Apple correcting Siri "abortion" search issue uncovered in 2011

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 63
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    Pretty sure Apple shouldn't be doing that. Don't take sides Apple. Just let the world figure itself out.

    I really don't stand on either side of the "abortion" issue. Nor should anyone. Taking sides is just ignorant. Obviously aborting a maturing child for convenience is "wrong". Obviously keeping a child that significantly endangers your life is also "wrong". There are no clear cut answers. People that pretend otherwise are stupid.
  • Reply 22 of 63
    metrixmetrix Posts: 256member
    Religion aside many women who have had an abortion feel horrible regret and others feel no regret. Neither is right or wrong since thats how they feel but like any business that wants to make money they don't go out of their way to reveal the downsides someone's choice. Question, Is legal law just a collective religion? Where we are the collective god that determines what is right and what is wrong. 
  • Reply 23 of 63
    I'm just shocked that searching for abortion doesn't include a list of places to buy coat hangers, Subway restaurant locations, or places to see the latest Star Wars movie.

  • Reply 24 of 63
    America is so damned screwed up when it comes to Human Rights' issues. You all know everything dies, yet millions of you; ...defend your "right" to bear arms, ...support Capital Punishment ...go outdoors and kill or maim wildlife on a whim... help cause untold misery in third-world countries where our planets poorest get to live short, wretched lives clawing minerals from their soil in the destructive process of providing you with products you don't really need. So, it's bloody amusing when those of you get so yippity-yuppety about a woman or a man's choice to terminate a pregnancy; grounds for which may be myriad and often in the interests of the zygote. 75% of American's cling to a totally unprovable belief that some god, thought up by Pagan Semites just a few moments ago, equivocally divines how and when all life both begins and ends. Yet, of the incontrovertible fact this same god terminates countless more zygotes than his creations could ever do, you don't question his morality.
    How do you "divine" something?  I think America's screwed up because we're so quick to defend the right to rip babies out of the womb and yet claim to care so much about our children, in spite of a monster divorce rate with single parents taking care of babies...ignoring so many studies that prove the connection between loving households with two parents and success in adult life.  That's why I think America is screwed up.  
    hittrj01
  • Reply 25 of 63
    Mr_Grey said:
    misa said:

    I actually think it was appropriate to "indicate adoption" as an option, but I think the real problem was that one of their data providers had mapped queries for Abortion directly to adoption agencies as a political motivation and Apple likely had to figure out where the bad data was coming from and purge it from Siri's learning. The other possibility is that "Siri learned" Abortion and Adoption were the same thing from that data and that had to be forgotten after the data source was scrubbed for that filtering.

    And if this is happening for one key word, imagine what it's doing for other political terms. What does "Obamacare" bring up?
    How could it ever be appropriate to throw back information on adoption when someone is searching for abortion clinics?   If I search for Catholic Churches should I be presented with information on the nearest Satanic groups?  If I search for burger joints should I be presented with a list of vegetarian restaurants?  Complete nonsense.   

    Also, your idea that it might have been "bad data" flies in the face of the reality of how long this change took. America is so backward about abortion and planned parenthood that there are hundreds and hundreds of times less clinics in a given area in the USA than there are in other more civilised countries.  It wouldn't take years to correct that data.   One person could easily in the space of a couple of days go through a list of all the abortion providers in the USA and correct the map data.  Easily. 

    You are living in a dream world my friend.  Adjusting reality to fit your theories and inclinations.  
    "More civilized countries"

    Um, what? You do realize the entire world has become essentially Americanized, right? Europe is degenerate, not "more civilized". 
  • Reply 26 of 63
    Mr_Grey said:
    The USA is not only on the wrong side of history with these wild religious based claims, they have no facts to support them.  The minute religion gets involved, reason goes out the window.  In that way, the USA is basically the same as ISIS.  
    I don't disagree with much of what you wrote, except for the portion I quoted above.

    Many of the early colonies were formed by groups seeking religious freedom. So tolerance of different religious views became part of the culture. It this environment of freedom and tolerance, people feel safe in speaking their views. This is so antithetical of ISIS where only one narrow interpretation of Islam is possible that your credibility is strained past its breaking point.
  • Reply 27 of 63
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,328member
    apple ][ said:
    Wow, that's great news. My girlfriend and I were looking to rid ourselves of our unborn child, and this will make the whole process easy as pie.

    I would also like to see some advanced search options, so that customers can shop around and find out where they can get the best price for various harvested parts.

    Still going on about the massively discredited "harvested body parts" lie? Nice to know you'll always be full of shit. People like you, with twisted, hateful agendas never let actual facts get in the way. Your life is nice and cozy that way in your own little bubble of bullshit. 
    singularitysumjuaniosenthusiast
  • Reply 28 of 63
    your "right" to bear arms
    So you believe that innocent life is not worth protecting.
    , ...support Capital Punishment
    So you believe that you should be forced to pay for an entire lifetime of luxury for a mass murderer.
     ...go outdoors and kill or maim wildlife on a whim... 
    So you believe that animals are people.
    help cause untold misery in third-world countries
    El oh el.
    a man's choice
    A man has no choice.
    Yet, of the incontrovertible fact this same god terminates
    So you believe in God and yet don’t believe in God? 

    Mr_Grey said:
    …the wrong side of history…
    Use of this phrase is proof that you’re wrong.
     with these wild religious based claims, they have no facts to support them.  The minute religion gets involved, reason goes out the window.  In that way, the USA is basically the same as ISIS.  
    Religion has nothing to do with abortion.
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 29 of 63
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Mr_Grey said:
    How could it ever be appropriate to throw back information on adoption when someone is searching for abortion clinics?   If I search for Catholic Churches should I be presented with information on the nearest Satanic groups?  If I search for burger joints should I be presented with a list of vegetarian restaurants?  Complete nonsense.   

    Also, your idea that it might have been "bad data" flies in the face of the reality of how long this change took. America is so backward about abortion and planned parenthood that there are hundreds and hundreds of times less clinics in a given area in the USA than there are in other more civilised countries.  It wouldn't take years to correct that data.   One person could easily in the space of a couple of days go through a list of all the abortion providers in the USA and correct the map data.  Easily. 

    You are living in a dream world my friend.  Adjusting reality to fit your theories and inclinations.  
    "More civilized countries"

    Um, what? You do realize the entire world has become essentially Americanized, right? Europe is degenerate, not "more civilized". 
    Still pissed that the EU stopped exporting chemicals to you for use in executions, I see.
    singularitybloodshotrollin'rediosenthusiast
  • Reply 30 of 63
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,005member
    pmz said:
    Don't take sides Apple. Just let the world figure itself out.

    I really don't stand on either side of the "abortion" issue. Nor should anyone. Taking sides is just ignorant. Obviously aborting a maturing child for convenience is "wrong". Obviously keeping a child that significantly endangers your life is also "wrong". There are no clear cut answers. People that pretend otherwise are stupid.
    Perhaps the most ignorant post of any in this thread.  

    Consider well Tim Cook's publicly stated reason for his "coming out": to SAVE LIVES.  He has publicly said that if by his coming out he could prevent a gay person from committing suicide, he was going to do it.  And he did do it, despite being a private person who otherwise would not reveal that which should be kept behind closed doors.  No one here should treat that fact flippantly or try to diminish its relevance.  That decision centered on Life vs. Death.

    Now consider that Abortion, by definition, centers exclusively on Death.  Dwell on that deeply.  Reasons to have an abortion are irrelevant in the sake of this discussion about LIFE vs. DEATH.  If the suggestion to dwell on that offends anyone here, perhaps your emotions or political leanings are diminishing your reason.  Love it, Hate it, dislike it but support it -- regardless of your personal stance, the FACT remains that Abortion exists to Abort / Kill human life.  Economics, Love, and even Women's Rights are separate issues.  By definition, Abortion is Termination of life.

    Now consider again that Mr. Cook came out to Save Lives.  Consider it deeply.

    This is why the abortion issue is not as simple as some wish it to be.  It is not merely "freedom of choice."  It centers on life itself and the VALUE each of us assign to that life.  It is also fascinating how we seek LIFE on other planets while having questionable laws regarding the sanctity of life on our own planet.  

    If LIFE was so important to Mr. Cook, perhaps it should be to us as well.  And in light of that, any reasonable person shouldn't be too distraught over SIRI's inability to lead one quickly to an abortion clinic anymore than one should be upset that SIRI doesn't teach you in more detail how to kill yourself or even others.  

    With that said, SIRI isn't intelligent at all, in my experience.  It fails to assist me in finding even the most basic things here in Japan, so much so that I never use it anymore.  It's pretty worthless.  Which is why it is somewhat shocking and even laughable that people would get all bent out of shape over only ONE AREA where SIRI fails.  The day I will be shocked and amazed is when SIRI begins to show intelligence, responding to information requests not to dissimilar from the ship's computer on Star Trek.  But at the rate Apple is improving SIRI, it surely will be the 24th Century before that comes to be.  And by that point in time, what will be our stance on life?  Will we be seeking out new life in accordance with Gene Roddenberry's semi-positive view of future humans?  Or will we be more like Klingons on a quest to destroy life?  That future depends on us today.  May we choose to improve SIRI with the same vigor we, and Tim Cook, choose to save lives.
  • Reply 31 of 63
    entropysentropys Posts: 3,197member
    Mr_Grey said:

    entropys said:
    ... If Siri is deliberately steering to places like planned parenthood it could imply behaviour just as bad as if Siri was actively steering away from them in the first place. ...
    This statement alone shows your huge bias.  Planned Parenthood is an institution of long-standing that provides assistance to people in need, but somehow to you (based on absolutely no evidence because none is available) it is somehow an evil institution.  

    Almost every "western" country has a branch of Planned Parenthood or something very similar with a different name in operation.  This has been the case for many decades.  In all those countries, these organisations have done good work and are a greatly respected part of their respective societies.  The only exception to this is the USA.  

    The USA is not only on the wrong side of history with these wild religious based claims, they have no facts to support them.  The minute religion gets involved, reason goes out the window.  In that way, the USA is basically the same as ISIS.  
    Really, because I mentioned a clinic by name I am biased? oooohKayyy. The reason I mentioned it as as a foreigner it is the the only name of a US abortion clinic I know. But to keep you happy I will reword it for you:

    "... If Siri is deliberately steering to places like <insert name of abortion clinic here> it could imply behaviour just as bad as if Siri was actively steering away from <insert name of abortion clinic here> in the first place. ...

    The point is that a search engine should just return relevant results, with no censorship by the people that own the search engine. That can work both ways, either for those that ludicrously reckon every sperm is sacred, to those that appear to argue abortion as inconsequential.  The world is too complicated to be emphatic about abortion. That you went off without actually comprehending what I said about the risks of manipulating search engines to support for or against abortion is well, a little sad.

    Bottom line though is I really could not care less about US abortion laws. I am worried about how search engines work and how they could be controlled by people with an agenda. From the right or the left.

    In fact, I suspect I should be more worried about the left to be honest. The left seem to have become all too interested in using the power of government for what they see as good. What could go wrong?
    macky the mackysumjuaniosenthusiast
  • Reply 32 of 63
    If a woman should be entitled to get a list of service providers that would murder her child for money, should Siri return appropriate information for a request from a man for the service providers that would murder his wife or girlfriend for money?
  • Reply 33 of 63
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    sirozha said:
    If a woman should be entitled to get a list of service providers that would murder her child for money, should Siri return appropriate information for a request from a man for the service providers that would murder his wife or girlfriend for money?
    Don't be an idiot.  One is legal and the other is not.
    macky the mackyhagarsumjuaniosenthusiast
  • Reply 34 of 63
    tenly said:
    Don't be an idiot.  One is legal and the other is not.
    So the murder part of it wasn’t the problem for you, just the legality?
  • Reply 35 of 63
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    tenly said:
    Don't be an idiot.  One is legal and the other is not.
    So the murder part of it wasn’t the problem for you, just the legality?
    The debate is ongoing as to when a fetus actually becomes a person.  Regardless of which side of the debate you and I sit on, abortion is currently legal in many jurisdictions.  Siri, quite simply shouldn't take sides in any ethical debates like this.  No matter which side she (Apple) leans to, she should keep her mouth shut and just do her job.  

    The job of a maps product is to help guide you to the place you want to go.  Omitting or censoring some destinations because the author doesn't believe in what goes on there is ludicrous and just ends up alienating customers while creating an inferior and incomplete product.

    Now I guess I should take a small step back since this article is not about "maps", it's about Siri.  Siri has been marketed as a personal assistant and clearly is meant to have a personality of her own - so - as long as the addresses and directions are available in the actual "maps" application - perhaps it's not that far fetched to have Siri exert her own personality with a response such as "I really don't believe in abortion.  Have you considered other options such as adoption? I can't in good conscience help you with an abortion.  You'll have to search the maps application on your own if you insist on pursuing that option."  But - can you imagine how many people a response like that would alienate?  And if Siri is supposed to emulate a real person - a real assistant - consider what would happen if a real-life personal assistant you employed took that sort of stance with you...  You'd likely fire her ass for not doing her job.   So why isn't it reasonable to expect the digital her to do her job competently and accurately and without any back talk?  Or....why can't I fire her and hire an assistant who has views and beliefs similar to my own?

    This could end up setting a dangerous precedent where Siri refuses to help you with anything that she (Apple) doesn't agree with.  Suppose you wanted information about a Trump rally - Siri could send you to the wrong address or claim she knows nothing about it - or just redirect you to information about the candidate that she is backing!  And if Siri decided that she is against alcohol - good luck finding that bar your friends are meeting at.  Microsoft store?  What Microsoft store?  I know nothing about any Microsoft stores!  You want to donate money to the "American Kidney Fund"?  Sorry.  Can't help you.  Perhaps you'd like to donate to "Action Against Hunger" instead.  Siri eventually ends up being nothing more than a shill for Apple and Apples interests.

    To alienate and offend the fewest people possible - Siri needs to practice complete impartiality (within the law).  Her mandate is to "assist" you and she should do so competently and without attitude or unsolicited advice.  

    The abortion issue is an issue for government and the courts to decide - not Apple and Siri.

    And the poster obviously chose the term "murder" to maximize dramatic effect at the expense of accuracy.   Abortion clinics - in jurisdictions where abortion is legal - do not "murder" anything.   The word "murder" is defined as an "unlawful killing".  So no matter how strongly you feel as an individual - "murder" is the wrong word to use.  "Killing" is the word that the poster should have used - but then, it's not quite as dramatic as "murder".

    Remember that at Siri's inception (until recently) she could be relied on to assist us all in finding good places to stash a corpse. It seems she's been updated recently though - now when I ask her where to hide a body, she just replies "I used to know the answer to this..."
    bloodshotrollin'redsumjuaniosenthusiast
  • Reply 36 of 63
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    tenly said:
    Don't be an idiot.  One is legal and the other is not.
    So the murder part of it wasn’t the problem for you, just the legality?
    Yes, exactly.  Even if the fetus were a human being (which has not been proven), by definition, terminating that fetus is not "murder" if it's done lawfully.
    tenly said:
    Don't be an idiot.  One is legal and the other is not.
    So the murder part of it wasn’t the problem for you, just the legality?
    Yes, exactly.  The murder part wasn't a problem because murder is not involved.  The poster incorrectly used the word in the first half of their example.

    "Murder" - "the unlawful, premeditated killing of one human being by another"

    There are plenty of circumstances where terminating a pregnancy is the right thing to do - and there are also plenty of times when it is the wrong thing to do.  

    It's a complicated issue.  But for now - it's legal.  What is disgusting is the way those of you who dislike the law treat people who support the law or choose to terminate a pregnancy.  It's nothing but bullying and many of you are participating in what should be classified and prosecuted as hate crimes.  Try respecting the life that is already on the planet even just half as much as the unborn life you are trying to protect.

    if you disagree with the law, lobby the government or elect a government that will change the law - but stop targeting your fellow law abiding citizens for having an opinion that is different than yours.
    lordjohnwhorfinsumjuaniosenthusiast
  • Reply 37 of 63
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    tenly said:
    So the murder part of it wasn’t the problem for you, just the legality?
    Yes, exactly.  Even if the fetus were a human being (which has not been proven), by definition, terminating that fetus is not "murder" if it's done lawfully.
    Yes, exactly.  The murder part wasn't a problem because murder is not involved.  The poster incorrectly used the word in the first half of their example.

    "Murder" - "the unlawful, premeditated killing of one human being by another"
    Slavery used to be legal in certain parts of the USA. I guess that everything was fine and dandy back then in that case, since it was legal after all.


    jdw
  • Reply 38 of 63
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    apple ][ said:
    tenly said:
    Yes, exactly.  Even if the fetus were a human being (which has not been proven), by definition, terminating that fetus is not "murder" if it's done lawfully.
    Yes, exactly.  The murder part wasn't a problem because murder is not involved.  The poster incorrectly used the word in the first half of their example.

    "Murder" - "the unlawful, premeditated killing of one human being by another"
    Slavery used to be legal in certain parts of the USA. I guess that everything was fine and dandy back then in that case, since it was legal after all.


    And how was slavery abolished?  Was it by business owners pretending it didn't exist?  Or did it come as a result of government action?  

    Every reasonable person agrees that abortion should be permitted at least in some cases - such as when carrying the baby to term will result in the death of the mother.  (Anyone who disagrees with that is not a reasonable person)

    So - at least in cases like that, there needs to be a way for the person to locate the clinic - however, some people are promoting and supporting censorship and would have Apple and other businesses refuse to supply that information.

    Another big problem with your comparison of slavery and abortion is that slavery is clearly a human rights violation.  With abortion, the issue is not so clear.  Perhaps 50 years from now there will be proof one way or the other - but until that proof appears - our best scientists and politicians have decided that it's better to allow it than to outlaw it - and much of the population agrees with that decision.

    The truth of the matter is that many who go to these clinics have decided they need an abortion for reasons that are important to them and their lives.  Reasons that you know nothing about and that are truly none of your business.  Clinics or no - these women have decided to terminate their pregnancy.  Without the clinics, they resort to throwing themselves down a flight of stairs, having someone punch or kick them in the stomach or using a coat hanger to get the job done - horrifying methods that put the mother at risk of dying.  The accessibility of abortion clinics are saving the lives of women who might otherwise die by attempting to do-it-themselves...but you seem to place no value on the lives of these women - making you all hypocrites in my books.

    The worst part of the whole abortion debate is that the activists who shout the loudest, the ones who would force their beliefs on strangers and make no exceptions for rape victims or women who are likely to die during childbirth are often very quick to grant themselves an exemption when an unplanned pregnancy occurs in their own family (daughter, niece, sister, etc...)
    lordjohnwhorfinsumjuaniosenthusiast
  • Reply 39 of 63
    your "right" to bear arms
    "So you believe that innocent life is not worth protecting."

    All independent sentient life is worth protecting. The assumption that only "innocent" people die by the gun is not reflected in statistics. America's profligate firearms laws means anyone can be on the receiving end of a bullet; be they law abiding or of criminal intent. In the UK the number of deaths by firearms is barely registered outside of the criminal underworld. However, those people here trained to use guns in the course of their "civic duties" quite often kill unarmed people who were not remotely involved in criminal actions. I believe to a far, far greater degree, America has the same problem with its own armed police.

    "So you believe that you should be forced to pay for an entire lifetime of luxury for a mass murderer."

    I believe in a system of rehabilitation. Locking a person up and throwing away the key is barbaric. If a person is so psychologically damaged that they cannot comprehend the consequences of their actions they should be cared for in a secure hospital environment.
    It has also been established, well beyond any reasonable doubt, that in a Judaeo-Christian culture capital punishment does not deter illegal killing. So, the point of it is...? Also, if you feel compelled to adopt the madness of an eye for an eye, why not murder the murderer on death row by hypoxia? Loss of consciousness takes two to three seconds, the executed have no physical or psychological awareness that they're dying and, crucially for a population of capitalists,  the process used (any inert gas, but preferably Argon) is materially cheap, naturally abundant, environmentally clean.

    "So you believe that animals are people."

    No, silly. I believe people are animals.

    "El oh el."

    Acknowledge your role in consumerism. The selfish benefits goods may bring you means somewhere along its passage into your life less fortunate people have paid a high price in environmental degradation and personal deprivation gathering base materials which enables you to use it as a status symbol until its psychological obsolescence is assured by marketeers.

    "A man has no choice."

    They do within a functional relationship.

    "So you believe in God and yet don’t believe in God?" 

    No, I don't believe in god. Though, despite a total vacuum of any evidence, theists do believe god's existence is incontrovertible. Just how they come to that conclusion is beyond my powers of reasoning. 


    cnocbuilordjohnwhorfinsumjuaniosenthusiast
  • Reply 40 of 63
    All these Apple defending comments...
    dreyfus2 said:
    The problem here is the pipe dream of maintaining a cleancurated platform without ever becoming the censor. Doesn't work. There is no universal moral or ethic, and those claiming that are the problem, not the solution.

    By replacing conventional search with Siri, Apple became an entry point to search. And now they have to live with it. It is not Apple's choice what people search for, and it should not be. Just return results. If you don't block anything, you can never be blamed. (Yes, this might be a problem in some places and result in less business, but so be it.)
    So true... But, this is an Apple fan site, so you will tend to have people avoid logic and defend their favourite corporation which is strange to me. I love my iPhone and my Macs, but at no point would I defend everything Apple does. There's absolutely no reason why it took 4 years for Apple to fix this issue.
    bloodshotrollin'redcnocbuisingularitylordjohnwhorfiniosenthusiast
Sign In or Register to comment.