this post was submitted on 28 May 2024
883 points (99.8% liked)

Technology

58144 readers
4472 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A purported leak of 2,500 pages of internal documentation from Google sheds light on how Search, the most powerful arbiter of the internet, operates.

The leaked documents touch on topics like what kind of data Google collects and uses, which sites Google elevates for sensitive topics like elections, how Google handles small websites, and more. Some information in the documents appears to be in conflict with public statements by Google representatives, according to Fishkin and King.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's honestly quite strange that this sort of black box system is allowed to exist. How are governments around the world OK with a vast majority of the internet being filtered through a private company's lens without any sort of insight into how it works? That sounds skeevy as shit.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Better than those governments having control. Ideal scenario is everything is decentralized

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I agree decentralized is better, but isn't that an argument in favor of a government having more control than a corporation?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No? What I said was "better than governments have control" how is that pro government?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

you said "ideal scenario is everything is decentralized"

would it be right to assume "more decentralization is better"?

if so, then which is more decentralized: a corporation or a government

yes, what you said was paradoxical, which is why i was saying "it's actually in favor of government"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Ahh, I suppose I could see that

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Why is that better? It may not be ideal but governments have at least some accountability.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Did you notice the US President from 16 to 20?

Even after felony convictions, there is no accountability or consequences.

Have you seen the US Supreme Court?

Don't tell me a government has any accountability when minds are twisted by misinformation engines like Fox & Friends.

Not that a company is any better, yet alone google.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

It's hard to draw meaningful conclusions form a single 4 year period. There have been several instances of corruption (and significant externalized costs) in private firms that went on for much longer than 4 years.

I agree that there is a lot of corruption in government but there's a long gap between that and no accountability. We see various forms of government accountability on a regular basis; politicians lose elections, they get recalled, and they sometimes even get incarcerated. We also have multiple systems designed to allow any citizen to influence government.

None of these systems and safeguards are anywhere close to perfect but it must be better than organizations that don't even have these systems in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Because that paves a very easy path to corruption . No freaking way do i wanna live in a country where the government has absolute control over all information spread.

Don't get me wrong, fuck Google, but government control of the Internet just sounds worse

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What makes governments any more susceptible to corruption than a private organization?

I'm not actually talking about governments having absolute control. That's a pretty extreme scenario to jump to from from the question of if it's better for a private company or a government to control search.

Right now we think Google is misusing that data. We can't even get information on it without a leak. The government has a flawed FOIA system but Google has nothing of the sort. The only way we're protected from corruption at Google (and historically speaking several other large private organization) is when the government steps in and stops them.

Governments often handle corruption poorly but I can rattle of many cases where governments managed to reduce corruption on their own (ie without requiring a revolution). In many cases the source of that corruption was large private organizations.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

You make some good points. But consider this. This data was publicly leaked by hackers. These hackers, if we go by precedent, will probably get away Scott free. sure it was very difficult to find this data, but not impossible. On the other hand a government if faced with a breach like this, would probably find the hackers and detain them as threats to national security, as we've seen with Edward Snowden.

Though our system isn't perfect, i think that having a corrupt Google is better than a corrupt government in this case. As you said, Google can be corrupt, but the government can step in and take over, whereas, if a government decides that it's access to citizens data is important enough, they can continue with corruption with less resistance. I mean, who guards the guards right?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

FOIA requests generally don't involve hackers or leaks. The act exists because citizens insisted that government provides visibility into its inner workings.

What is the equivalent for Google, or any other private company?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Do you have any sort of argument for that or is it just thoughts different, different thoughts bad?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago

I tried to cry for them but after Googling instructions about how to I poured Elmer's Wood Glue on both eyes. I cannot call the result tears. Not sure what to call it, but certainly not tears.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 3 months ago

Honestly I hope this bites them hard. They've done way way worse to small businesses and competition for decades now.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Who wants to take bets that Search itself ends up in The Graveyard soon, leaving nothing but the new AI abomination in place?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I could see them not letting you directly search anymore, only through the LLM bot. Because that's been how things have been going anyway, Google seems to fully ignore literal searches with quote marks now, presumably because it doesn't fit their vision of using natural (imprecise) language. So why not make the LLM write the search query for you in a completely opaque way?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

You can search, it will just cost you $15/mo for the Google battlepass.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

More likely they will just slowly rebrand search to more AI type things. Then slowly retire the non-AI parts in the background.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I know a lot of the smaller, independent search engines are lacking, but the people using the "udm=14" trick to remove Google's AI results now, as if that won't be removed as soon as Google needs to show investors the AI is more profitable.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

the url needs a param to tell the server what kind of query is being requested. as long as they have the 'web' tab and option, it will be there. but i'm guessing they will come up with a way to encode that instruction in the tracking bits or something so you can't just manually tack something on to the end of your query url and bypass their precious a.i. bot

load more comments
view more: next ›