4 ms·

The entire premise here is ridiculous. It "interferes" and "changes your results" to "shape what you see." It's like me asking you a question and you "interferi

The entire premise here is ridiculous. It "interferes" and "changes your results" to "shape what you see." It's like me asking you a question and you "interfering with your vocal cords and changing your response to shape what I hear."

goatinaboat 7y ago
It's like me asking you a question and you "interfering with your vocal cords and changing your response to shape what I hear." No, that is analogous to Google setting a font and colour theme you like, which they don’t do, btw.
robbrown451 7y ago
This was my impression too, although they could have adjusted the wording to say "manually" or "directly" or something to indicate it isn't purely algorithmic. Of course algorithms can have bias too, but still.
pochamago 7y ago
People feel like algorithms are neutral and people are biased. Having people actively intervene on something that only algorithms would have touched otherwise feels bad if you already suspected that your results aren't what they should be
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
  Yeah, people who don't have practical experience with them seem to think of algos as a kind of designed policy, like laws. Exceptions to the laws seem to be hypocrisy. In reality, algos are just a way to scale and automate some goal. Exceptions compensate for imperfection execution of that goal.
shanty 7y ago
Not exactly. There is an implicit expectation of truth when searching on Google, sort of like an encyclopedia. The interference happens when the results do not match reality. Try these yourself to see how this can change public opinion: Google: "is abortion good or bad" returns almost entirely pro-aborion results. Do the same on Bing and you get actual results such as "Is abortion a good or bad thing?" Further reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_manipulation_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_manipulation_eff...

goatinaboat 7y ago

It's like me asking you a question and you "interfering with your vocal cords and changing your response to shape what I hear." No, that is analogous to Google setting a font and colour theme you like, which they don’t do, btw.

robbrown451 7y ago

This was my impression too, although they could have adjusted the wording to say "manually" or "directly" or something to indicate it isn't purely algorithmic. Of course algorithms can have bias too, but still.

pochamago 7y ago

People feel like algorithms are neutral and people are biased. Having people actively intervene on something that only algorithms would have touched otherwise feels bad if you already suspected that your results aren't what they should be

6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
Yeah, people who don't have practical experience with them seem to think of algos as a kind of designed policy, like laws. Exceptions to the laws seem to be hypocrisy. In reality, algos are just a way to scale and automate some goal. Exceptions compensate for imperfection execution of that goal.

shanty 7y ago

Not exactly. There is an implicit expectation of truth when searching on Google, sort of like an encyclopedia. The interference happens when the results do not match reality. Try these yourself to see how this can change public opinion: Google: "is abortion good or bad" returns almost entirely pro-aborion results. Do the same on Bing and you get actual results such as "Is abortion a good or bad thing?" Further reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_manipulation_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_manipulation_eff...