Is Google too powerful?
- Thread starter elmo16
- Start date
I mean, we're talking about a search engine. That's what search engines do. They send their crawlers out to find and index web pages. If it's published on a web page, it's going to be found. If you don't want certain information available, don't publish it or allow somebody else to publish it on the World Wide Web. You can't hold Google or any other company that runs a search engine responsible for finding information on a web page that somebody else published.
If a library processes a print document, makes it easily searchable in their catalog, and allows people to access it, do you blame the library for the contents of the document?
If a library processes a print document, makes it easily searchable in their catalog, and allows people to access it, do you blame the library for the contents of the document?
Here is a link you can check out on search engines.
http://lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/SearchEngines.html
http://lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/SearchEngines.html
Does a library deliberately put stuff in categories allegedly using the Dewey Decimal System which it knows don't really belong in those categories because the libary has a commercial interest in those books and makes more money if people check them out, does it place them as multiple entries, place them ahead of the entries which really belong in that category, leave out books which are on the shelf and belong in that catgegory but compete with the one's the library has a commercial interest in?
The desciption Google gives of what it does isn't necessarily inaccurate, but it is so simplistic that it makes you think it's a simple benign process. If I asked how a Formula One driver gets around a track at 200 miles per hour, saying he gets in the car, starts the enigne, and then steps on the gas and manipulates the the gas, brakes, clutch and steering wheel wouldn't be a lie, but it leaves out so much of what goes on that it doesn't really tell you the truth about what's happening.
The desciption Google gives of what it does isn't necessarily inaccurate, but it is so simplistic that it makes you think it's a simple benign process. If I asked how a Formula One driver gets around a track at 200 miles per hour, saying he gets in the car, starts the enigne, and then steps on the gas and manipulates the the gas, brakes, clutch and steering wheel wouldn't be a lie, but it leaves out so much of what goes on that it doesn't really tell you the truth about what's happening.
Let's say someone is trying to harm you. So they go and make a bunch of posts on blogs under the name franca or Vermeer, or "chlamydia carrier" and links them to your page with your IRL identity so that when anyone types "chlamydia carrier" into google, they get your name, age, picture, home address, etc. Now, you never associated oursled in any way with beng a chlamydia carrier: but there you are - because someone manipulated Google. the only way around it is to not have a page up with any info about yourslef up on the Web at all, and these days in an awful lot of businesses, that's just not possible (for example, ever major law firm i know has a page for each of their attorneies and wouldn't take too kindly to one of them saying "I don't want a page for me up on outr website).
And what if, after this happened and you allerted Google that someone was trying to slander you by doing it. What should they do and how should you feel if they refuse to remove the entries which are clearly up there to harass you?
It seems that you are saying that it is not a good idea to have a page on web sites like face book, my space or even linkedin, that unless you have a company that actually needs a web site, don’t have one. If you do have to have a web site for your business or whatever, don’t include your name on the web page.
It also seems to me that today, few people would go to all this trouble to harass you for no apparent reason (other than some nasty teenager with nothing better to do). It seems to me that a person like this would be more interested in making money by some form of identity theft or fraud.
Lets say you Google Canon Digital Cameras. I create a virtual store that sells digital cameras, computers and other consumer electronics. My web site has pages of product inventory with full specifications and a shopping cart. You order your Canon Digital Camera, go to check out which takes you to the shopping cart. You enter your billing address, shipping address and credit card number, expire date and even the credit card security number (the three digit number on the back of your cc). You never get your Canon Digital Camera, but what you do get is a bill for unauthorized credit card purchases, ruined credit rating, etc.
Lets say you Google Canon Digital Cameras. I create a virtual store that sells digital cameras, computers and other consumer electronics. My web site has pages of product inventory with full specifications and a shopping cart. You order your Canon Digital Camera, go to check out which takes you to the shopping cart. You enter your billing address, shipping address and credit card number, expire date and even the credit card security number (the three digit number on the back of your cc). You never get your Canon Digital Camera, but what you do get is a bill for unauthorized credit card purchases, ruined credit rating, etc.
It seems that Google wants to get a lot bigger.
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20081002/D93IJPE00.html
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20081002/D93IJPE00.html
Google, as they get more power, they like to do a bit of censuring themselves:
http://www.innercitypress.com/un1google021408.html
http://www.innercitypress.com/un1google021408.html
Yes, I know Google is a crappy search engine. I understand that their algorithms are corrupt. You are much more familiar with Google than I, so I'll take your word on their specific corrupt practices. I'm not trying to say that Google is great. I just don't hold Google responsible for what others have published on the WWW.
But see, EVERYTHING is published on the WWW (what I mean is you can find some idiot who has said anything you want). And people give it equal authority/value. So how is gets presented and who it gets presented by end up being extremely meaningful. What ends up happemning is that, rightly or wrongly, Google has become the "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" for websites. And Google even feeds into this: in case you haven't noticed recently they started actually putting a little "Google approved site" seal on some searcg results.
But I also think you are setting up a straw man to knock down: there are plenty of books which libraries decide specifically not to carry, aren't there? Or do all libraries carry all books without any influence by the content of the books?
But I also think you are setting up a straw man to knock down: there are plenty of books which libraries decide specifically not to carry, aren't there? Or do all libraries carry all books without any influence by the content of the books?
Let's take a more abstract answer just to prove how things can work. Let's say you had a search engine which replied to any query about AIDS or HIV only with pages like VirusMyth and other pages which claim AIDS doesn't exist or HIV doesn't cuase AIDS. Or it replied to any query about the Holocaust with pages of Holocaust denialists. Or queries about abortion only with abrotion horror stories, etc. Now, they aren't responsible for the content on those pages. but they are responsbile from presenting the thesis nevertheless because that's the bent of where they lead their users. And it would be one thing if the search page was "Rightolifesearch.com" or "Klansearch.com" or "Diefagsdie.com". But it's not: it's the page which has become the poster child for "the right search". It's become the BandAid/Xerox of the day. People say "I'll Google it" instead of "I'll search the web for it". So rightly or wrongly, people give an awful lot of weight to something if Google sends them to it.
It's the same with print publications: they don't write the advertisements which appear on their pages, but almost any one of any quality will make judgements as to what advertising they will and won't accept to publish, as opposed to just saying "hey, they are just ads, we don't make them, we just publish them". And Google goes further than that, because if you listen to what they say, rather than what they do, it's really easy to think they are saying that they give you "the most relevant results" to all of your searches (it's easy to hear that because it's what they actually say) and think it means where they send you has any accuracy to it.
It's the same with print publications: they don't write the advertisements which appear on their pages, but almost any one of any quality will make judgements as to what advertising they will and won't accept to publish, as opposed to just saying "hey, they are just ads, we don't make them, we just publish them". And Google goes further than that, because if you listen to what they say, rather than what they do, it's really easy to think they are saying that they give you "the most relevant results" to all of your searches (it's easy to hear that because it's what they actually say) and think it means where they send you has any accuracy to it.
Let me ask you a more personal question: what if a Google search for the phone number you use for your professional phone yeilded a series of pages which all say "{insert Franca's working name here} has herpes" or genital warts or whatever. Would you think, oh well, Google isn't repsonsible for what other poeple say, or would you think "Why the fuck is Google ranking these pages from nowhere as the top results for that query?"