a "Fictional Character".
    This is quite damning of Google.

    https://www.infowars.com/shock-video...-jesus-christ/




    Who is Jesus Christ? Internet users are posting videos of Google products refusing to answer the simple question.
    In one video uploaded Wednesday, Google fails to answer but provides an in-depth summary when asked about other religious figures including Allah.
    A Facebook user who asked the same question in November 2017 received a different response.
    In the older footage, Google answered, “Regardless of what you might think of him personally, Jesus Christ stands as the central figure in the history of Western Civilization.”
    The conquering of self is truly greater than were one to conquer many worlds.
    Edgar Cayce

  12. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to DNA For This Post:

    Art (26th January 2018), astridmari (29th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), bluestflame (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Ivanhoe (12th April 2018), Ivy23 (12th April 2018), mojo (26th January 2018), Noelle (26th January 2018), Spiral (26th January 2018), Valerie Villars (26th January 2018)

  13. Link to Post #7
    United States Avalon Member ghostrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2011
    Location
    Sand Springs Ok
    Age
    53
    Posts
    7,424
    Thanks
    9,879
    Thanked 28,528 times in 6,625 posts

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

    All information is sanitized, now apparently it's personalized ... it won't be long before they move to bio-chip everyone ... Thanksfor the thread Bill ...
    Raiding the Matrix One Mind at a Time ...

  14. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to ghostrider For This Post:

    Art (26th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), Ivanhoe (12th April 2018), Ivy23 (12th April 2018), mojo (26th January 2018)

  15. Link to Post #8
    England Avalon Member Spiral's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th July 2012
    Location
    Brexit Isle
    Age
    52
    Posts
    758
    Thanks
    4,763
    Thanked 3,777 times in 709 posts

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

    This what the top tier at google do & how they recruit.....

    There was a really good vid on this but the search engine won't find it (surprise surprise ) which went on to point out the satanic nature of burning man, but then I shouldn't have to point that aspect out on here ...

    "If UFOs and physical reality are incompatible, maybe the time has come to re-negotiate physical reality." Jacques Vallee

  16. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Spiral For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Noelle (26th January 2018), Valerie Villars (26th January 2018)

  17. Link to Post #9
    Germany Avalon Member christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th February 2011
    Age
    32
    Posts
    4,141
    Thanks
    14,550
    Thanked 21,604 times in 2,842 posts

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

    Quote Posted by DNA (here)
    What can we use in so far as a search engine is concerned that can replicate the capability of google?
    I've tried several, and I simply have the hardest time finding anything with these lesser search engines.
    I get the best results usually with Google as well. When looking for "politically sensitive" topics, however, I sometimes use several other search engines as well, in case Google applied a filter there.

    In some cases, it might not even be a politically sensitive topic that is censored, but simply a competitor to Google's services. In one case, ProtonMail was censored this way, probably to protect GoogleMail. ProtonMail is arguably the biggest secure mail service, and it disappeared completely from Google's search results for a while, until a lot of users complained to Google and they fixed the issue.

  18. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to christian For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Noelle (26th January 2018), O Donna (26th January 2018)

  19. Link to Post #10
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    39
    Posts
    7,232
    Thanks
    20,765
    Thanked 37,297 times in 6,763 posts

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

    Quote Posted by christian (here)
    Quote Posted by DNA (here)
    What can we use in so far as a search engine is concerned that can replicate the capability of google?
    I've tried several, and I simply have the hardest time finding anything with these lesser search engines.
    I get the best results usually with Google as well. When looking for "politically sensitive" topics, however, I sometimes use several other search engines as well, in case Google applied a filter there.

    In some cases, it might not even be a politically sensitive topic that is censored, but simply a competitor to Google's services. In one case, ProtonMail was censored this way, probably to protect GoogleMail. ProtonMail is arguably the biggest secure mail service, and it disappeared completely from Google's search results for a while, until a lot of users complained to Google and they fixed the issue.
    The best replacement for google that still gives you "google like" results is https://www.startpage.com/.

    However I wouldn't doubt it's still influenced in someway (if not JUST the quarantine list) by google even still.

    Last edited by TargeT; 26th January 2018 at 14:22.
    There was a 1: 400,000,000,000,000 chance of you being born: what have you done with your miraculous life today?

  20. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    AriG (10th October 2018), avid (26th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), bluestflame (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Noelle (26th January 2018), O Donna (26th January 2018)

  21. Link to Post #11
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    15,173
    Thanks
    52,628
    Thanked 82,569 times in 13,920 posts

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

    Anyone - beside Paul - tried "Yandex"?
    "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.

  22. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bassplayer1 (26th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (28th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018)

  23. Link to Post #12
    United States Avalon Member Valerie Villars's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th November 2017
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,853
    Thanks
    12,605
    Thanked 10,807 times in 1,808 posts

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

    An Open Letter to Google

    Dear Google,

    You suck.

    Sincerely,

    Valerie
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with someone when we are uncool." From the movie "Almost Famous""l "Let yourself stand cool and composed before a million universes." Walt Whitman

  24. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Valerie Villars For This Post:

    AriG (10th October 2018), avid (26th January 2018), Bassplayer1 (26th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Hym (26th January 2018), Noelle (26th January 2018), O Donna (26th January 2018), TargeT (26th January 2018)

  25. Link to Post #13
    Canada Avalon Member Bassplayer1's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th December 2012
    Posts
    98
    Thanks
    1,983
    Thanked 656 times in 85 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    Anyone - beside Paul - tried "Yandex"?
    Yes Herve - and Yandex is excellent but sadly its too much hassle. I was using Yandex browser, which I really like - its a favorite, and I set up a Yandex email as a result, which is also (potentially) great- slick, efficient and no ads! The same day I got the email address and updated my accounts, my cell phone got blocked with a message from the network provider for me to contact the Fraud department. When I challenged them outright about Yandex they admitted that it was because of a new Russian email address associated with my account and how in their experience, there's a big crime racket in Russia hacking north american cell phone accounts!!! I was pissed at hearing this BS and had to switch back to my outlook account. I mean, I'm sure there IS a racket just like there is in EVERY OTHER country, but I was angry and concerned at the extent of spreading propaganda and the control companies are starting to exert over their customers. That's not ok. I got the vibe that the person I was speaking to was puzzled at why someone in Canada would want a Russian email address - and frankly, its not anyone's business!! Then, on the same day Google blocked it completely when I tried to create a new account - it was a flat out no-go. But when I tried an old Yahoo account it worked right away! So there it is. The browser is great, though I expect users activity to be tracked and logged every which-way .... Personally, Yandex browser and email are very good indeed but sadly the PTB seem like they might be on the case and clamping down with new users in other countries - especially living in Canada - I don't think Yandex has caught on here, people I've mentioned it to have never heard of it. We might get better quality unfiltered searches but at a price of being blocked and tracked.

  26. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Bassplayer1 For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), Ewan (26th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Hervé (26th January 2018), Hym (26th January 2018), Ivanhoe (12th April 2018), O Donna (26th January 2018), TargeT (26th January 2018)

  27. Link to Post #14
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    15,173
    Thanks
    52,628
    Thanked 82,569 times in 13,920 posts

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

    Google Ad-Non-sense from Jim Stone:

    Jan 25 2018

    GOOGLE AD BLOCK SCAM BUSTED!

    A couple weeks ago, Google announced that its chrome browser would start blocking malicious ad types, if a "truth agency" determined them to be malicious.

    At that time, I specifically stated that this meant Google was going to start blocking ALL ads to alt media if alt media sites found alternative ad servers after Adsense denied them ads, simply because of what they reported.

    I WAS RIGHT.


    THE LIE: Google claimed they would only use Chrome to block ads that
    1. Locked the screen or mouse,

    2. Made you click them before you could see site content, or

    3. Started up audio automatically.
    GOOGLE LIED (but at least I knew it was a lie RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING)

    Fact: It does not matter if the ad is only a static JPEG that does nothing at all, IF IT COMES FROM A COMPETING AD SERVICE, AND A "TRUTH COUNCIL" HATES YOUR WEB SITE, CHROME WILL NOT ALLOW THE ADS TO LOAD. HERE IS PROOF!

    ALL I AM USING IS STRAIGHT GOOGLE CHROME WITH NO PLUGINS AT ALL, AND IT DID THIS.

    The "hate" article that had its ads blocked was about a Target security guard who got fired for catching a Sheriff's deputy shoplifting, and reporting it! AND CHROME BLOCKED THE ADS! WHAT A FARCE!

    Google needs a G*D* smart bomb.

    Ahh yes, but the Google parasite slurps this web site once every five minutes or so, (to see what the AI needs to auto ban elsewhere) so it will see the words "google" and "smart bomb" associated with each other, alert a living troll who will read the associated report, and they'll fix this ONE SINGLE LONE INSTANCE so they can continue to go right on being the scammers they are.
    Last edited by Hervé; 26th January 2018 at 15:31.
    "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.

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

    avid (26th January 2018), Bassplayer1 (27th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), Chip (23rd November 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), Ewan (26th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Hym (26th January 2018), latte (26th January 2018), O Donna (26th January 2018)

  29. Link to Post #15
    United States Avalon Member Foxie Loxie's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th September 2015
    Location
    Central NY
    Age
    74
    Posts
    3,079
    Thanks
    67,683
    Thanked 17,186 times in 2,952 posts

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

    Does anyone understand what I heard Jerome Corsi say last night about AT&T getting a contract for NSA & how a First Amendment for the Internet will play out? Is this something Congress has to do?

  30. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Foxie Loxie For This Post:

    Bassplayer1 (27th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), Ewan (27th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), O Donna (26th January 2018), TargeT (26th January 2018)

  31. Link to Post #16
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    15,173
    Thanks
    52,628
    Thanked 82,569 times in 13,920 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
    Does anyone understand what I heard Jerome Corsi say last night about AT&T getting a contract for NSA & how a First Amendment for the Internet will play out? Is this something Congress has to do?
    Do you have a link for that video/interview/podcast? Or where we could find 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.

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

    Bassplayer1 (27th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), Ewan (27th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), O Donna (26th January 2018)

  33. Link to Post #17
    Avalon Member Hym's Avatar
    Join Date
    27th June 2011
    Location
    Eastern Pacific
    Posts
    472
    Thanks
    5,172
    Thanked 2,786 times in 449 posts

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

    It's on the "Transition into Trump" thread on post #3561:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF0-WbKdDl8



    Jerome Corsi:
    "QAnon is military intelligence at its highest level..."

    "Soros was funding Net Neutrality. He desperately wanted Net Neutrality!"

    "Trump wants AT&T to buy out & control CNN. Becuz AT&T is more ethical."

    "Net Neutrality is a psy-op, where Treason is sold as Patriotism.... black is white & up is down..." (paraphrased)

    "Awakening has to happen in stages."

    "First person Trump meets in Davos is UK Teresa May. Explains seriousness of British Intelligence used by Obama of spying on Trump. It was a treasonous act!"

    "Also talks regarding Julian Assange. He had the right to publish."

    "So Few people voted for Clinton that she lost a rigged election."

    "Treason will go to Obama."

    "The real shoe is going to drop ==> human trafficking, pedogate..."

    "This is the Second Revolution."
    Relevant Links:
    Corsi Decode:https://www.scribd.com/document/36966...
    F&F: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_co...
    NSA: http://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2...
    InternetBillOfRights:http://www.breitbart.com/big-governme...
    #ReleaseTheMemo #InternetBillOfRights TWITTER:https://twitter.com/cbts_stream
    SUBREDDIT:https://www.reddit.com/r/CBTS_Stream/
    QCodeFag: https://qcodefag.github.io/

  34. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Hym For This Post:

    anandacate (26th January 2018), Bassplayer1 (27th January 2018), Bill Ryan (26th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (26th January 2018), Ewan (27th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Hervé (26th January 2018), Ivy23 (12th April 2018), O Donna (26th January 2018)

  35. Link to Post #18
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    39
    Posts
    7,232
    Thanks
    20,765
    Thanked 37,297 times in 6,763 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
    Does anyone understand what I heard Jerome Corsi say last night about AT&T getting a contract for NSA & how a First Amendment for the Internet will play out? Is this something Congress has to do?


    Jan 24th:
    AT&T Calls on Congress to Protect Net Neutrality, Create an ‘Internet Bill of Rights’


    Jan 25th:
    NSA Awards AT&T Classified $2 Billion Tech Contract… Wasn’t ATT proposing an internet bill of rights?

    Is it just me or is the game getting a bit obvious?


    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    Do you have a link for that video/interview/podcast? Or where we could find it?
    Here ya go:

    AT&T Urges Congress to Pass “Internet Bill of Rights”
    AT&T CEO insists: Net neutrality should apply to all, including internet censors like Google, Facebook, and Twitter


    Last edited by TargeT; 26th January 2018 at 19:35.
    There was a 1: 400,000,000,000,000 chance of you being born: what have you done with your miraculous life today?

  36. The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    avid (27th January 2018), Bassplayer1 (27th January 2018), BMJ (7th February 2018), Chip (23rd November 2018), DNA (27th January 2018), Ewan (27th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (26th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Hervé (26th January 2018), Hym (27th January 2018), Ivy23 (12th April 2018), latte (26th January 2018), O Donna (26th January 2018), Valerie Villars (26th January 2018)

  37. Link to Post #19
    United States Avalon Member onevoice's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    123
    Thanks
    2,970
    Thanked 777 times in 117 posts

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

    Quote Posted by Hym (here)
    It's on the "Transition into Trump" thread on post #3561:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF0-WbKdDl8



    Jerome Corsi:
    "QAnon is military intelligence at its highest level..."

    "Soros was funding Net Neutrality. He desperately wanted Net Neutrality!"

    "Trump wants AT&T to buy out & control CNN. Becuz AT&T is more ethical."

    "Net Neutrality is a psy-op, where Treason is sold as Patriotism.... black is white & up is down..." (paraphrased)

    "Awakening has to happen in stages."

    "First person Trump meets in Davos is UK Teresa May. Explains seriousness of British Intelligence used by Obama of spying on Trump. It was a treasonous act!"

    "Also talks regarding Julian Assange. He had the right to publish."

    "So Few people voted for Clinton that she lost a rigged election."

    "Treason will go to Obama."

    "The real shoe is going to drop ==> human trafficking, pedogate..."

    "This is the Second Revolution."
    Relevant Links:
    Corsi Decode:https://www.scribd.com/document/36966...
    F&F: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_co...
    NSA: http://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2...
    InternetBillOfRights:http://www.breitbart.com/big-governme...
    #ReleaseTheMemo #InternetBillOfRights TWITTER:https://twitter.com/cbts_stream
    SUBREDDIT:https://www.reddit.com/r/CBTS_Stream/
    QCodeFag: https://qcodefag.github.io/
    In the Relevant Links section, the first 4 links doesn't work anymore. Some people have been busy censoring the information.

  38. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onevoice For This Post:

    BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (15th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (27th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Hym (27th January 2018)

  39. Link to Post #20
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    2nd June 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    557
    Thanks
    616
    Thanked 2,769 times in 498 posts

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

    I'm certain that most if not all of us are aware the Google, Facebook, Aplle, Microsoft .....cell phone companies and providers and a myriad of other tech companies are really just "fronts" for alphabet soup agencies and whatever their agendas are.
    The "spyware" is built into the hardware. The backdoors cannot be blocked.

    At best any measure we take just prevents "hackers" from accessing our data.

    Here is an excellent 6 part in depth video series that chases the money.
    I find their research high credible and compelling. and very much worth the time to watch. It's like a mini degree in what is behind tech companies of today. Some but not all of the names are familiar.

    Trillion Dollar Rip-Off
    Social Networking is a Stolen Trade Secret

    One of the largest government sponsored industrial espionage thefts of copyrights, trade secrets, and patents in modern times was the theft of scalable social networking inventions. The technology and programming code that underlie Facebook, Gmail, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram and most the other large-scale social networking companies runs on Leader Technologies’ intellectual property.

    It was stolen by a group of criminal lawyers, judges, spies and bankers working with complete impunity and in total disregard for the law. Under the guise of the IBM Eclipse Foundation, James P. Chandler III (who was a national security advisor and top White House attorney) led the group of criminals who, interestingly enough, are also appearing in the news currently due to their most recently discovered crimes, along with John Podesta, Robert Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, John Breyer, James Breyer, Larry Summers, Yuri Milner, Alisher Usmanov, Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and a host of others who are not so well known.

    Usually, we see them stealing oil, gold, uranium and other resources, but this time they stole the very software code that is utilized by the largest tech companies in America, Europe, Russia, China, South America, and anywhere else they could market it – making trillions of dollars in the process.

    https://aim4truth.org/2017/11/21/fac...by-zuckerberg/
    Last edited by CurEus; 28th January 2018 at 04:30.

  40. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to CurEus For This Post:

    BMJ (7th February 2018), DNA (15th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (28th January 2018), gaiagirl (28th January 2018), Valerie Villars (28th January 2018)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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