3 ms·
People seem to think that search is meant to be unbiased, thus any bias added after the fact is not just bad but is malicious just by being there. But... even
by dismantlethesun 10y ago
People seem to think that search is meant to be unbiased, thus any bias added after the fact is not just bad but is malicious just by being there.
But... even if the worst is true, and Google treats its search results like its own personal pulpit, is that so bad? Should Google be required to advertise for all its competitors in every field, just because they happen to have a website?
Google's algorithm is secret; there's nothing to imply that its results are anything except editorials.
- lossolo 10y ago> But... even if the worst is true, and Google treats its search results like its own personal pulpit, is that so bad? Yes. http://fortune.com/2016/10/24/google-antitrust-eu/ http://fortune.com/2016/10/24/google-antitrust-eu/ http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/19/google-could-face-3-separate-antitrust-cases-eu-competition-chief.html http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/19/google-could-face-3-separate-...
- dismantlethesun 10y agoWell, I guess that answers the question of if its bad for Google's bottom line once caught, but I was questioning if it was immoral in general. Plenty of things are unpopular, or illegal, or annoying but not necessarily immoral.
- mankash666 10y agoAnti monopoly laws name it illegal for Google to hide it's competitors deliberately. No one on this thread believes it's not immoral for Google to be doing this