GOOGLE Lists GOP NC Senator As 'BIGOT'

a reply to: luthier

I have yet to see you condemn Google for doing this.

All you've done is defend the label that Google placed on the image.


Now if you have condemned it, I will admit to being wrong.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Everyone forgive me a moment while I actually try and defend Google.

Ummm... I think a couple posters are going into cardiac arrest. Can we get some EMTs in here?

Now, while that's being taken care of, as I was saying, that photo was likely not created by Google. It was likely someone else, a private individual with a warped idea of what the term means, who superimposed the word on a 'normal' photo. Then others who also don't know what the word 'bigot' means started posting it everywhere they could because they don't like the evil bigoted Republicans because they're bigots... whatever that means...

So now Google runs an AI widget that scours the Internet for a good photo of Trudy Wade and it comes back with this recently popular photo that has a silhouette that matches the algorithm for what a person's photo should look like, and it gets inserted into the web page without a person ever looking at it. Yeah, that's possible. It's called 'image processing' and is used to handle the abnormally high demand for photos from a database the size Google uses.

Another possibility is that of 'crowd editing.' Wikipedia uses this a lot, which is why they are regularly attacked as being biased one way or another. In actuality, it is the editors, otherwise 'normal' people with time on their hands, that keep the pages updated. If one of those people with time on their hands uploads a photo that says 'bigot' across it, it is quite likely that no one else noticed, until someone came along and wrote about it.

Now, who typically has time on their hands? Those who don't have a job, or at least who don't have a productive (as in, with room for advancement and responsibility) job. That would be the far left. Who typically tosses out baseless accusations about racism, bigotry, hatred, etc.? That would be the far left as well.

I have to admit, the conservative portion of society can be pretty dumb at times. The political arena is nothing less than a war zone between those who hold certain views that dictate they work hard for a living and take responsibility for their actions, and those who just want to win this political game at all costs, damn the consequences. In this war, the far left is using the equivalent of semi-auto nuclear grenade launchers, while the right is busy looking at each other wondering who is going to fire back with their slingshots. An equivalent response would be to busily produce and distribute photos of Mad Maxine Waters with the word "insane" plastered across it, or maybe of Pelosi with the word "greedy" across her, or maybe Schumer with the words "dumb as a rock" across his photo. But such childish activities take time, and most conservatives don't have time in great abundance; we're busy actually doing stuff. So the war continues as always.

When one of those nuclear grenades goes off, as in this case, we will look up and go "what the freak?" and start accusing the messenger, though. I guess that's time well spent in some other universe...

Now I will also admit that Google, being a company built on social change, likely has more than its fair share of liberal employees, some of which are likely far left and more than happy to see photos like this pop up. I don't necessarily hold everyone at Google blameless. Rather, I just wanted to point out how this likely came about.

Now, can we get the false labeling of people as "racist" or "bigot" to be a class A felony? It wouldn't stop this mess from happening, of course, but a few 20-year sentences in a Federal penitentiary might make a few people think before they throw out the next accusation... yeah, that's extreme, but at least I haven't mentioned making it a capital offense... yet...

TheRedneck

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: luthier

I have yet to see you condemn Google for doing this.

All you've done is defend the label that Google placed on the image.


Now if you have condemned it, I will admit to being wrong.

So you think one ideology should be able to determine for everyone else what that person is or thinks or feels?


I do not.

I assume it was hacked or an employee with access did this.

If it was intentional then it is just another sign of decisive partisanship that is everywhere.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: IAMTAT

Everyone forgive me a moment while I actually try and defend Google.

Ummm... I think a couple posters are going into cardiac arrest. Can we get some EMTs in here?

Now, while that's being taken care of, as I was saying, that photo was likely not created by Google. It was likely someone else, a private individual with a warped idea of what the term means, who superimposed the word on a 'normal' photo. Then others who also don't know what the word 'bigot' means started posting it everywhere they could because they don't like the evil bigoted Republicans because they're bigots... whatever that means...

So now Google runs an AI widget that scours the Internet for a good photo of Trudy Wade and it comes back with this recently popular photo that has a silhouette that matches the algorithm for what a person's photo should look like, and it gets inserted into the web page without a person ever looking at it. Yeah, that's possible. It's called 'image processing' and is used to handle the abnormally high demand for photos from a database the size Google uses.

Another possibility is that of 'crowd editing.' Wikipedia uses this a lot, which is why they are regularly attacked as being biased one way or another. In actuality, it is the editors, otherwise 'normal' people with time on their hands, that keep the pages updated. If one of those people with time on their hands uploads a photo that says 'bigot' across it, it is quite likely that no one else noticed, until someone came along and wrote about it.

Now, who typically has time on their hands? Those who don't have a job, or at least who don't have a productive (as in, with room for advancement and responsibility) job. That would be the far left. Who typically tosses out baseless accusations about racism, bigotry, hatred, etc.? That would be the far left as well.

I have to admit, the conservative portion of society can be pretty dumb at times. The political arena is nothing less than a war zone between those who hold certain views that dictate they work hard for a living and take responsibility for their actions, and those who just want to win this political game at all costs, damn the consequences. In this war, the far left is using the equivalent of semi-auto nuclear grenade launchers, while the right is busy looking at each other wondering who is going to fire back with their slingshots. An equivalent response would be to busily produce and distribute photos of Mad Maxine Waters with the word "insane" plastered across it, or maybe of Pelosi with the word "greedy" across her, or maybe Schumer with the words "dumb as a rock" across his photo. But such childish activities take time, and most conservatives don't have time in great abundance; we're busy actually doing stuff. So the war continues as always.

When one of those nuclear grenades goes off, as in this case, we will look up and go "what the freak?" and start accusing the messenger, though. I guess that's time well spent in some other universe...

Now I will also admit that Google, being a company built on social change, likely has more than its fair share of liberal employees, some of which are likely far left and more than happy to see photos like this pop up. I don't necessarily hold everyone at Google blameless. Rather, I just wanted to point out how this likely came about.

Now, can we get the false labeling of people as "racist" or "bigot" to be a class A felony? It wouldn't stop this mess from happening, of course, but a few 20-year sentences in a Federal penitentiary might make a few people think before they throw out the next accusation... yeah, that's extreme, but at least I haven't mentioned making it a capital offense... yet...

TheRedneck

The photo was from an article about her from a liberal media outlet.
interstateq.com...

a reply to: TheRedneck

When we've reached a point where we go to search engines for opinions rather than facts, then we're done.

Katy bar the door.


Turn out the lights.


Good night Irene.

a reply to: luthier


Fair enough.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Ummm... did you have a nice nap?

We've been there for some time now.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

My Google news feed has gotten rediculous. It's complete confirmation bias now with articles it thinks are from my viewpoint.

Reason which is a fairly obscure media outlet has several articles in my feed.

It's creepy.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: DBCowboy

Ummm... did you have a nice nap?

We've been there for some time now.

TheRedneck

*chuckle*

Yeah. I suppose we have.

a reply to: IAMTAT

People in the know list Google as totalitarian fascists.

a reply to: luthier

More algorithms.

I tend to confuse the Hades out of them. Half of my Internet activities are high-tech research, the other half is mind-numbing mental masturbation, and the other half is conspiratorial stuff.

You should see the targeted ads I get.

TheRedneck

Almost all of you are paranoid freaks. What is Google at its heart? It is a search engine that shows results from crawling the web. Where did the results and the picture of the right wing freako politician come from? That is where your feigned outrage should be placed.

The sad thing is those that are whining because they are triggered snowflakes should look at what her views are that prompted the bigot label (that was returned by the search results that showed the pic) in the first place. What was the actual source? Hint, it wasn't Google. Try to learn about how Google search works.

Time to start smashing your Android phones, along with your Yeti coolers and TVs, etc.

a reply to: luthier

I think abortion and homosexuality are morally wrong and I am not at all religious. Now, granted, as a Libertarian, I have no interest in limiting the protections and freedoms of my fellow citizens, but you don’t need to be religious to find certain lifestyles and choices to be immoral.

a reply to: terrapincb

And yet there are no images of Democrats on Google stamped with “Communist”...why is that I wonder? I guess it’s great to be able to dismiss these biased incidents as mistakes when they aren’t happening to your side.

originally posted by: terrapincb
Almost all of you are paranoid freaks. What is Google at its heart? It is a search engine that shows results from crawling the web. Where did the results and the picture of the right wing freako politician come from? That is where your feigned outrage should be placed.

A lot have woken up to how Google works.

Result manipulation based on the overwhelmingly leftist political beliefs by it's controllers and the bots they employ to push forward their beliefs.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: terrapincb

And yet there are no images of Democrats on Google stamped with “Communist”...why is that I wonder? I guess it’s great to be able to dismiss these biased incidents as mistakes when they aren’t happening to your side.

There are many.

www.google.com... CygC&biw=1366&bih=662

So Google apparently put this picture up on purpose so that people would see it but as soon as people see it they pull it down? Why would they knowingly put the picture up for people to see if they didn't want people talking about it? Something doesn't add up here, I don't think people think these things through before grabbing their pitchforks.

Sounds to me like it was either an honest mistake or they were just following orders and "triggering" certain people who have been taught to feel like victims by Hollywood and the media.

Again, why would they put the picture up if they didn't want any negative backlash over it? They're not that dumb.

originally posted by: luthier

How would libertarian views be mistaken for fascist?

"Bigot" is nothing more than a curse word label so we might as well call someone a F head for the same result. How does one prove someone is not a bigot outside of Gandhi? In the end when people label it doesn't matter why or even if it is correct in anyway, if you do not agree with me then I'll randomly pick from the list below to identify you.

1. Bigot
2. Racist
3. Fascist
4. Homophobic
5. sexist
6. Liar
7. hypocrite

to name a few...

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: luthier

I think abortion and homosexuality are morally wrong and I am not at all religious. Now, granted, as a Libertarian, I have no interest in limiting the protections and freedoms of my fellow citizens, but you don’t need to be religious to find certain lifestyles and choices to be immoral.

My point was using legislature to limit people's freedoms.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
So Google apparently put this picture up on purpose so that people would see it but as soon as people see it they pull it down? Why would they knowingly put the picture up for people to see if they didn't want people talking about it? Something doesn't add up here, I don't think people think these things through before grabbing their pitchforks.

As with the FBI, Google is not political at the institutional level, but it seems we fail to realize that individuals or small groups that work for both can be political. These people can cause and affect political statements/actions/agendas with in their realm of control that the over all institutions do not support. So a Bigot picture somehow gets magically selected until the institution finds out.