4 ms·

> common courtesy Common courtesy should not be encoded into law. If you type the current year into your calculator, and then hit subtract, and then you type

> common courtesy Common courtesy should not be encoded into law. If you type the current year into your calculator, and then hit subtract, and then you type the year I was born in to your calculator, it shows you how old I am. But that's protected information! You could use that to discriminate against me! Texas Instruments, must modify their SUBTRACTION ALGORITHM to not show how old I am!!! Google is just a SEARCH ALGORITHM.

gress 12y ago
Google is just a search algorithm in the same way that a gun is just a convenient way to move pieces of lead around.
- VikingCoder 12y ago
  You don't blame a gun for someone getting shot. You shouldn't blame Google for indexing information and displaying it when queried.
  - gress 12y ago
    No - you don't blame the gun. You blame the operator. That is exactly what is happening in this case.
    - VikingCoder 12y ago
      A SITE POSTS INFORMATION. ...Google indexes it... Go after the site that posted the information!!! Posting the information on a web server is the offensive and harmful act. Mechanically creating an index of information on web servers is not.
      - gress 12y ago
        So you were wrong about the gun analogy and are ignoring the point that the operators are responsible for what Google does.
        VikingCoder 12y ago
        The harmful information was shot out of one website, and bounced off of the Google index. Why are you so completely incapable of blaming the person who actually pulled the trigger? The original source of the harmful information?
        gress 12y ago
        I said nothing about not blaming the original sites. Only that Google is responsible for the effects of their service.
        Goronmon 12y ago
        Only that Google is responsible for the effects of their service. To a limit though, right? I mean, you wouldn't expect Google to be sued because someone bombed a location they got directions to via Google Maps. So, why in this case are they any more responsible?
        gress 12y ago
        Certainly there are limits. That's why it is an issue for courts and legislatures to decide what they should be. My argument is simply that it's entirely appropriate for courts to decide based on the social harms and that 'it's just an algorithm' is utterly irrelevant.
        chrismcb 12y ago
        So google shouldn't index public newspapers?
        gress 12y ago
        How does that follow from 'it's up to the courts to decide what is harmful'?
axanoeychron 12y ago
I am not sure what to make of this argument. A number on a calculator is data, not information. Do you want a perfect search algorithm that knows no bounds? Would you be okay with it finding a webcam stream into your home? Or phone or your GPS? Would you be okay with making searching everything you have ever visited online or said to someone? Would you be okay with this search algorithm to allow finding your political allegiances? No? There has to be some limit then. That comes from people and enshrined by the actions of people, constituting common courtesy.
- VikingCoder 12y ago
  A search algorithm can only search what it is allowed to search. If you don't want a search engine to find a webcam stream of your home, then don't allow a search algorithm to index it. Don't put it online in the first place, or if you do restrict access to people with a log-in. > Would you be okay with making searching everything you have ever visited online or said to someone? If I want to allow a search engine to access that information, then yes. GMail does search everything I have GMail'ed to or from people. That's incredibly useful. Chrome History Search does let me search sites I have visited. > Would you be okay with this search algorithm to allow finding your political allegiances? If I post, "I, Viking Coder, am a tea party Conservative," then yes. (I'm not, by the way.) > No? I didn't answer "no" to any of your questions. > There has to be some limit then. Yes, people need to limit what information they, themselves, SHARE. And if someone else shares something ABOUT YOU with everyone else on the internet, then you should be mad at them. The fact that the search engine is a magnifying glass / microscope / index tool that allows you to search the data on the internet doesn't give me any right to be mad at that tool.
  - axanoeychron 12y ago
    The article and discussion is not about what you yourself put online, it is what others put online about you which is then indexed. The cost of removing from an index is insignificant compared to the personal cost to the person.

gress 12y ago

Google is just a search algorithm in the same way that a gun is just a convenient way to move pieces of lead around.

VikingCoder 12y ago
You don't blame a gun for someone getting shot. You shouldn't blame Google for indexing information and displaying it when queried.
- gress 12y ago
  No - you don't blame the gun. You blame the operator. That is exactly what is happening in this case.
  - VikingCoder 12y ago
    A SITE POSTS INFORMATION. ...Google indexes it... Go after the site that posted the information!!! Posting the information on a web server is the offensive and harmful act. Mechanically creating an index of information on web servers is not.
    - gress 12y ago
      So you were wrong about the gun analogy and are ignoring the point that the operators are responsible for what Google does.
      - VikingCoder 12y ago
        The harmful information was shot out of one website, and bounced off of the Google index. Why are you so completely incapable of blaming the person who actually pulled the trigger? The original source of the harmful information?
        gress 12y ago
        I said nothing about not blaming the original sites. Only that Google is responsible for the effects of their service.
        Goronmon 12y ago
        Only that Google is responsible for the effects of their service. To a limit though, right? I mean, you wouldn't expect Google to be sued because someone bombed a location they got directions to via Google Maps. So, why in this case are they any more responsible?
        gress 12y ago
        Certainly there are limits. That's why it is an issue for courts and legislatures to decide what they should be. My argument is simply that it's entirely appropriate for courts to decide based on the social harms and that 'it's just an algorithm' is utterly irrelevant.
        chrismcb 12y ago
        So google shouldn't index public newspapers?
        gress 12y ago
        How does that follow from 'it's up to the courts to decide what is harmful'?

axanoeychron 12y ago

I am not sure what to make of this argument. A number on a calculator is data, not information. Do you want a perfect search algorithm that knows no bounds? Would you be okay with it finding a webcam stream into your home? Or phone or your GPS? Would you be okay with making searching everything you have ever visited online or said to someone? Would you be okay with this search algorithm to allow finding your political allegiances? No? There has to be some limit then. That comes from people and enshrined by the actions of people, constituting common courtesy.

VikingCoder 12y ago
A search algorithm can only search what it is allowed to search. If you don't want a search engine to find a webcam stream of your home, then don't allow a search algorithm to index it. Don't put it online in the first place, or if you do restrict access to people with a log-in. > Would you be okay with making searching everything you have ever visited online or said to someone? If I want to allow a search engine to access that information, then yes. GMail does search everything I have GMail'ed to or from people. That's incredibly useful. Chrome History Search does let me search sites I have visited. > Would you be okay with this search algorithm to allow finding your political allegiances? If I post, "I, Viking Coder, am a tea party Conservative," then yes. (I'm not, by the way.) > No? I didn't answer "no" to any of your questions. > There has to be some limit then. Yes, people need to limit what information they, themselves, SHARE. And if someone else shares something ABOUT YOU with everyone else on the internet, then you should be mad at them. The fact that the search engine is a magnifying glass / microscope / index tool that allows you to search the data on the internet doesn't give me any right to be mad at that tool.
- axanoeychron 12y ago
  The article and discussion is not about what you yourself put online, it is what others put online about you which is then indexed. The cost of removing from an index is insignificant compared to the personal cost to the person.