this post was submitted on 12 May 2024
68 points (87.8% liked)

worldnews

1782 readers
5 users here now

Welcome! This community is constantly upgrading and is a current work in progress. Please stay tuned.

/c/[email protected] strives for high-quality standards on the latest world events.

The basis of these standards comes from the MBFC, which uses an aggregate of methodologies, including the IFCN and World Freedom Indices, to rate the Bias and Factual Reporting of News.

These are non-profit organisations with full transparency of their funding and structure. Likewise, this community is also transparent – Please feel free to question its staff and the overall content of this community.


Does your post fit the standards? Check this thread!



Rules:


Disallowed submissions

Commenters will receive one public warning with only one strike if violating any of the following rules:

Thank you.

todo list:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Google is coming in for sharp criticism after video went viral of the Google Nest assistant refusing to answer basic questions about the Holocaust — but having no problem answer questions about the Nakba.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Nah, I think the solution is simpler: multiple competing algorithms. Gaming one system is pretty easy, gaming 5 isn't. So if a search company wants to always have the top results, they need to swap between a handful of good search algorithms to keep SEO hunters at bay.

Hiring experts is certainly a good idea, but due to the sheer size of the internet, it's not going to be feasible.

As for the original discussion about censorship in search, I take it to mean intentional hiding or demotion of relevant results due to the content of those results. SEO spam isn't relevant because it's not what the customer is likely wanting, so hiding/demoting it doesn't count as censorship imo.