4 ms·

> Even one person's life inconvenienced is one too many. People working at Google: where is your conscience? If one of your family member was affected like this

> Even one person's life inconvenienced is one too many. People working at Google: where is your conscience? If one of your family member was affected like this by a service provider who you have no control over, how would you feel? This is an over-reaction. Someone being inconvienced is something you think should affect people's conscience? And it seems like OP could take control here and do something. They allow people to claim a knowledge panel however OP seems to only ask for things to be changed in a knowledge panel. It seems to me they provide the tools for OP to solve the issue but OP refuses to do so. I also wonder if OP choose to flag a problem or issue a legal removal request. I doubt very much that you sit there and feel shame and contemplate how you have inconvienced others and even when you've done so in a more purposeful way.

Zvez 5y ago
but what if you don't want to be identified? Because to claim panel you most probably have to provide some evidence it is you. on the other hand, what if you don't know/don't care about some google panel about you. But other people get harmed by it? If someone really lost their job just because his photo was attached. Who should be blamed and how this person should fix this if there is no tools to remove panel? So I don't see this as overreaction. If you make something that can do mistakes that can cost someone their job or harm significantly, you should provide some ways it can be fixed fast. And not via months of talking with a wall.
- that_guy_iain 5y ago
  > If someone really lost their job just because his photo was attached. Who should be blamed and how this person should fix this if there is no tools to remove panel? So I don't see this as overreaction. If you make something that can do mistakes that can cost someone their job or harm significantly, you should provide some ways it can be fixed fast. And not via months of talking with a wall. Small correction the person who was pictured who lost their job lost it for sending threats to OP. They deserve the blame. And since your entire point is based on someone losing their job over the knowledge panel then it seems like your point is moot?
  - HeJAnQuer 5y ago
    there is a woman getting threats and harassment, (a woman that has absolutely nothing to do with the book/panel mind you) because of the knowledge panel not working as intended, and that is fine in your eyes because the op can post a photo of herself?(when she clearly said she doesn't want it online) are you intentionally being a devil's advocate?
    - that_guy_iain 5y ago
      * OP choose to write and publish a book. * It's subject matter makes it very clear there would be angry people. * OP choose to publish this under a name that is linked to lots of other people. Instead of a nonsense name linked to no one. * OP chooses not to claim the knowledge panel for her book. There are lots of things OP chose to do. The harm being done is partially at the hands of OP. OP isn't entirely blameless here and other people are getting threats and harassment because of OP and Google, but mostly because of OP. I get that it's a hard subject but if you're going to go write about a cult either do it completely anonymously or do it publically. This middle ground stuff OP is trying is clearly causing harm to other people.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - corpdronejuly 5y ago
        The OP choose to write and publish a book, about controversial material under their own name. That was a series of choice clearly made to manage risk while taking a stand against a cult. Google choose to associate write an algorithm to associate names and faces with zero verification. Then google choose to not provide any substantial way to appeal the algorithms ruling. You're trying to equate a reasonable choice to proactively manage risk with an automated system that has decided to not allow people to manage that risk. That seems unreasonable on it's face. What am I missing about the tools provided to undo Google's knowledge panel decision?
        5y ago
hnthrowaway2 5y ago
Yes of course. If the actions of a collective group are causing harm to others, I expect members of the collective to feel responsible. This is how we build a caring society. If my actions have caused pain and suffering to others, whether deliberate or not, it does distress me until I have alleviated that somehow. If I do not have a way to alleviate their pain, the guilt of having inconvenienced them stays with me for a long time. That is how I stop myself from doing such things again in the future. Do you not care?
- tartoran 5y ago
  If Google employees, blinded by their big compensation cannot understand how this can go bad and how nearly impossible it is to navigate the cracks these algorithm are leaving behind then I agree, the google collective they're part of is causing a lot of harm and they should feel responsible.
CRConrad 5y ago
> Someone being inconvienced is something you think should affect people's conscience? "Inconvienced"? "Inconvienced"?!? People have been threatened, physically attacked, and sometimes even killed for books they've written. OP seems to be claiming to have written a fairly controversial book, which so far has generated at least threats. And now Google is associating that book with other people, because their fucking algorithm has more of a hard-on to get a picture, any picture, onto their "knowledge" card than to get shit right. People could DIE here... And you come blithering about "inconvienced". Are you for fucking real?

Zvez 5y ago

but what if you don't want to be identified? Because to claim panel you most probably have to provide some evidence it is you. on the other hand, what if you don't know/don't care about some google panel about you. But other people get harmed by it? If someone really lost their job just because his photo was attached. Who should be blamed and how this person should fix this if there is no tools to remove panel? So I don't see this as overreaction. If you make something that can do mistakes that can cost someone their job or harm significantly, you should provide some ways it can be fixed fast. And not via months of talking with a wall.

that_guy_iain 5y ago
> If someone really lost their job just because his photo was attached. Who should be blamed and how this person should fix this if there is no tools to remove panel? So I don't see this as overreaction. If you make something that can do mistakes that can cost someone their job or harm significantly, you should provide some ways it can be fixed fast. And not via months of talking with a wall. Small correction the person who was pictured who lost their job lost it for sending threats to OP. They deserve the blame. And since your entire point is based on someone losing their job over the knowledge panel then it seems like your point is moot?
- HeJAnQuer 5y ago
  there is a woman getting threats and harassment, (a woman that has absolutely nothing to do with the book/panel mind you) because of the knowledge panel not working as intended, and that is fine in your eyes because the op can post a photo of herself?(when she clearly said she doesn't want it online) are you intentionally being a devil's advocate?
  - that_guy_iain 5y ago
    * OP choose to write and publish a book. * It's subject matter makes it very clear there would be angry people. * OP choose to publish this under a name that is linked to lots of other people. Instead of a nonsense name linked to no one. * OP chooses not to claim the knowledge panel for her book. There are lots of things OP chose to do. The harm being done is partially at the hands of OP. OP isn't entirely blameless here and other people are getting threats and harassment because of OP and Google, but mostly because of OP. I get that it's a hard subject but if you're going to go write about a cult either do it completely anonymously or do it publically. This middle ground stuff OP is trying is clearly causing harm to other people.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - corpdronejuly 5y ago
      The OP choose to write and publish a book, about controversial material under their own name. That was a series of choice clearly made to manage risk while taking a stand against a cult. Google choose to associate write an algorithm to associate names and faces with zero verification. Then google choose to not provide any substantial way to appeal the algorithms ruling. You're trying to equate a reasonable choice to proactively manage risk with an automated system that has decided to not allow people to manage that risk. That seems unreasonable on it's face. What am I missing about the tools provided to undo Google's knowledge panel decision?
      - 5y ago

hnthrowaway2 5y ago

Yes of course. If the actions of a collective group are causing harm to others, I expect members of the collective to feel responsible. This is how we build a caring society. If my actions have caused pain and suffering to others, whether deliberate or not, it does distress me until I have alleviated that somehow. If I do not have a way to alleviate their pain, the guilt of having inconvenienced them stays with me for a long time. That is how I stop myself from doing such things again in the future. Do you not care?

tartoran 5y ago
If Google employees, blinded by their big compensation cannot understand how this can go bad and how nearly impossible it is to navigate the cracks these algorithm are leaving behind then I agree, the google collective they're part of is causing a lot of harm and they should feel responsible.

CRConrad 5y ago

> Someone being inconvienced is something you think should affect people's conscience? "Inconvienced"? "Inconvienced"?!? People have been threatened, physically attacked, and sometimes even killed for books they've written. OP seems to be claiming to have written a fairly controversial book, which so far has generated at least threats. And now Google is associating that book with other people, because their fucking algorithm has more of a hard-on to get a picture, any picture, onto their "knowledge" card than to get shit right. People could DIE here... And you come blithering about "inconvienced". Are you for fucking real?