5 ms·

It would be very interesting to prove this, but their argument is mostly circumstantial so far.

by dibujante 9y ago

thisrod 9y ago
The fact that Google is refusing to deny it is, in my view, pretty strong circumstantial evidence.
- yeahsureokay 9y ago
  ??? I'd be shocked if anyone who could comment was even were aware of the claim (until it hit the HN front page).
- skj 9y ago
  That is... a really silly position to take. (I work for Google but on nothing remotely related)
- dibujante 9y ago
  Not necessarily. Google may not comment on these things as a matter of policy; for example, let's say that Google is required by some law to censor a particular search result. If they are in the habit of announcing their censorship decisions, then their silence on that one site would be non-silence. They would have to lie about the site instead. So, from a company liability perspective, Google is cautious about revealing information.
  - thisrod 9y ago
    That's true. But this isn't about Google releasing a whole class of information by policy. It's about them responding, or not, to a specific question of the form, "We run a legitimate website on the topic that the American government has censored more often, and more harshly, than any other topic. Could you please confirm that our recent drop in search rankings is not the result of deliberate action by Google employees?"
oh_sigh 9y ago
Even if Googlers had no sense of right and wrong, just knowing the number of socialists or socialist-leaning googlers there are, there is no way this would ever fly. It's not like anyone has super special access to modify the search engine algorithm and rankings individually. All changes go through probably dozens of people at least. One of them would presumably raise the issue internally(or leak to press) if something so nefarious was happening.
- WaxProlix 9y ago
  How many socialist googlers do you think there are? I imagine the number is really, really small. I have plenty of friends who work at google and a disproportionate number of socialist friends, and neither group would be able to tolerate each other at a party. Not saying that none exist, but it's way outside of my experience if it's the case.

It would be very interesting to prove this, but their argument is mostly circumstantial so far.

thisrod 9y ago

The fact that Google is refusing to deny it is, in my view, pretty strong circumstantial evidence.

yeahsureokay 9y ago
??? I'd be shocked if anyone who could comment was even were aware of the claim (until it hit the HN front page).
skj 9y ago
That is... a really silly position to take. (I work for Google but on nothing remotely related)
dibujante 9y ago
Not necessarily. Google may not comment on these things as a matter of policy; for example, let's say that Google is required by some law to censor a particular search result. If they are in the habit of announcing their censorship decisions, then their silence on that one site would be non-silence. They would have to lie about the site instead. So, from a company liability perspective, Google is cautious about revealing information.
- thisrod 9y ago
  That's true. But this isn't about Google releasing a whole class of information by policy. It's about them responding, or not, to a specific question of the form, "We run a legitimate website on the topic that the American government has censored more often, and more harshly, than any other topic. Could you please confirm that our recent drop in search rankings is not the result of deliberate action by Google employees?"

oh_sigh 9y ago

Even if Googlers had no sense of right and wrong, just knowing the number of socialists or socialist-leaning googlers there are, there is no way this would ever fly. It's not like anyone has super special access to modify the search engine algorithm and rankings individually. All changes go through probably dozens of people at least. One of them would presumably raise the issue internally(or leak to press) if something so nefarious was happening.

WaxProlix 9y ago
How many socialist googlers do you think there are? I imagine the number is really, really small. I have plenty of friends who work at google and a disproportionate number of socialist friends, and neither group would be able to tolerate each other at a party. Not saying that none exist, but it's way outside of my experience if it's the case.