Anyone who knows anything about search engines (I admit my knowledge is basic) would surely know that each enquiry affects how search results are displayed. For example, if you search my name, skip over the troll posts (creep tried to get me fired from my job while trying to provoke a flame war), then only read the other posts about me, the next time you look me up the results will be different.
Why?
Because results are sorted according to relevance and popularity. The more often certain items are searched for, e.g. "Wendy Cockcroft On t'Internet" the higher up the search results my blog posts will display.
Try it, leave it for a few days, then check again.
Search engine companies can influence their search results by changing algorithms but they can't change search behaviour. If people want to look up "Wendy Cockcroft copyright" they will. And when they do they'll find that I'm a right opinionated so-and-so (you don't need to bother). They are not omnipotent. If they were, there would be no copyright infringement, trolling, or other unwanted behaviours.
If Zaphod Beeblebrox promised to upend the status quo and effect change, and looked as if he could actually achieve this, the American people would totally vote for him, papier mâché paper second head or not.
Heck, they'd even vote for Arthur Dent's dressing gown if they thought it would make a difference.
To be fair, Thad, Trump supporters, having been advised for decades that "government" and "the Establishment" and "the elites" are bad are so desperate for change they are willing to vote this jerk in to upset the status quo and reset the system. The Atlantic's Conor Friedersdorf is my main source of information about this and he has provided a great Q&A session in which Trump supporters explain their choices.
While many of Trump's supporters are undoubtedly fascists, etc., that doesn't mean they all are.
If we don't take the "desperate for change" faction into account we'll have no chance of addressing the concerns that have driven them to such desperation.
Yep. And there's the problem: put up with it until you snap = terrorism; put up with it and hope it doesn't come your way = part of the problem.
I personally believe that a sustained campaign to force accountability on people in authority is the answer. The people need to take responsibility for ensuring that the rule of law is upheld and until they do this kind of thing will continue.
Good national security programs will shut down the accounts and lock out agencies who mislead the public, cheat, or lie to get signups. Least untruthful answers are intentionally misleading the public into believing a program has a good reputation and has not been found to be abusive. National security programs that support that sort of nonsense should be dealt with by the relevant congressional oversight committee.
"Mass surveillance programs's year-of-woe keeps going" because people are trying to use it to cover and excuse all sorts of bad behavior. No, terrorism is not a cover for unconstitutional bulk surveillance nor does it somehow magically make the program not responsible for the actions of the people they both pay and help with "terrorism prevention."
It's sort of shocking to see an advocate for robust law enforcement not grasping something so basic.
It doesn't help that people who want to advance an agenda tend to choose a broad-brush identity, e.g. [religion] or [political philosophy] in order to lend credibility to their cause. If they're noisy enough they end up tarring the entire [group] with the brush of their craziness.
If only the Fascist alt-right brigade would stop calling themselves "Conservatives!"
If only the authoritarian weirdos would stop calling themselves "Liberals!"
If only the hard-left anarchists would stop calling themselves "Socialists!"
It's not going to happen. And until such time as the moderates push back and label these people according to their attitudes and actions we will have to suffer a divided society in which labels alone keep people at each others' throats when they'd usually get along.
Re: Re: Re: I'm not picking up a coherent message from the Trump quotes...
Yes! This is why we need a big popular shift to a third party; at least it would break up the status quo. That's what all the Trump votes are about. Believe me, no one wants a thick president. What is actually happening is that people want change and will vote for whoever can deliver that change, whatever that change is, as long as it is change. I'm personally hoping the GOP will either win and reset after a crushing defeat in four years' time or that they'll lose and reset after a crushing defeat in November. Either way, they need to reset.
On the post: Donald Trump Happily Repeating Lie About Google Autocomplete Suppressing Negative Hillary News
Re:
Why?
Because results are sorted according to relevance and popularity. The more often certain items are searched for, e.g. "Wendy Cockcroft On t'Internet" the higher up the search results my blog posts will display.
Try it, leave it for a few days, then check again.
Search engine companies can influence their search results by changing algorithms but they can't change search behaviour. If people want to look up "Wendy Cockcroft copyright" they will. And when they do they'll find that I'm a right opinionated so-and-so (you don't need to bother). They are not omnipotent. If they were, there would be no copyright infringement, trolling, or other unwanted behaviours.
On the post: Donald Trump Happily Repeating Lie About Google Autocomplete Suppressing Negative Hillary News
Re: Re: Re: Re: google news
Heck, they'd even vote for Arthur Dent's dressing gown if they thought it would make a difference.
On the post: Donald Trump Happily Repeating Lie About Google Autocomplete Suppressing Negative Hillary News
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: google news
While many of Trump's supporters are undoubtedly fascists, etc., that doesn't mean they all are.
If we don't take the "desperate for change" faction into account we'll have no chance of addressing the concerns that have driven them to such desperation.
On the post: The FCC Wants To Know Why Journalists Had To Pay $200 For WiFi At Presidential Debate
Re: Completely Fitting
If people don't like the available choices, let them do without. /sarc
On the post: Court Dumps Cops' Complaint They Were Unfairly Treated After Shooting Two Unarmed Suspects 47 Times
Re: Re: Re: nutjobs with guns
On the post: Court Dumps Cops' Complaint They Were Unfairly Treated After Shooting Two Unarmed Suspects 47 Times
Re: Re: Re: In A Nation Awash With Guns ...
I personally believe that a sustained campaign to force accountability on people in authority is the answer. The people need to take responsibility for ensuring that the rule of law is upheld and until they do this kind of thing will continue.
On the post: Court Dumps Cops' Complaint They Were Unfairly Treated After Shooting Two Unarmed Suspects 47 Times
Re: Re: Re: Cue the world's smallest violin...
On the post: Court Dumps Cops' Complaint They Were Unfairly Treated After Shooting Two Unarmed Suspects 47 Times
Re: Re: Re: Cue the world's smallest violin...
On the post: Does The FTC Get To Ignore Section 230 Of The CDA?
Re: Re: Not sure how 230 is relevant here...
Good national security programs will shut down the accounts and lock out agencies who mislead the public, cheat, or lie to get signups. Least untruthful answers are intentionally misleading the public into believing a program has a good reputation and has not been found to be abusive. National security programs that support that sort of nonsense should be dealt with by the relevant congressional oversight committee.
"Mass surveillance programs's year-of-woe keeps going" because people are trying to use it to cover and excuse all sorts of bad behavior. No, terrorism is not a cover for unconstitutional bulk surveillance nor does it somehow magically make the program not responsible for the actions of the people they both pay and help with "terrorism prevention."
It's sort of shocking to see an advocate for robust law enforcement not grasping something so basic.
On the post: Photographer Successfully DMCAs Trump Jr.'s Skittles Image
Re: Re: Re: Re: COPYRIGHT, SLANDER AND BLASPHEMY
On the post: Photographer Successfully DMCAs Trump Jr.'s Skittles Image
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If only the Fascist alt-right brigade would stop calling themselves "Conservatives!"
If only the authoritarian weirdos would stop calling themselves "Liberals!"
If only the hard-left anarchists would stop calling themselves "Socialists!"
It's not going to happen. And until such time as the moderates push back and label these people according to their attitudes and actions we will have to suffer a divided society in which labels alone keep people at each others' throats when they'd usually get along.
On the post: Can Someone Explain To The RIAA That SOPA Didn't Actually Pass?
Re: Re:
On the post: Can Someone Explain To The RIAA That SOPA Didn't Actually Pass?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Get over yourself, Whatever, and go and learn some history. Ireland has been independent of the UK since 1922. Therefore UK law doesn't apply to us.
EU laws are a different thing and are not interchangeable with UK laws.
I live in the UK, and as an activist I make it my business to know things like this.
On the post: Can Someone Explain To The RIAA That SOPA Didn't Actually Pass?
Re: Re:
On the post: Local Lawyers Challenge New Kuwaiti Law Creating Mandatory DNA Database Of All Citizens And Visitors
Re:
*Throws up*
Benevolent, my rear end.
On the post: We QA Tested Vote2016() Against Last Night's Debate; No Code Changes Required
Re: Don't believe the hornswogglers
On the post: We QA Tested Vote2016() Against Last Night's Debate; No Code Changes Required
Re:
On the post: Trump Offers More Insight On His Cybersecurity Plans: 10-Year-Old Relatives Vs. 400-lb Bedroom Dwellers
Re: Re: Re: I'm not picking up a coherent message from the Trump quotes...
On the post: Trump Offers More Insight On His Cybersecurity Plans: 10-Year-Old Relatives Vs. 400-lb Bedroom Dwellers
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Trump Offers More Insight On His Cybersecurity Plans: 10-Year-Old Relatives Vs. 400-lb Bedroom Dwellers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Suppose this was a problem nonetheless: would a tyranny of the minority be any better? Are you really asking for a king?
Next >>