3 ms·

I am not trying to defend Google or its practices. But how is the activity of CNW researchers different from what is Google doing? Unless the author elaborates

I am not trying to defend Google or its practices. But how is the activity of CNW researchers different from what is Google doing? Unless the author elaborates on their method, "Educated guess" sounds like scrapping content without sourcing the author in the first place.

mrtksn 6y ago
AFAIK there's no other database that they scrapped from. Reading sources like news articles, documents etc. is very different from copying the database that someone else created. It's like the difference of tapping Yelp's API and create a competing service and looking at Yelp, Google, Squirespace etc. to create a restorant recommendations website.
- dimsumsumdim 6y ago
  Humans can also scrap. If CNW employs researchers, they must be using sources. These sources are not referenced in their content. Either CNW is merely making up the net worth figures, or their researchers are pulling data from somewhere to provide information about 25,000+ celebrities. If the second is valid, they aren't that different from what Google is doing.
  - mrtksn 6y ago
    I answered your question about how CNW researchers are different. Using sources to create a knowledge base for something is very different than hooking up to a knowledge base that was already curated and displaying it as your own without compensating the people who curated it. Yes, sure. It would be nice of them to disclose their own sources too but I fail to see how this is related to Google straight out copying their curated database and showing it to its own users. Like, why are we discussing it? What is the agenda here? Are we trying to conclude that CNW owners are also not that nice? Are you claiming that CNW copied your own research and demand justice too? If you explain what is your point here, maybe we can have a productive discussion instead of repeating the same stuff.
sidibe 6y ago
Understable not to include the sources after that email exchange because if they source the articles on their site Google could just cite those articles. What isnt clear to me is where the fake ones were attributed to in the info box. For the real celebrities it seems like they're mostly from Wikipedia which cites articles (who maybe look it up from CNW?)

mrtksn 6y ago

AFAIK there's no other database that they scrapped from. Reading sources like news articles, documents etc. is very different from copying the database that someone else created. It's like the difference of tapping Yelp's API and create a competing service and looking at Yelp, Google, Squirespace etc. to create a restorant recommendations website.

dimsumsumdim 6y ago
Humans can also scrap. If CNW employs researchers, they must be using sources. These sources are not referenced in their content. Either CNW is merely making up the net worth figures, or their researchers are pulling data from somewhere to provide information about 25,000+ celebrities. If the second is valid, they aren't that different from what Google is doing.
- mrtksn 6y ago
  I answered your question about how CNW researchers are different. Using sources to create a knowledge base for something is very different than hooking up to a knowledge base that was already curated and displaying it as your own without compensating the people who curated it. Yes, sure. It would be nice of them to disclose their own sources too but I fail to see how this is related to Google straight out copying their curated database and showing it to its own users. Like, why are we discussing it? What is the agenda here? Are we trying to conclude that CNW owners are also not that nice? Are you claiming that CNW copied your own research and demand justice too? If you explain what is your point here, maybe we can have a productive discussion instead of repeating the same stuff.

sidibe 6y ago

Understable not to include the sources after that email exchange because if they source the articles on their site Google could just cite those articles. What isnt clear to me is where the fake ones were attributed to in the info box. For the real celebrities it seems like they're mostly from Wikipedia which cites articles (who maybe look it up from CNW?)