6 ms·

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 do

by 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?
      - that_guy_iain 5y ago
        > 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. I disagree. Google allows you to take ownership of a knowledge panel and take control of the knowledge panel. > 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. No, I am saying OP decided to take a risk. A calculated risk and now OP is letting others feel the negative consequences of OP's calculated risk. Even tho it seems there are multiple options available to OP to stop others feeling the negative consequences of their actions. Actions have consequences. OP took an action. This action has consequences. And now people are telling all Google employees to feel bad because a search engine behaves the way search engines do. The guess what is the info we want to see. Let's stop worrying about OP and worry about the people who did nothing in this getting bullshit because OP is choosing not to do one of many things that would stop it from happening. You're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem. > What am I missing about the tools provided to undo Google's knowledge panel decision? The claim knowledge panel functionality that has been mentioned in this thread. The legal take downs instead of just reporting misinformation.
        5y ago
- inetknght 5y ago
  > Small correction the person who was pictured who lost their job lost it for sending threats to OP. They deserve the blame. You and Google are not (and should not be) judge, jury, or executioner. Your comment here suggests you want to be.
  - anchpop 5y ago
    That’s ridiculous. You don’t need to believe yourself “judge jury and executioner” to say that someone who sends (death?) threats to innocent rape victims is responsible for the consequences. If you feel otherwise, fine, but if you can’t blame them for lack of being judge jury and executioner then you certainly can’t blame Google either
    - inetknght 5y ago
      Someone who sends threats to anyone should be reported to law enforcement. Not doing so is reprehensible and encourages the anti-social behavior.

by Zvez 5y ago

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?
    - that_guy_iain 5y ago
      > 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. I disagree. Google allows you to take ownership of a knowledge panel and take control of the knowledge panel. > 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. No, I am saying OP decided to take a risk. A calculated risk and now OP is letting others feel the negative consequences of OP's calculated risk. Even tho it seems there are multiple options available to OP to stop others feeling the negative consequences of their actions. Actions have consequences. OP took an action. This action has consequences. And now people are telling all Google employees to feel bad because a search engine behaves the way search engines do. The guess what is the info we want to see. Let's stop worrying about OP and worry about the people who did nothing in this getting bullshit because OP is choosing not to do one of many things that would stop it from happening. You're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem. > What am I missing about the tools provided to undo Google's knowledge panel decision? The claim knowledge panel functionality that has been mentioned in this thread. The legal take downs instead of just reporting misinformation.
      - 5y ago
inetknght 5y ago
> Small correction the person who was pictured who lost their job lost it for sending threats to OP. They deserve the blame. You and Google are not (and should not be) judge, jury, or executioner. Your comment here suggests you want to be.
- anchpop 5y ago
  That’s ridiculous. You don’t need to believe yourself “judge jury and executioner” to say that someone who sends (death?) threats to innocent rape victims is responsible for the consequences. If you feel otherwise, fine, but if you can’t blame them for lack of being judge jury and executioner then you certainly can’t blame Google either
  - inetknght 5y ago
    Someone who sends threats to anyone should be reported to law enforcement. Not doing so is reprehensible and encourages the anti-social behavior.