4 ms·

> once they decided to get into the game of determining what is and what is not the truth is where they step over the line. Why shouldn't they? If I search for

> once they decided to get into the game of determining what is and what is not the truth is where they step over the line. Why shouldn't they? If I search for information about the Earth, I don't want to see a bunch of flat Earth crap. If I search for information on vaccines, I don't want to have to sift through anti-vax results, no matter how popular they are. People use Google because they think the results are good. Google's bet is that one reason people for this is that they surface true information. Therefore, they penalize information they assess likely to be false. If users disagree with Google's assessment — i.e. it buries valuable information or surfaces worthless information — they'll use another search engine.

camillomiller 7y ago
They shouldn’t because they are a private company that reached public utility level, and public utilities should be neutral
- calciphus 7y ago
  How do you think Google should order search results?
  - spookthesunset 7y ago
    You'll never get an answer to this question from people who question google's ordering. Google has to order the content somehow. I don't think people bitching about their changes realize it is always a trade off. Some people win and some people loose.
- iron0013 7y ago
  They are in no way equivalent to a public utility. This and the obsessive focus on whether google/youtube/facebook are a "publisher or a platform" are the most laughably bad-faithed and incoherent talking points I've seen in a while.
  - root_axis 7y ago
    The publisher/platform thing is also a false dilemma that keeps getting repeated even though it has no basis in the reality of the law. U.S.C 230 explicitly states: > No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. The same law also states: > any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected So this idea that these platforms are de-facto publishers because they decided to curate their platform is explicitly incorrect as stated by the law.
welly 7y ago
While I agree with you, the results you seek are still subjective results. As a flat earther (I'm not a flat earther), the emphasis I wuold be looking for would be on returning results proving the earth is flat when I search for information about the Earth. I'm not sure Google can win this one.

camillomiller 7y ago

They shouldn’t because they are a private company that reached public utility level, and public utilities should be neutral

calciphus 7y ago
How do you think Google should order search results?
- spookthesunset 7y ago
  You'll never get an answer to this question from people who question google's ordering. Google has to order the content somehow. I don't think people bitching about their changes realize it is always a trade off. Some people win and some people loose.
iron0013 7y ago
They are in no way equivalent to a public utility. This and the obsessive focus on whether google/youtube/facebook are a "publisher or a platform" are the most laughably bad-faithed and incoherent talking points I've seen in a while.
- root_axis 7y ago
  The publisher/platform thing is also a false dilemma that keeps getting repeated even though it has no basis in the reality of the law. U.S.C 230 explicitly states: > No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. The same law also states: > any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected So this idea that these platforms are de-facto publishers because they decided to curate their platform is explicitly incorrect as stated by the law.

welly 7y ago

While I agree with you, the results you seek are still subjective results. As a flat earther (I'm not a flat earther), the emphasis I wuold be looking for would be on returning results proving the earth is flat when I search for information about the Earth. I'm not sure Google can win this one.