anton zuykov

About

Username
anton zuykov
Joined
Visits
82
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
1,612
Badges
1
Posts
1,056
  • Google's Pichai denies any political bias in search results during lengthy Congressional t...

    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    georgie01 said:
    It can be very difficult to believe someone in an authoritative position because too many times we’ve seen people like that clearly lie, even testifying in court. They play games with words or facts that any idiot knows is a lie but at face value eludes accountability.

    Who knows if he’s telling the truth, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he wasn’t and that he was being knowingly misleading. 
    Most likely he knows very well what he is doing. He is not an idiot and certainly can understand what is going on, which leaves me no other option but to conclude his malicious intent for “greater good”.
    What malicious intent are you referring to? Are you claiming that there is intentional search bias in place from Google to disadvantage conservatives (!) and if so what evidence of it do you have? If it is simply your opinion that search results are being intentionally manipulated to "hide the truth" then fair enough. We all have opinions. 
    Malicious intent of platforming people with certain political views, that companies do not support, of course. Yes, there IS intentional bias in the company so much so that when facts are stated by one of the employees, that gets that person fired from the company. Dont tell me there is no bias, and a person got fired for being a nazi.
    What does that have to do with Google Search results? Of course people in offices and stores and schools and neighborhoods have biases, including people they like and people they don't, you and me included.

    "IN JANUARY (2018), FIRED Google engineer James Damore filed a lawsuit alleging that Google discriminated against white men and political conservatives. On Wednesday (February/18) , another former Google engineer, Tim Chevalier, sued the company for firing him for posting what he calls politically liberal content, including criticism of Damore, on Google’s internal message boards."

    So which is it: Google fires employees for being too liberal or instead for being too conservative? The simple answer: Disruptive employees often get fired no matter what viewpoint they're using to negatively interfere with the business and or create a hostile workplace.  It's a simple concept, particularly if you've ever had to manage anything in business. Ever manage anything? 

    So to repeat, do you have any proof whatsoever that the Google Search algorithms are intentionally designed to introduce political bias favoring one party over another? Anything? Are you considering perhaps it's your own bias rearing its head? 
    Stop lying. Damore was fired for saying that women are not like man. Literally. The fact that some disruptive liberal employee could have been fired is irrelevant, becasue I never stated that Google only fires conservative, which Damore never was. You are all over the place with your “logic”. As said before, google fires those employees whose political opinion they dont like. The same goes for commentators on YT. 
    watto_cobra
  • Google's Pichai denies any political bias in search results during lengthy Congressional t...

    Well, if he said that there is no bias, then there is no bias. Case closed. /s
    What evidence do you provide to the contrary? Any? None? Old white guys having no clue how technical things work won't do, sorry. That includes congressmen and the president.


    1. Evidence is that in the last 1/2 a year a lot of people were banned from platform, mostly right wingers. It was so obvious that it required a congress committee to question that. Some of those were right wing clowns, just like the clowns on the left. But the clowns from the left were not banned for hate speech ( aka  “community” rules) despite them preaching hate, while the right wingers were. I do not support a lot of those folks, but I disagree with censorship, especially when it is done very dishonestly, like facebook and youtube did.

    2. Why did you bring the race in your response? Are you racist? Or do you have evidence old people of other races understand the tech better? What relevance that remarked had to the conversation in question?

    it would be good, if you could think through your response, before you typed it. But the MSM training kicked in before you could.
    Nope, that isn’t evidence. That’s poorly behaving people getting banned for violatating the rules of private platforms. 

    I brought up “old white guys” because that’s who congress is, who asked all the dumb questions. What part are you struggling with?

    Oh! The MSM! Boo! Hiss! 

    lol. you people. 
    Behaving badly? Nah. The company does not apply policies the same way to every user. It is a fact that is easily provable. That is the problem. They are just being dishonest about what they do. They do not deplatform those who “behave badly” (whatever that means to you). They deplatform only those who create a strong enough opinion that they do not like. Antifa with their literal terorist actions are rarely banned for saying things for which a right winger will get banned for life and across multiple platforms. Dont tell me that it is just about “people behaving badly”, ‘cause it clearly isnt. It is quite clear that the only set of standards those companies operate on are a set of double standards.
    Also, since when you have decided the companies should be patrolling morality? I thought it is the job of the right wingers to do that with their abortion bullshit. I guess, I was wrong. The evangelical part of the right and modern “liberal” left are both equally authoritarian. 
    lol indeed. You think you better than the right wingers?. Nah, pal. You are JUST LIKE THEM.
    SpamSandwich
  • Google's Pichai denies any political bias in search results during lengthy Congressional t...

    gatorguy said:
    georgie01 said:
    It can be very difficult to believe someone in an authoritative position because too many times we’ve seen people like that clearly lie, even testifying in court. They play games with words or facts that any idiot knows is a lie but at face value eludes accountability.

    Who knows if he’s telling the truth, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he wasn’t and that he was being knowingly misleading. 
    Most likely he knows very well what he is doing. He is not an idiot and certainly can understand what is going on, which leaves me no other option but to conclude his malicious intent for “greater good”.
    What malicious intent are you referring to? Are you claiming that there is intentional search bias in place from Google to disadvantage conservatives (!) and if so what evidence of it do you have? If it is simply your opinion that search results are being intentionally manipulated to "hide the truth" then fair enough. We all have opinions. 
    Malicious intent of platforming people with certain political views, that companies do not support, of course. Yes, there IS intentional bias in the company so much so that when facts are stated by one of the employees, that gets that person fired from the company. Dont tell me there is no bias, and a person got fired for being a nazi.
    watto_cobra
  • Google's Pichai denies any political bias in search results during lengthy Congressional t...

    Well, if he said that there is no bias, then there is no bias. Case closed. /s
    What evidence do you provide to the contrary? Any? None? Old white guys having no clue how technical things work won't do, sorry. That includes congressmen and the president.


    1. Evidence is that in the last 1/2 a year a lot of people were banned from platform, mostly right wingers. It was so obvious that it required a congress committee to question that. Some of those were right wing clowns, just like the clowns on the left. But the clowns from the left were not banned for hate speech ( aka  “community” rules) despite them preaching hate, while the right wingers were. I do not support a lot of those folks, but I disagree with censorship, especially when it is done very dishonestly, like facebook and youtube did.

    2. Why did you bring the race in your response? Are you racist? Or do you have evidence old people of other races understand the tech better? What relevance that remarked had to the conversation in question?

    it would be good, if you could think through your response, before you typed it. But the MSM training kicked in before you could.
    redraider11
  • Google's Pichai denies any political bias in search results during lengthy Congressional t...

    Well, if he said that there is no bias, then there is no bias. Case closed. /s
    georgie01SpamSandwichwonkothesane