slurpy wrote: »
That asswipe Dan Lyons is still getting his shit published? How? After years of writing hit pieces against Apple and bashing everything they do, he basically came out and said he just did it for the clicks, he didn't believe most of what he wrote, and it was horse-shit. And he's still allowed to write? Incredible. Even though he admitted he's a lying, trolling piece of shit, he still amassed an army of Apple-hating followers.
Corrections wrote: »
You can believe what you like after evaluating the article and Lyons' response.
Note that while he denies a lot, the fact remains that his article was fluff, was written years after the FTC revealed much of its investigation (if not the latest, and most detailed issues) and did in fact push down all relevant, real news on the subject with lightweight garbage, full of inconsistencies and downright lies.
If you'd prefer to believe what you want, then great news: Google is customizing your news feed to pipe you exactly what you want to see, confirming your world view. And also providing lots of notoriety for not just Dan Lyons, but also Russia Today and other extremist propaganda sources, blending the line between fact and horseshit, not to mention advertising.
Dan Lyons didn't address any of the actual content of the article, or any of his shilling of Google Glass (which he made a very prominent part of his fluff piece) or his disparaging of Apple Watch (which he still hasn't even used. Apple doesn't invite him to events). So I guess we'll have to wait and see whether he's as wrong about that as he was about Linux (which he railed against in the service of SCO), about iPods, iPhones and the iPad he hated so much, not to mention his contempt for Steve Jobs, whose health issues Lyons gloated about in concerned tones right up until Steve died.
Let it be known that "Lord Amhran" finds Dan Lyons credible. Anyone else want to sign up on the Lyons Fan List? Gadorguy?
Final note: Lyons claimed "Levy made a stink and claimed I was lying. I produced the email that Levy had sent to the business editor of Newsweek and gave it to Howard Kurtz at CNN."
That's not the story Howard Kurtz at CNN reported: "Daniel Lyons apologizes for Apple interference claim"
Lyons has an appropriate last name.
Dan Lyons has been caught lying so many times that he has no credibility. Nothing he says is worth listening to.
Why is AI publishing his response here? **** him. Make him publish it on his own site.
What is AI afraid of?
Maybe they are afraid of posting flat out lies themselves?
kiltedgreen wrote: »
"How the CIA made Google". A LONG, two part in-depth report. Fascinating:
This is strong stuff:
The content of Dilger's editorial borders on actionable libel in some respects (I am not a lawyer). The owners of the site should be more cautious about posting editorials that could get them and Dilger sued, IMO. However, I do not own this site and cannot do anything other than shake my head.
Occasionally I find Dilger's commentary amusing, but there is a line between humor and rancor that has definitely been crossed. I find these acid-filled diatribes also strangely at odds with the mild-mannered person who appears in the AI podcasts. The DED in the podcasts is courteous and more witty.
Equally important, the core of this piece (the information regarding the FTC investigation) is completely buried under all of the personal attacks against Lyons, which is just shoddy writing.
On the contrary...while Daniel's piece is full of opinion, it still enlightens many who should be concerned with this topic and with Lyons. There aren't any facts to discredit Daniel's assertions. We should be critical of both sides and rightfully so.
If anything, you as a truth-seeker should encourage AI to author more of these contentious issues.
I think if additional pieces are published here that could result in financial harm or "distress" to Lyons, the odds that a lawsuit follows greatly increase. Lyons hit back pretty hard and I honestly wouldn't be surprised if AI got a letter from his lawyer.
If the simple facts were conveyed without all of the personal opinion by DED, it would be a far better piece of work.
This is not rocket science. This is how Google News works. That's why I said earlier that the whole premise about Google "burying" negative news is completely wrong.
I'm not disagreeing with whatever algorithm your are trying to explain...but realize this:
The general population has no idea what the algorithm is or how it works...so it IS ROCKET SCIENCE!
Therein lies the next big issue of the civilized world...control of the media.
Media controls knowledge/truth. Knowledge is power.
If the media is allowed to be controlled by any one ideology then there will be a dangerous imbalance of power.
People are becoming concerned with Google's algorithm, using it as media to sell more advertising, sway our buying habits or innocently attempting to personalize what our computer displays.
Don't try to suggest that you know exactly how the algorithm works. And don't pretend that Google can't just as easily tweak/revise the algorithm (or per Art.Intel). Basically NOBODY knows exactly how it is working at this very instance.
This is not a conspiracy theory, this is a valid concern.
Sure, we can use Yahoo! or Bing. But having any one company so dominating as Google in the search/ad is probably not good for anyone.
It's not rocket science... it's computer science!
I couldn't disagree more.
Daniel's writing in the tech world far surpasses anyone else for sheer enjoyment coupled with a rigorous appraisal of data, to a level of detail that no-one else bothers to do. What's more, the target of his wrath, Google, could not be more apt. I am quite sure that Steve Jobs would be cheering him on.
Google are truly a despicable company. 'Twas not always so, which makes it especially sad. If only power hadn't corrupted them soon after the iPhone arrived. The lust for dominance which drove them to undermine the iPhone will be their undoing. Over the past eight years, it is Daniel Eran who has done more than anyone to call them out for their misdeeds. We are lucky to be blessed with his writing here at Apple Insider.
I use Google News all the time, and I consistently see all the latest anti-Google stories mixed in with the tech, business, and some custom sections I have created. I have been unable to detect any bias.
singularity wrote: »
Breakout the tinfoil hats
Why does Mr. Lyons bring up homophobia and anti-Semitism ? Is he inferring, from association, that DED has precipitated either homophobic or anti-Semitic comments ?
There is absolutely no evidence of any such slander or even vague suggestion of such an intention in DED’s writing, so why is Lyons mentioning this in his rebuttal ? It sounds a lot like ‘boo-hoo, now everyone hates me’ - not, I hasten to add, that one’s sexual orientation or race/religion should ever be subject to abuse in any debate.
If he wants to accuse DED of these slanders he should do so, not try and paint him guilty by vague association. If a journalist criticises my writing, and some commentator subsequently calls me an ass*ole, does that say something about the journalist or the commentator ?
I agree with toning it down.
Don't agree with the sentiment. You don't speak for me.
Lyons is no hack. His rebuttal letter sounds legit to me. He works for 'real news' organizations.
DED rides a train around China and thinks he's Phineas Fogg.
Plus, Fake Steve Jobs was hilarious until Real Steve Jobs died.