- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Did Google pull a "Gavin Belson" on search manipulation w/ Hillary Clinton
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:25 am to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:25 am to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
quote:
All these motherfrickers are riding the fenceline, pandering to the stupidity of the masses acting like there's an actual difference between politicians on either side.
0
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:28 am to TigerFanatic99
quote:
You can't argue that Google isn't doing this intentionally. I mean you can, I guess, but not if you have any understand of facts and data.
See: mahdragonz
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
you're wrong. removing the terms from suggestions means you're removing it from the articles written by her media cohorts using the terms but defending her behavior. take the "indictment" search for instances. the NYT, LAT, etc have reported on a possible indictment, often dismissing the idesas behind it. those articles are not from "low quality" sites and should be following the search trends removing the concept entirely removes articles from both sides of the disucssion
Wow. That's not what is happening at all. So Google isn't just looking for the term "indictment" it will look at the context around it and how it is used. So newspapers with reputable content will mostly use a phrase like "could lead to an indictment" where a specious website will frame it with "possible indictment" or a more fantasy level turn of phrase. So Google is not discriminating against the phrase, it's just discriminates against fiction.
Also, Google is using terms from it's users and data the user brings. yahoo attracts a more uneducated user base compared to Google. Think of the who you know who has a yahoo email than a goolge one. That's why the terms are different.
The search engines are not searching for information in a vacuum. They are providing results for their user base, which again, yahoo has a lock on those who struggle to read USA Today.
This post was edited on 6/10/16 at 10:34 am
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:31 am to mahdragonz
quote:
But for the dim, the reason his terms are not being listed is bc those words essentially are used on low quality websites.
I work in IT.
It was predicted over two weeks ago when this was discovered that this would be the talking point.
Good work!
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:32 am to EZE Tiger Fan
Is it a talking point...because it's true?
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:33 am to mahdragonz
You couldn't be more wrong. I'm sorry.
This shouldn't be a an issue where people take sides. Everyone should be against Google on this, liberal or conservative.
This shouldn't be a an issue where people take sides. Everyone should be against Google on this, liberal or conservative.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:34 am to Snoopy04
I am somewhat surprised at the naïve people in this thread.
I thought some of you guys were smarter.
I thought some of you guys were smarter.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:35 am to mahdragonz
quote:
Wow. That's not what is happening at all.
yes it is
if you remove "indictment" from the search terms, you eliminate the articles demanding indictment and the article explaining why an indictment isn't proper. you're removing BOTH, which includes many major media sites
quote:
Also, Google is using terms from it's isees and data the user brings. yahoo attracts a more uneducated user base compared to Google. Think of the who you know who has a yahoo email than a goolge one. That's why the terms are different.
why is EVERY OTHER search engine showing these predicted searches?
google is the biggest search engine on earth, so even if every idiot in the world used the other engines, google would still have a large portion of its user base being idiots. it's just too big to avoid the demographics
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:35 am to mahdragonz
quote:
Wow. That's not what is happening at all. So Google isn't just looking for the term "indictment" it will look at the context around it and how it is used. So newspapers with reputable content will mostly use a phrase like "could lead to an indictment" where a specious website will frame it with "possible indictment" or a more fantasy level turn of phrase. So Google is not discriminating against the phrase, it's just discriminates against fiction.
Also, Google is using terms from it's isees and data the user brings. yahoo attracts a more uneducated user base compared to Google. Think of the who you know who has a yahoo email than a goolge one. That's why the terms are different.
The search engines are not searching for information in a vacuum. They are providing results for their user base, which again, yahoo has a lock on those who struggle to read USA Today.
I am an admitted IT simpleton. You could have droves of industry knowledge that I will never know. But...
This post was edited on 6/10/16 at 10:37 am
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:36 am to mahdragonz
quote:
Is it a talking point...because it's true?
Oh I have no doubt we are going to redefine what a "low quality" web site is now too.
It is what Progressives do. Redefine meanings.
Keep going. I'm enjoying your replies. They make me laugh.
PS - I would have voted for Hillary in 2008
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:36 am to mahdragonz
quote:
That dude doesn't understand the basics of search engine work, so there is that.
But for the dim, the reason his terms are not being listed is bc those words essentially are used on low quality websites.
Science! It's not magic!
wut? explain his error then. he didn't claim to be explaining the details of Google algorithms. Just the basics of popularity ranking and search term suggested-completion.
educate us please, boy genius.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:36 am to Breesus
quote:
But Google actively changing the search engine for political reasons is absolutely one the all turn stupidest business decisions in the history of mankind if it turns out to be true.
Why? It doesn't matter to most people and to the people it does matter, what are they going to do? switch to bing or duckduckgo? both are inferior to Google Search.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:37 am to MSMHater
quote:
I am an admitted IT simpleton. You could have droves of industry knowledge that I will never know. But this...
IS complete horseshite. I'm sure that copy-paste response is going to come back to me from all my prog friends shortly. I'll check back in when it does.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:39 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
This shouldn't be a an issue where people take sides. Everyone should be against Google on this, liberal or conservative.
I'm not in IT, and agree 100% assuming it's a decision made on purpose by the heads at Google and not just a consequence of its algorithm.
I'm not convinced there are enough people googling the exact phrase Hilary Clinton criminal combined with headlines of that same title that outweighs the other things predicted by Google,seeing as there are a shite load of articles out there with the title and words Hillary Clinton Crime, so I think the algorithm would have to see more of the word criminal than the word crime in order to predict Hillary Clinton Criminal instead of Hilary Clinton crime, right?
Especially when you consider that if you type in "Hilary Clinton crimi" it brings up the criminal stuff. It's not like they wiped it from their search engine.
Maybe someone can explain how the Google search works? And why what I said isn't a logical explanation?
This post was edited on 6/10/16 at 10:44 am
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:39 am to SlowFlowPro
FYI I think this talking point is straight from Democrat Underground.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:40 am to colorchangintiger
quote:
Why?
Why is Google choosing to actively alter their search engine to align with a political party a bad business decision?
That's your question?
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:42 am to Snoopy04
You all should just shut up and obey our Google overlords! Google for life!
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:43 am to Breesus
quote:
I'm not convinced there are enough people googling the exact phrase Hilary Clinton criminal combined with headlines of that same title that outweighs the other things predicted by Google.
then why is EVERY OTHER search engine conflciting?
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:44 am to Snoopy04
I got bad news for everybody. We're heading for the end of the world and the internet is the beast.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News