5 ms·

> As for the rest of your post, you seem to be confusing search autocomplete with double click ads, which shows a gross misunderstanding of what is even being d

> As for the rest of your post, you seem to be confusing search autocomplete with double click ads, which shows a gross misunderstanding of what is even being discussed As for this nugget, if shows a gross misunderstanding of what we're debating: whether Google is biased towards one party. But processing your full response - nitpicking on the exact % of Democrats is a masterful tangent from the crux - that Google is likely not going to censor fairly. And the only reason I can think of for this bike shedding [1] is likely because you know it's true. [1]: https://bit.ly/2XA2wAx https://bit.ly/2XA2wAx

ggggtez 7y ago
It's not really kosher to throw out claims with no basis in fact, and then say it's bike shedding if someone calls you on it. If you want to have an intellectual discussion about serious issues, you shouldn't open with making things up that you think make your options look more authoritative. If we want to have a discussion, we need to start by being intellectually honest. Part of that is not making claims of facts that don't exist. On a very real level, are you saying nonsense. Do you think that a human is reading what you type into Google and saying "haha, time to auto complete this with my liberal bias!!". How exactly do you think this technology works? And why do you think it had anything to do with this announcement about political ads? There is so much illiteracy to unpack in a short space.
- throwGuardian 7y ago
  Ignoring the ad hominem suggestions of illiteracy and stupidity only because you are willing to listen. 1. Google is majority Democratic, at least by a spread of 40% (D:R) if you simply assume the employee pool to mirror Democrat:Republican ratios of the counties Google HQ and branches are located in the bay area. [1]. Further, this is only the lower bound, as Google's employee pool tends to be college educated with postgraduate degrees (M.S, PhD, ...), which leans 63% democratic [2]. Further, Google is legendary for it's recruitment of the activist left, and minorities, with an even greater proclivity towards the Democratic party. So yes - you are bike-shedding when you make a mountain of the 95% claim, because the spread between Democrats and Republicans is large, nay mammoth enough for it to be irrelevant. And I bet you knew all of this, but wanted to engage in trivialities anyways. 2. Google search suggestions show falsehoods on certain terms like "men can " precisely because of manually inserted political bias into training models that the AI is based on. Google has a whole ethics committee whose entire job is precisely this - play "judge" on what AI models are "ethical and fair", manually intervene with oodles of their own corrections & interpretations - never mind the facts behind the issue. Here is the AI ethics committee explaining manual interventions [3], and here [4] is the explanation on why Google search suggestions show what they do, with the AI engineer confirming it 6],despite having ZERO correlation on Google search trends for those terms (tsk tsk manually inserted political bias) . Also note that the contents of this video were the subject of a congressional hearing [5], in which Google confirmed it's veracity, but still maintained political neutrality blaming any appearance of bias on individual employees. 3. "why do you think it had anything to do with this announcement about political ads". It has everything to do with political ads, because Google has been repeatedly caught red-handed in acts of bias against conservatives on YouTube, search results, political ad-spend, ..... (my GGM comment cites some instances). They've confirmed that their news app has an editorial agenda (hint: left leaning), and senior employees have been caught on record stating they'll do whatever it takes to skew the system against a Trump re-election. So yes - in aggregate, Google has a massive leftist basis, and every iota of their business decision making imbibes these biases. My prediction is that they will not censor leftist political ads, but will put any right leaning ads through hell before letting them see light of day. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_locations_by_voter_registration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_locations_by_voter_... [2]: https://www.people-press.org/2018/03/20/1-trends-in-party-affiliation-among-demographic-groups/2_6-10/ https://www.people-press.org/2018/03/20/1-trends-in-party-af... [3]: https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=259 https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=259 [4]: https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=429 https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=429 [5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX6LlEcJ4nw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX6LlEcJ4nw [6]: https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=536 https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=536 PS: The hubris in this statement!! - > "haha, time to auto complete this with my liberal bias!!". How exactly do you think this technology works? And why do you think it had anything to do with this announcement about political ads? There is so much illiteracy to unpack in a short space.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]

ggggtez 7y ago

It's not really kosher to throw out claims with no basis in fact, and then say it's bike shedding if someone calls you on it. If you want to have an intellectual discussion about serious issues, you shouldn't open with making things up that you think make your options look more authoritative. If we want to have a discussion, we need to start by being intellectually honest. Part of that is not making claims of facts that don't exist. On a very real level, are you saying nonsense. Do you think that a human is reading what you type into Google and saying "haha, time to auto complete this with my liberal bias!!". How exactly do you think this technology works? And why do you think it had anything to do with this announcement about political ads? There is so much illiteracy to unpack in a short space.

throwGuardian 7y ago
Ignoring the ad hominem suggestions of illiteracy and stupidity only because you are willing to listen. 1. Google is majority Democratic, at least by a spread of 40% (D:R) if you simply assume the employee pool to mirror Democrat:Republican ratios of the counties Google HQ and branches are located in the bay area. [1]. Further, this is only the lower bound, as Google's employee pool tends to be college educated with postgraduate degrees (M.S, PhD, ...), which leans 63% democratic [2]. Further, Google is legendary for it's recruitment of the activist left, and minorities, with an even greater proclivity towards the Democratic party. So yes - you are bike-shedding when you make a mountain of the 95% claim, because the spread between Democrats and Republicans is large, nay mammoth enough for it to be irrelevant. And I bet you knew all of this, but wanted to engage in trivialities anyways. 2. Google search suggestions show falsehoods on certain terms like "men can " precisely because of manually inserted political bias into training models that the AI is based on. Google has a whole ethics committee whose entire job is precisely this - play "judge" on what AI models are "ethical and fair", manually intervene with oodles of their own corrections & interpretations - never mind the facts behind the issue. Here is the AI ethics committee explaining manual interventions [3], and here [4] is the explanation on why Google search suggestions show what they do, with the AI engineer confirming it 6],despite having ZERO correlation on Google search trends for those terms (tsk tsk manually inserted political bias) . Also note that the contents of this video were the subject of a congressional hearing [5], in which Google confirmed it's veracity, but still maintained political neutrality blaming any appearance of bias on individual employees. 3. "why do you think it had anything to do with this announcement about political ads". It has everything to do with political ads, because Google has been repeatedly caught red-handed in acts of bias against conservatives on YouTube, search results, political ad-spend, ..... (my GGM comment cites some instances). They've confirmed that their news app has an editorial agenda (hint: left leaning), and senior employees have been caught on record stating they'll do whatever it takes to skew the system against a Trump re-election. So yes - in aggregate, Google has a massive leftist basis, and every iota of their business decision making imbibes these biases. My prediction is that they will not censor leftist political ads, but will put any right leaning ads through hell before letting them see light of day. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_locations_by_voter_registration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_locations_by_voter_... [2]: https://www.people-press.org/2018/03/20/1-trends-in-party-affiliation-among-demographic-groups/2_6-10/ https://www.people-press.org/2018/03/20/1-trends-in-party-af... [3]: https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=259 https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=259 [4]: https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=429 https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=429 [5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX6LlEcJ4nw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX6LlEcJ4nw [6]: https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=536 https://youtu.be/csP4z8dR6X0?t=536 PS: The hubris in this statement!! - > "haha, time to auto complete this with my liberal bias!!". How exactly do you think this technology works? And why do you think it had anything to do with this announcement about political ads? There is so much illiteracy to unpack in a short space.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]