slug.com slug.com
10 7

Google as fake news?! Finally a smoking gun on Google bias against conservatives (or even classical liberals)? See


UPDATE: Youtube has since removed the video. see: [projectveritas.com] BTW, if you put a bitchute link in a post, we automatically embed it in your post.

Some thoughts:

  • Bias is both a common word and a specific word used in machine learning. In machine learning, bias is the whole point of the algorithm... it takes millions of data points (e.g., # views, similarity to other viewers, view length, etc) and tries to bias things for you to see with the goal of some metric (e.g., click rate on suggested videos).

  • Per video: "algorithmic unfairness" means unjust or prejudicial treatment on people that is related to sensitive characteristics (race, income, sex, gender) through algorithmic or algorithmically-aided decision-making. => keywords: unjust... the whole point of ML is to be prejudicial but should it be MANUALLY prejudicial based on undisclosed bias (political or otherwise)? Should we demand a public audit of Google's internal policies?

  • women can... vs men can... (see attached) => the difference in results is shocking and suggests a case for manual related to manual bias, but it is not, in itself, a smoking gun.

How to fight this? Are we being thought controlled? If so, do we want a say in the way "the algorithm" + Google employees are doing it?

Admin 8 June 24
You must be a member of this group before commenting. Join Group

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value evidence and civil discourse - the social network for the fans of the IDW.

Create your free account

10 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Well ...
As to bias ... the fact of life is ... we ALL ARE. By actual definition, we have no choice.
I’ve held for decades the same answer for “prejudice”.
These are basic nature ... and by “basic nature” I mean that EVERY Living Thing has them ... displays them.
From he lowest viruses, microbes and bacteria through “plants” through the smallest of God’s Creatures to the Largest, bias and prejudice is an important survival tool. Survival of Species, Survival of Individual.
Over Millions of years, bias and prejudice has allowed survival of every single “survivor”.
They are as innate and visceral as our Gag Reflex to rotten food and vomit.
As we believe ourselves to be a “Higher Lifeform” ... a “Sentient Being” we have, to some degree, a choice as to how we cope with these things including the ability to override them.

Google, Facebook, YouTube and ... are they “Biased” ... “Prejudiced”? I suppose the first thing that needs to be asked is; “Why should it matter?”
These companies are ... Companies ... Corporate Entities ... who, as any Commercial Enterprise are required to provide a product that the Consumer wants, needs, is willing to buy or support.
The fact is, they are ruled by ONE RULE; Remain Desired or Die ... their “Desirability” is determined by the Most Democratic Method Available; “Popular Demand” ... by “Majority Vote” ... Second by second, minute, hour, day, week ... whether each individual “voter” casts their vote on purpose, by accident, by trickery, the VOTE Still Remains the “Metric”
I have refused to use Google (or Chrome) and any Obvious Google Platform for a couple decades at least. Especially NOT their “Search Engines”, browsers or games.
I restrict my use of Facebook to keeping track of Family and certain Friends ... it’s what they use ... I simply don’t engage in any extraneous stuff.
I have a Twitter account I used for a couple days a few years ago.
I do use YouTube but I accept the limitations it has ...

The thing is, you NEVER “had” to use ANY of them but, I bet you do ... and probably all of them.
YOU Choose to use them. YOU Choose to cast Your “Vote” for them.
Yet here You are complaining that THEY should be “regulated” because they seem like a “Monopoly” which, in fact, they are NOT.
YOU can change your Search Engines ... there are several that are better and don’t track you and are free. (Startpage.com)
YOU can change your Browser ... there are several that are better and ... (Mozilla’s Firefox)
YOU can change your E-Mailer reader ... (Mozilla’s Thunderbird)
YOU can change your System from Windows to a Linux version
Then there are several Portals that allow you to log onto the InterNet completely anonymously and work through their portals.

Will YOU Change? Probably NOT. Those other things are more “convenient” ... are better “populated”.
Does that make YOU “bad”? Of course NOT.
However, YOU are standing (or sitting) Right Now in a Virtual Polling Booth deciding Who and What to “Vote” for, and you don’t “Like” the Big Names on the Screen (those damn do-Nothing politicians) and there’s LOTS of other Choices that YOU Don’t Choose.

Choices are funny things ... IF You make a “choice” or “choose” NOT to make a “choice” or simply “choose” one over another ... NO MATTER You have STILL made a “choice” ... even if Your “choice” is to allow OTHERS to “choose” for you.

Oh ... the Second Question ...
Is it the Companies that are deciding these things or, is it their employees? Some Uber Liberal Employee sitting at a keyboard watching actual feed and turning certain ones off or is it some Uber Liberal person sitting at a keyboard creating an algorithm they “like” ... writing code that they “like” ... loading the “I” into the “AI” that has the same result.

In “AI” like computers and programs in general ... GIGO ... Garbage In Garbage Out ...

Do you honestly believe that there is some Super Corporate Wonk overlooking thousands ... millions ...of lines of Code to see what is in there?

0

Video no longer available?????????

Jurecki Level 7 June 25, 2019
0

Haven't watched the video (I don't trust O'Keefe but do support breaking up or nationalizing parts of the big tech companies), but it strikes me that the screenshots could just be a function of people's average search activity. The suggested queries about men strike me as things that conservative men would be concerned about and then search for on Google, perhaps constituting most searches about men. The suggested queries about women, on the other hand, strike me as things that feminists would be concerned about and then search for, likewise constituting most searches about women. Maybe this isn't a conspiracy but rather an algorithm outputting accurate but awkward results.

Yes could be true... As duckduckgo returns slightly similar results. I'll have to test it with more phrases.

1

Dear Admin. Am watching this and following videos and all of a sudden terrible noise and message on our monitor saying “journalism censored on YouTube, check...” did you get the same blockage from watching Project Veritas?

Jurecki Level 7 June 24, 2019

Yep, I'd be interested in the answer to that strangeness.

I don't know what happened in your instance but it appears Google has removed the video. Sigh.

0

Thank you for posting.

Jurecki Level 7 June 24, 2019
2

I feel like a couple of issues jump out at me, and I do not need to rely on whether Project Veritas ' James O'Keefe is trustworthy to verify that their motivations are credible. We can all do the following things, to verify the information directly from Google.

  1. Follow along with the google searches shown as example of how the algorithms respond and operate directly from the video. I did. This is evidence you can verify for yourself from within the google browser itself.

  2. Sometimes it is useful to read written words, rather than rely on the faulty orifices we call ears, to discern truths within spoken works, ihmo - it works for me.

Jen Gennai Head of Responsible Innovation Google, quote;

"Elizabeth Warren even, I love her, but she is also saying you've got to break up Google and that will solve everything,"...interviewer asks her to repeat.... "Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she's very misguided, like, that will not make it better it will make it worse., because now all these smaller companies who don't have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it's like a small company cannot do that. The White House and Congress won't play a role in making things more fair, so people are holding us accountable to fill the gap of what should be done." end quote.

Not sure who died and made them the 5th branch (column) of government, but there you go. Am not making an opinion, (except for the 5th column part), but rather presenting what I think is the unbiased areas of this reporting piece, separate from the whistle blower, or Project Veritas.

1

Ho-hum. More evidence of leftist bias on the part of the big teck companies.

The following is a refreshing departure from groupthink. Robert Reich is left-leaning, but is promoting the break-up of the left-leaning big tech companies.

3

I saw the footage taken, and have seen other whistleblower evidence. What I don't understand is how this is not resulting in law enforcement taking action? If the farce of Russian intervention would have been cause for international action, how is it that domestic interference is not a criminal case?

I know from my own dealings in the UK how there is no route to recourse for anything the cabal hold interest in, and it does make me wonder at what point is awareness just not enough.

2

No surprises there, that's been going on for years now. On a side note, can't say I trust the founder of Project Veritas (can't think of his name at the moment), I know he had lied about a few things in the past.

James O' Keefe, that was his name...

Noted. I'll check with some insiders for extra info about the video. However, the crazy biased Google screenshots I made today.

2

Just another straw on the camel's back.

Sooner rather than later the Preservationists are going to snap and use their 2A Rights against the Deconstructionists. The 1A Rights are rendered impotent in the climate of absurdity.

Those are the only 2 sides that exist now.

Write Comment