Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would it bother you if your search engine ranked its results based on what they deem is truth?
Would you feel differently if you knew that 91.5% of people don't read beyond the first page of results?
That is, regardless of your own search results reading routines of how many pages you look at, would it bother you to know that others were getting their information based on what the search engine people decided was true and untrue on websites and they moved the "truthful" ones to the first page of search results?
Currently, relevance and usefulness (a formula using 200 factors) is how one search engine determines which sites make it to the first page. Those variables include such things as keyword usage, site structure, site speed, time spent on site, number and quality of links, etc.. There is no human intervention in the rankings done by algorithm and "truth" isn't a factor.
Think of a "truth determination" ranking for political or business webpages. Could the search engine corporation's human determination of "truth" put some people out of business? How about determining who is the source of your information on political issues?
How would you feel if the search engine purveyor of truth turned out to have strong ties (not just campaign donations) to the political party that is not your own? Would you be concerned that everyone was getting filtered information based on "thruth" decided by a large corporation?
These above questions are not based on some hypothetical idea. A large search engine does plan to rank its search results based on what they deem is truthful.
What if all the search engines decided to do this? Could you foresee a liberally biased search engine and a conservatively biased search engine, chosen by the search engine user deliberately because it mirrors their political leanings? Would that make things even more polarized than they are now?
Would it bother you if your search engine ranked its results based on what they deem is truth?
No, since I always assumed search engines had biases.
Search engines, after all, are programmed by people, and people are not without bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
Would you feel differently if you knew that 91.5% of people don't read beyond the first page of results?
No, since that has always been true.
That's why back in the days of the "Yellow Pages" businesses sought numerical names, or "AAA Whatever" or "AAAA Whatever," because people only look on the first page of the listings for any service or business they're seeking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
That is, regardless of your own search results reading routines of how many pages you look at, would it bother you to know that others were getting their information based on what the search engine people decided was true and untrue on websites and they moved the "truthful" ones to the first page of search results?
Actually that opens the door to legal issues, such as defamation or libel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
Currently, relevance and usefulness (a formula using 200 factors) is how one search engine determines which sites make it to the first page. Those variables include such things as keyword usage, site structure, site speed, time spent on site, number and quality of links, etc.. There is no human intervention in the rankings done by algorithm and "truth" isn't a factor.
That would be SEO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
Think of a "truth determination" ranking for political or business webpages. Could the search engine corporation's human determination of "truth" put some people out of business? How about determining who is the source of your information on political issues?
How would you feel if the search engine purveyor of truth turned out to have strong ties (not just campaign donations) to the political party that is not your own? Would you be concerned that everyone was getting filtered information based on "thruth" decided by a large corporation?
No one who uses "Social Media" like FacePuke or Useless Tube can claim to be concerned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
These above questions are not based on some hypothetical idea. A large search engine does plan to rank its search results based on what they deem is truthful.
What if all the search engines decided to do this? Could you foresee a liberally biased search engine and a conservatively biased search engine, chosen by the search engine user deliberately because it mirrors their political leanings? Would that make things even more polarized than they are now?
Assuming there is a Free Market, then the beauty of the Free Market is that anyone can start their own search engine.
Why is this an issue now?
You do understand that all Social Media is data-mined, right?
Your government gleans every byte of data.
Why?
To learn how to sell you a bill of goods that you don't want, like dictatorship.
It's just a routine run-of-the-mill exercise in psychology.
Once I learn how you think, I can push your buttons to get you to do whatever I want.
The beauty of mass media/mass communications is the ability to target different demographic groups with a message, and even though the messages are different, the end results are the same.
Another win for Pavlov....
This is what I fear is coming with the FCC taking over the Internet. That is why Obama wanted his "Net Neutrality" rules adopted and instructed the FCC to do so.
This is what I fear is coming with the FCC taking over the Internet. That is why Obama wanted his "Net Neutrality" rules adopted and instructed the FCC to do so.
There is nothing in the proposals that I'm aware of that censor content and in fact will have the opposite affect by preventing your ISP from favoring content.
This is what I fear is coming with the FCC taking over the Internet. That is why Obama wanted his "Net Neutrality" rules adopted and instructed the FCC to do so.
Yet another who has no klew as to what "net neutrality" means. It is NOT a government versus free market issue at all.
The government regulated telephone companies for many decades. Can you provide ANY CASE WHATSOEVER where government taxation of the telcos has led to government limiting content. You cant be cause taxing telephone service and taxing internet service is not the same thing as regulating content. You pay a telephone tax now. Still saying anything you want in talk or text?
As for other aspects of this conversation by other people, all Google cares about is finding out what you want so they can hit you with paid for advertising in the spaces set up for such by the websites you browse. This has nothing to do with truth. It has everything to do with revenue.
This is what I fear is coming with the FCC taking over the Internet. That is why Obama wanted his "Net Neutrality" rules adopted and instructed the FCC to do so.
You think google is "objective" in what they display on the first page ?
Would it bother you if your search engine ranked its results based on what they deem is truth?
Since search engines have been existence people with web sites have been gaming them. Do you want websites that have best been able to game the search engine, ones that are popular or ones that are accurate?
They need to evolve, granted determining "truth" is a slippery slope.
There is nothing in the proposals that I'm aware of that censor content and in fact will have the opposite affect by preventing your ISP from favoring content.
The ISP's don't favor content, never have, and there was no reason to speculate that they would. That was a ploy to gain support for so-called "Net Neutrality." It was based on nothing but "what if's."
Yet another who has no klew as to what "net neutrality" means. It is NOT a government versus free market issue at all.
Sorry, but you are the one who is clueless. It is precisely "government vs. free market." Why would we need the FCC to take over the Internet if it wasn't that? It was all based on fear of what the free market might mean for the future of the Internet. Never mind that the Internet has been free since it's inception under free market capitalism. It was working quite well. There was absolutely no need for government intervention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann
The government regulated telephone companies for many decades. Can you provide ANY CASE WHATSOEVER where government taxation of the telcos has led to government limiting content. You cant be cause taxing telephone service and taxing internet service is not the same thing as regulating content. You pay a telephone tax now. Still saying anything you want in talk or text?
You are comparing apples to oranges. The Internet is primarily an information system, not a communications system. Why should it be placed under 1930's regulations that applied to telephones?
You're going to be paying that Universal Service Fund Fee on your Internet now. Count on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann
As for other aspects of this conversation by other people, all Google cares about is finding out what you want so they can hit you with paid for advertising in the spaces set up for such by the websites you browse. This has nothing to do with truth. It has everything to do with revenue.
You are delusional. How many times has Obama criticized conservative Websites and accused them of "lies and distortions?" This is HIS plan, and his purpose is to get control of the content that he deems is undermining his agenda. It is for the same reason that he had the IRS target conservative organizations applying for 501 (c)3 non-profit status. (You don't really think Lois Lerner did it on her own, do you?)
Last edited by nononsenseguy; 03-29-2015 at 08:49 AM..
Comcast and others have throttled or outright stopped P2P traffic in the past and then there is the Netflix deal. It was only a matter of time before it became more prevalent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
