Thou Shalt Be Gunless: The Power of Google Compels Thee!

This is a Forum to discuss issues relating to gun control vs. the right to keep and bear arms in the United states and Utah. Please be respectful of everyone's opinions.

Thou Shalt Be Gunless: The Power of Google Compels Thee!

Postby bumpylight » Sat 27 Feb 2016 7:54 am

Google controls the vertical, and Google controls the horizontal. All your opinions are belong to them.

Well, not totally -- but read the astonishing findings of the researchers behind this profoundly disturbing essay about invisible mind control through search-engine results. Keep in mind that Google's upper echelons are utterly liberal, and they hate Republicans and core civil liberties like the right to keep and bear arms.


[....]

Does the company ever favour particular candidates? In the 2012 US presidential election, Google and its top executives donated more than $800,000 to President Barack Obama and just $37,000 to his opponent, Mitt Romney. And in 2015, a team of researchers from the University of Maryland and elsewhere showed that Google’s search results routinely favoured Democratic candidates. Are Google’s search rankings really biased? An internal report issued by the US Federal Trade Commission in 2012 concluded that Google’s search rankings routinely put Google’s financial interests ahead of those of their competitors, and anti-trust actions currently under way against Google in both the European Union and India are based on similar findings.

In most countries, 90 per cent of online search is conducted on Google, which gives the company even more power to flip elections than it has in the US and, with internet penetration increasing rapidly worldwide, this power is growing. In our PNAS article, Robertson and I calculated that Google now has the power to flip upwards of 25 per cent of the national elections in the world with no one knowing this is occurring. In fact, we estimate that, with or without deliberate planning on the part of company executives, Google’s search rankings have been impacting elections for years, with growing impact each year. And because search rankings are ephemeral, they leave no paper trail, which gives the company complete deniability.

[....]

What happens, though, if such technologies are misused by the companies that own them? A study by Robert M Bond, now a political science professor at Ohio State University, and others published in Nature in 2012 described an ethically questionable experiment in which, on election day in 2010, Facebook sent ‘go out and vote’ reminders to more than 60 million of its users. The reminders caused about 340,000 people to vote who otherwise would not have. Writing in the New Republic in 2014, Jonathan Zittrain, professor of international law at Harvard University, pointed out that, given the massive amount of information it has collected about its users, Facebook could easily send such messages only to people who support one particular party or candidate, and that doing so could easily flip a close election – with no one knowing that this has occurred. And because advertisements, like search rankings, are ephemeral, manipulating an election in this way would leave no paper trail.

[....]

Certainly, if Google set about to fix an election, it could first dip into its massive database of personal information to identify just those voters who are undecided. Then it could, day after day, send customised rankings favouring one candidate to just those people. One advantage of this approach is that it would make Google’s manipulation extremely difficult for investigators to detect.

[....]

Remember what the search algorithm is doing: in response to your query, it is selecting a handful of webpages from among the billions that are available, and it is ordering those webpages using secret criteria. Seconds later, the decision you make or the opinion you form – about the best toothpaste to use, whether fracking is safe, where you should go on your next vacation, who would make the best president, or whether global warming is real – is determined by that short list you are shown, even though you have no idea how the list was generated.

[....]

Meanwhile, behind the scenes, a consolidation of search engines has been quietly taking place, so that more people are using the dominant search engine even when they think they are not. Because Google is the best search engine, and because crawling the rapidly expanding internet has become prohibitively expensive, more and more search engines are drawing their information from the leader rather than generating it themselves. The most recent deal, revealed in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing in October 2015, was between Google and Yahoo! Inc.

[....]

We now estimate that Hannon’s old friends have the power to drive between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes to Clinton on election day with no one knowing that this is occurring and without leaving a paper trail. They can also help her win the nomination, of course, by influencing undecided voters during the primaries. Swing voters have always been the key to winning elections, and there has never been a more powerful, efficient or inexpensive way to sway them than SEME.

[....]


https://aeon.co/essays/how-the-internet ... r-thoughts

The article is very long but worth reading in its entirety. You are commanded by the power of Google!
User avatar
bumpylight
Marksman
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue 26 Feb 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Thou Shalt Be Gunless: The Power of Google Compels Thee!

Postby Doctor Jenks » Sat 27 Feb 2016 11:07 am

Google "NRA News" and behold the top 5 news results. Generally, there are several Huffington post articles bemoaning the evils of the nra.

Although it's tempting to blame this on some Google / liberal mind control conspiracy, the large amount of NRA hate in news search results is likely related to the fact that most news outlets are actually quite liberal.

I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories. It's too easy to find proof to back up your theories when you've already made up your mind. "It could happen" too easily becomes "those dirty rotten liberals would definitely do that. It must be true."
M&P 40 Pro
User avatar
Doctor Jenks
Sharp Shooter
 
Posts: 884
Joined: Wed 13 May 2009 10:59 am

Re: Thou Shalt Be Gunless: The Power of Google Compels Thee!

Postby Cinhil » Sat 27 Feb 2016 2:42 pm

Okay, I decided to check the theory of the top five articles under, NRA News," and this is what I got;

In the news
Concealed Carry Reciprocity Deal Signed in Virginia
NRA-ILA‎ - 1 day ago
The National Rifle Association (NRA) commends Virginia's leaders for reaching an agreement to ... APPEARS IN News Legal & Legislation ...
NRA election: Nugent, Norquist and my bullet vote
http://www.wnd.com‎ - 2 days ago
Another NRA endorsement for Arkansas Supreme Court: Shawn Womack
Arkansas Times‎ - 1 hour ago
More news for nra news
NRA News
https://www.nranews.com/
For more than a decade, NRA News has been delivering hard-hitting, timely news, investigative journalism, commentary and analysis. No one else in the news ...
‎Cam & Co – ‎Commentators
NRA News | Cam & Co
https://www.nranews.com/series/cam-and-company
Cam & Co airs from 2 to 5 p.m. ET on NRANews.com. The show is also simulcast on SiriusXM—tune in from 9 p.m. to midnight on Patriot Plus, or midnight to 3 ...
NRA News - Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/NRANews/
NRA News, Washington, DC. 835077 likes · 22207 talking about this. NRA News offers the most comprehensive video coverage of Second Amendment issues,.
NRA News (@nranews) | Twitter
https://twitter.com/nranews
4 hours ago - View on Twitter
Scotland: Airgun owners given six months to license weapons - http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotl… #NRA #2A (via @bbcnews)
4 hours ago - View on Twitter
Virginia: Concealed Carry Reciprocity Deal Signed - dailycaller.com/2016/02/2… #NRA #2A (via @dailycaller)
1 day ago - View on Twitter
[email protected] Backed Sportsmen's Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act passes House - http://www.nraila.org/articles/2… #NRA #2A (via @nraila)
1 day ago - View on Twitter
Targeting the Middle Class, @HillaryClinton Pushes Punitive 25% Tax On Guns - bearingarms.com/targeting… #NRA #2A (via @BearingArmsCom)
1 day ago - View on Twitter
Washington: Appeals court declines to rehear challenge to D.C. gun registration laws - bit.ly/21nhdFQ #NRA #2A (via @washtimes)
NRA News - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/user/NRANews
NRA News offers the most comprehensive video coverage of Second Amendment issues, events and culture anywhere in the world.
NRA-ILA | News
https://www.nraila.org/news/
The Sportsmen's Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act, legislation backed by the NRA, passed the U.S. House of Representatives ... News.
NRA-ILA | Official NRA-ILA Press Releases
https://www.nraila.org/news/nra-ila-press-releases/
The Sportsmen's Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act, legislation backed by the NRA, passed the U.S. House of Representatives ... News.
NRA | Home
https://home.nra.org/
National Rifle Association
... Rifle Association · NRA News ... Latest Programming from NRA News. {{item.title}}. {{ item. ... Trending on NRA-ILA: Politics and Legislative News. {{item.title}}.
NRANEWS Cam & Co | Sportsman Channel
http://www.thesportsmanchannel.com/.../nranews-cam-co/
Sportsman Channel
NRANEWS Cam & Co. features in-depth news and views of the 2nd Amendment and other freedom-related issues you'll only find here.
Today's Gun News‎
Adwww.keepandbeararms.com/‎
Where Gun Owners protect their rights and stay informed.
Concealed Carry Mistakes:‎
Adwww.concealedcarryconfidence.org/‎
What part of "Shall not be infringed" is not being abused today!

Even Knights had "Modern" weapons!

'Sed quis custodiet ipsos cutodes' ("Who watches the watchmen?”)."
User avatar
Cinhil
Sniper
 
Posts: 3195
Joined: Fri 24 Jun 2005 1:31 am

Re: Thou Shalt Be Gunless: The Power of Google Compels Thee!

Postby bumpylight » Sat 27 Feb 2016 3:21 pm

The point is more that Google, Facebook, Yahoo! and several other well-known media entities are run by ultra-liberal cliques who can carefully, subtly slant the results for searches or social-media matches on politically sensitive topics. This doesn't mean being ham-handed about it. Slanting the results for the given example, "NRA news," is much less likely because people who look for "NRA news" in particular tend to be strongly biased in favor of the NRA. Back-room propagandists at Google and their ilk undoubtedly have discovered this fact from internal analyses of hundreds of millions of searches and other interactions. Indeed, the first page of Google results for that specific keyword combination hews very closely to what an NRA supporter would want.

On the other hand, a keyword combination like "NRA deaths" almost certainly will be posted to Google by anti-gun loonies looking for confirmation of their preconceived notions. I just tested this, and a bunch of extremely anti-NRA results popped up. Notice how the first page of results totally omits any mention of anti-death organizations such as Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership. It's all about the death-happy crazies at the NRA gloating at the news of every sad-eyed puppy and innocent little baby who gets blown away by wild-eyed refugees from the Mad Max world that exists just around the corner from reality.

The most interesting possibilities for biased results arise from edge cases. Suppose that one searches for a neutral term like "Hillary integrity"? Do the results bear down on the simmering classified-emails scandal that the mass media has desperately ignored, or do they tend to slide into apologetic puff pieces from The Huffington Post that barely even mention the scandal? How many of the first ten results cover the cattle-futures scandal from 1978? The results from my own test search were mixed. Complicating the matter is the very real possibility that Google used a collection of indications from tracking networks to tailor the results for my specific search to meet what their algorithms discern to be my habitual political bias. This last practice is just good business, but it does amplify the point of the original essay.

http://moneymorning.com/2015/11/06/the- ... ntroversy/
http://komando.com/tips/11741/stop-goog ... istory/all

Furthermore, that results might be relatively neutral most of the time doesn't mean for an instant that results can't be increasingly slanted as critical election dates approach. For example, independent voters who post search strings associated with uncertainty through big-data analyses might see a larger degree of slanting in favor of one candidate or another while other independent voters who seem to want confirmation in favor of a specific candidate get pretty much what they want. The scope for subtlety in slanted results for specific keyword searches and even for targeted individuals is virtually unlimited. In an age of petabytes and gigantic cloud-computing facilities, building a profile on each individual voter in the United States is trivial.

https://backblaze.com/blog/petabytes-on ... d-storage/
http://datacenterfrontier.com/top-10-cloud-campuses/

I could go on, but the readers of this forum tend to be unusually bright. They can think for themselves. I doubt that the point needs belaboring.

P.S. Doctor Jenks, did you really get immediate results for The Huffington Post in your own Google search for "NRA news"? All I got were totally on-the-line results in favor of the NRA.
User avatar
bumpylight
Marksman
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue 26 Feb 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Thou Shalt Be Gunless: The Power of Google Compels Thee!

Postby Doctor Jenks » Sat 27 Feb 2016 3:58 pm

bumpylight wrote:The point is more that Google, Facebook, Yahoo! and several other well-known media entities are run by ultra-liberal cliques who can carefully, subtly slant the results for searches or social-media matches on politically sensitive topics. This doesn't mean being ham-handed about it. Slanting the results for the given example, "NRA news," is much less likely because people who look for "NRA news" in particular tend to be strongly biased in favor of the NRA. Back-room propagandists at Google and their ilk undoubtedly have discovered this fact from internal analyses of hundreds of millions of searches and other interactions. Indeed, the first page of Google results for that specific keyword combination hews very closely to what an NRA supporter would want.

On the other hand, a keyword combination like "NRA deaths" almost certainly will be posted to Google by anti-gun loonies looking for confirmation of their preconceived notions. I just tested this, and a bunch of extremely anti-NRA results popped up. Notice how the first page of results totally omits any mention of anti-death organizations such as Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership. It's all about the death-happy crazies at the NRA gloating at the news of every sad-eyed puppy and innocent little baby who gets blown away by wild-eyed refugees from the Mad Max world that exists just around the corner from reality.

The most interesting possibilities for biased results arise from edge cases. Suppose that one searches for a neutral term like "Hillary integrity"? Do the results bear down on the simmering classified-emails scandal that the mass media has desperately ignored, or do they tend to slide into apologetic puff pieces from The Huffington Post that barely even mention the scandal? How many of the first ten results cover the cattle-futures scandal from 1978? The results from my own test search were mixed. Complicating the matter is the very real possibility that Google used a collection of indications from tracking networks to tailor the results for my specific search to meet what their algorithms discern to be my habitual political bias. This last practice is just good business, but it does amplify the point of the original essay.

http://moneymorning.com/2015/11/06/the- ... ntroversy/
http://komando.com/tips/11741/stop-goog ... istory/all

Furthermore, that results might be relatively neutral most of the time doesn't mean for an instant that results can't be increasingly slanted as critical election dates approach. For example, independent voters who post search strings associated with uncertainty through big-data analyses might see a larger degree of slanting in favor of one candidate or another while other independent voters who seem to want confirmation in favor of a specific candidate get pretty much what they want. The scope for subtlety in slanted results for specific keyword searches and even for targeted individuals is virtually unlimited. In an age of petabytes and gigantic cloud-computing facilities, building a profile on each individual voter in the United States is trivial.

https://backblaze.com/blog/petabytes-on ... d-storage/
http://datacenterfrontier.com/top-10-cloud-campuses/

I could go on, but the readers of this forum tend to be unusually bright. They can think for themselves. I doubt that the point needs belaboring.

P.S. Doctor Jenks, did you really get immediate results for The Huffington Post in your own Google search for "NRA news"? All I got were totally on-the-line results in favor of the NRA.

I enter the search "nra news" quite often. I like some of the videos at nranews.com. Commentators, and the like. Most often, the news articles that appear below the link for nranews.com are quite negative. And yes, very often I see things from Huffington post. I do the search this way because sometimes I'm feeling masochistic enough to read the Huffington Post style articles. Although usually I just read the titles to see what the news is saying about the nra today.

Just my luck, today's results seem to be mostly positive. Click on "news" results, instead of "All" results in your Google search and you'll see a better representation of the articles I've come to expect. Two articles from The Trace, and one from Media Matters in the top 5.
M&P 40 Pro
User avatar
Doctor Jenks
Sharp Shooter
 
Posts: 884
Joined: Wed 13 May 2009 10:59 am


Return to Gun Control Issues in the United States and Utah

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron