4 ms·
It is not (just) about paying. It is about a condition that demands Google reveal their algorithm. This is a common problem with modern legislation, where the a
by imperfectcats 6y ago
It is not (just) about paying. It is about a condition that demands Google reveal their algorithm. This is a common problem with modern legislation, where the awful, disgusting, dirty politics of the things hidden in legislation gets lost behind the "big ticket" dispute.
Here is the part Google objects to from their propaganda piece https://about.google/google-in-australia/an-open-letter/ https://about.google/google-in-australia/an-open-letter/ under "Why does the revised Code not work for Google?":
> 14 days algorithm notification: It requires us to give news publishers special treatment—14 days’ notice of certain algorithms changes and ‘internal practices’. Even if we could comply, that would delay important updates for our users and give special treatment to news publishers in a way that would disadvantage everyone else.
I would argue it is even worse, as a SUBSET of publishers that the Australian government deems worthy qualify. Basically Rupert Murdoch, for my English speaking cousins in other countries, and their only real local competitor.
If this was ONLY about paying, it would be a negotiation. This is a bizarre law that aims to profit the people who are supposed to hold the government of my country accountable, and give a leg up to specific publishers. None of that bodes well for democracy in my country, and this is government getting in bed with specific businesses, the cynic in me believes to win the government more favourable reporting.
- A12-B 6y agoI believe google should reveal their algorithm.
- londons_explore 6y agoThe algorithm used to be very complex and a big trade secret. Now it's just a bunch of big neural networks, and while still secret, doesn't look very different to Bings. The difference is Google has much more data to train theirs, so the results are better.
- coldcode 6y agoIt was an algorithm originally. Today it's a bunch of big neural networks as you say, which are basically impossible to document, much less explain changes in, or even know if anything changed.
- mrweasel 6y agoThat is much more terrifying that Google may not fully understand their search results, compared to not wanting to reveal their search algorithm.
- username90 6y agoWhen you have hundreds of engineers putting together models to create the result page there will be nobody who understands the entire thing.
- mrweasel 6y agoTrue, but imagine going to Ford and asking: How does your cars work? If they came back with: “Frankly we’re not entirely sure, we just jigglede the handles in the factory until they came out like we wanted them to.” Then they’d not be allowed on to sell any cars anymore.
- qwerpoi 6y agoYou mean kinda like how no one truly understands aerodynamic lift, but we are still able to create great airplanes because we have accurate models and do loads of testing?
- username90 6y ago> Now it's just a bunch of big neural networks This isn't true. Neural networks doesn't have state of the art performance in many areas, there is no way they would use them for everything.