Page 5 of 5 [ 72 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,382

23 May 2013, 12:59 am

Jaden wrote:

Just because something may not be the result of people typing exactly that phrase, doesn't mean it isn't offensive and inappropriate and therefore shouldn't be taken down.
Furthermore, you seem to have contridicted yourself as well, you complain that this is "Censorship of freedom of speech". Earlier you said:

Quote:
Censorship offends me too.

It is freedom of speech that keeps us free.

In direct agreement with the quote:
Quote:
Google search is supposed to show what others are searching for. I don't really appreciate the censorship, no matter how cruel

Yet you just now said:
Quote:
The Algorithm is a collection of words and math, not necessarily the intention of ill intent returned in actual web results

Quote:
a mindless Algorithm equation of math


So, if it's simply a mindless algorithm that has come up with this top result, and not necessarily the intention of ill intent or what people are actually typing, then there is no basis to complain about freedom of speech because it's a math equation that has no such freedom.

Once again this brings us all back to what people are subjected to by force of that same equation, and since you've just established that the result is not necessarily what people are really typing, then why complain about people who want that top result removed, by using the basis of "freedom of speech" for something that is apparently given by a machine that has no such right? Since no-ones freedom of speech has been taken away, what's the problem?

Do you see the conflict? If people really were saying it, then it could be classified as hate speech and was rightfully removed (though no discussion anywhere would be touched even if that were the case, so it's not censorship either way), if it was purely an algorithm that put those words together then it has no freedom of speech and it doesn't matter who complained about it or why it was removed from the possible searches in the first place.


The google search engine is an avenue of Freedom of Speech that is part of an expanded avenue of free speech available at our finger tips today.

The search engine itself is a tool, not intent.

The rationale of complaint offered to Google was that Society was intentionally typing in this phrase and Google was "letting it happen". That was the argument that I disagreed with, that there is no evidence for.

If it was clearly understood by those individuals at that point in time that it was an Algorithm generated result from words that people on the spectrum actually typed in, per defense of the idea of people being killed on the spectrum or killing other people, there would be no "reasoned" need to feel "insulted" by the Algorithm

Restricting the search results restricts the potential for freedom of speech, whether it is math generated or human generated.

For every amusing or nonsensical phrase generated by the Algorithm there are others useful in enhancing the avenue that Google provides for freedom of speech.

The fact remains that one isolated person found this Algorithm "Offense" and amplified it with human intent per Society overall, that was not reasoned.

As a result there now is a lower probability that other people on Google will randomly find themselves studying the actual rhetorical concerns of people reporting on the spectrum arguing against filicides and violence among people on the spectrum.

In effect, some of the same people arguing these points censored themselves and do not seem be aware of it. That is ironic.

The argument that there are more Filicides associated with Autism over any other demographic in the US, is not warranted by Department of Justice Statistics, so perhaps there is not much lost by society losing "random algorithm" access to that rhetorical opinion by some of the same people who were attempting to get that non-reasoned message out on the internet.

Perhaps there is "Algorithm Karma" after all. :)

The actual internet search results on the internet associated with the "Webosphere" are majority comprised of compassion and concern for people facing the challenge of Autism. Any actual offense against people on the spectrum by diagnostic label alone is far the exception rather than the rule.

However, anytime something negative happens to a person diagnosed and reported as such anywhere in the world, on the spectrum, it is amplified by some people in the Autism Community as a myth of Society, as a whole, "Demonizing" Autism by label alone.

There is no substantial evidence of that. All it takes is a Google search and actual search results to prove it.

The negative parts, overall, are coming from a relative few people associating themselves with the Spectrum amplifying the same myths about Society "Demonizing" Autism by "label alone" over and over and over again.

The evidence for that in actual search results is abundantly clear.

That is part of the element of freedom of speech associated with this Google Algorithm that is the greatest of all tools per avenue for global human communication.

The Algorithm discriminates against few words, even newly invented ones that any creative person can design, and provides an equal playing field of voices across the globe for almost anyone who wants to participate in freedom of speech and have people listen to messages of interest.

People used to imagine cosmic consciousness.

Now it can be measured in keyword search tools and actual web search result thanks to the business enterprise of Google.

That would not likely even be fathomable to people living just a century in the past.


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Jaden
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

23 May 2013, 2:13 am

aghogday wrote:
The google search engine is an avenue of Freedom of Speech that is part of an expanded avenue of free speech available at our finger tips today. 1

The search engine itself is a tool, not intent. 2

The rationale of complaint offered to Google was that Society was intentionally typing in this phrase and Google was "letting it happen". That was the argument that I disagreed with, that there is no evidence for. 3

If it was clearly understood by those individuals at that point in time that it was an Algorithm generated result from words that people on the spectrum actually typed in, per defense of the idea of people being killed on the spectrum or killing other people, there would be no "reasoned" need to feel "insulted" by the Algorithm 4

Restricting the search results restricts the potential for freedom of speech, whether it is math generated or human generated. 5


1. Freedom of speech is an idea and right given by government and law, the freedom would be the same even if the internet didn't exist. The only change would be who is heard, where, and over what period of time but that doesn't effect the freedom itself. So, I'm not sure how that's relevant to the conversation.

2. Yes, it is just a tool and the tool itself may not have intent, but that's not really the issue here. The issue is whether or not what was generated as a top search was offensive and should've been taken down as such.

3. So you're saying there's no evidence to suggest that society was typing it in, fine, I agree there is no evidence of that. So then you maintain that the algorithm was solely responsible for the recommended search? Ok.

4. So now you're saying someone actually did type it in... Ok.
Although since you established in point 3 that there was no evidence to warrent the takedown of the recommendation, I must point out that there couldn't be evidence to suggest that people on the spectrum were the ones typing it, any more than normal society. If such evidence did exist then Google could've easily explained one way or the other, but since that never took place it is obvious to me that there was no evidence to either argument.

5. We're not talking about results from the search, we're talking about auto-generated search recommendations given by the system. There's a difference there. Taking down what the system recommends is not restrictive upon freedom of speech, people can still search it and they can still find the results of that same search and they can still talk about said phrase wherever they want, the only thing that's changed, is that people don't have to see the phrase (recommendation) if they don't want to when searching for something completely unrelated.


_________________
Writer. Author.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,382

23 May 2013, 3:51 am

1. The Business Enterprise of Google provides a phenomenal new avenue/tool for Freedom of speech on a Global basis. Without increased avenues for freedom of speech there is reduced freedom of speech, whether it is Global Internet Access, Satellite TV, National Cable, Newspapers, Phone, Telegraph, Radio, Sign Language. or the Alphabet. These are all incredible tools/avenues for freedom of speech. The laws enforce the rights but the tools are what makes it happen in the large scale of global human interaction.

Take away any part of Google and there is less freedom of speech per reduced avenue/tool of freedom of speech. It is a very relative and understood concern associated with Freedom of Speech on a global basis. The Google Corporation could shut the switch off tomorrow, but another corporation would come to take that spot, as it is among the highest of desired attributes of modern society, per access to information, and profit making potential.

2 & 3. I'm glad you understand that there is no malicious intent per this issue by the Algorithm or Society. There are some people that have difficulty understanding that point of logic.

I am emphasizing many of the points I am making here to validate the evidence for those who may be reading, who may still not understand how the Algorithm works, and the fact that there is no substantial evidence that this is a society generated phenomenon of malicious intent.

4. Google provides a complete resource in how the Algorithm works. It works based on keyword searches and actual keywords in text across the internet. It is not necessary that someone type in an exact phrase to generate the phrases that Google Recommends. They are generated by keywords, not just exact phrases.

At the time this incident first happened there were less than 10 global monthly key word searches on the exact phrase "Autistic People Should be Killed". Google provides a keyword search tool to measure exact phrases typed in on searches on the internet.

People in the Autism Community are typing in the keywords killed, should, be, and Autistic in text on the internet. The Algorithm generates the autocomplete suggestion phrase from the keywords. At the point in time this issue started the phrase typed in without quotes for a broad search brought up the rhetorical concerns over Filicides, which were not warranted by the Department of Justice statistics.

At that point in time there were 7 actual exact phrase search results where one uses quotes in the search box and now there are about 25K, as a direct result of people discussing this specific issue per rhetoric instead of malicious intent.

No doubt people from the Autism Community in the last 3 months, since this controversy was generated, have been typing in that exact phrase for the sake of curiosity.

5. That's true. However, it is also true that there is no longer the same random opportunity for people in general society to discover what people in the Autism Community were discussing per concerns over Filicides, and the killing of Autistic children. As far as I can see since some of the concerns were not warranted, that is no great loss of random opportunity by general society to view those type of results.

I'm not attempting to make a "value" judgement that it is a bad thing that part of the phrase is gone now. I'm just fully describing the process that is not evidenced as a result of malicious intent by society, overall. That the same opportunity to come across the discussions is no longer the same random opportunity is where a value judgement could be made, by a person who might be concerned about that.

The Google Corporation as a private business allows customers to present their case for adjustments in Algorithm Auto complete search suggestions. It is only a business decision where Google determines the cost/benefit was benefit to take the minimal corrective action they took to alter the Algorithm based on the concern that was expressed. It was likely a public relations decision not worth arguing about.

They did not even address the issue of "Autistics Should". The offensive phrase "Autistics Should be Killed" without the "people" keyword comes up third in a Google search for that Auto complete phrase suggestion that society, overall, is not typing in.

It is higher than it has ever been in rank, because of all the rhetoric discussed on this issue in the last 3 months in the Autism Community that can be found in actual search results.

The last time I checked it was ranked at 5.

Effectively Speaking, bringing attention to this issue has made it worse in someways, overall, per the initial concern, than better.

Edited on 5/23/13 to provide updated stats on the Google Key Word Search Tool, that one can use to verify the statistics at this link:

https://adwords.google.com/o/Targeting/ ... WORD_IDEAS

The Google Key Word Search Tool now provides evidence that there are 260 monthly exact phrase searches on the phrase "Autistic People Should be Killed", just 3 months after this controversy started, and people on the spectrum gained interest in the issue. As mentioned earlier in this post it was 10 monthly phrase searches, 3 months ago.

I documented that statistic at the link below 3 months ago on another website, in discussion of this issue. I had predicted at that point that the number of monthly searches would likely rise substantially since "rhetorical" interest from the Autism Community had become focused on this exact phrase of offense.

There were 28 broad monthly searches "not based on the exact phrase", 3 months ago, also documented in the link below, and now there are 320 broad monthly searches, per the Google Keyword Search Tool linked above.

http://www.autismspeaks.org/news/news-i ... -818750117

So to summarize, the rhetorical interest directed at this phrase of offense, "Autistic People Should be Killed", has exponentially increased the number of keyword searches on the exact phrase by a factor of 26 times, since the time this controversy began 3 Months ago.

The increase from 7 actual exact phrase results coming from actual searches on the exact phrase "Autistic People Should be Killed", enclosed in quotes to 25,100 actual exact phrase results, as of today, is an incredible increase and testament to the power of attention in focus on areas of interest by people on the spectrum as a group effort, in resulting effect on Google Auto-Complete Search Suggestions, Actual Keyword Searches, and Actual Web Results in written text across the global internet.


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Last edited by aghogday on 23 May 2013, 5:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jaden
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

23 May 2013, 4:07 am

I have no doubt that more search it now out of curiosity and really, if anything that has given a higher return for people who potentially click on the links, that before, would've been random from the generated autocomplete suggestion and so has (according to your logic about google effecting freedom of speech) provided more "freedom of speech"/publicity to people who potentially discuss it, and with that there is still no infraction/censorship of said freedom or speech but rather a proliferation of it. So, I fail to see why people complain that removing an autocomplete suggestion generated by a computer based on words said in nonrelated topics is in any way censorship of the freedom of speech in any form, especially since the result of such removal has given new publicity to the results and even to this topic, which is as stated, the complete opposite of censorship.


_________________
Writer. Author.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,382

23 May 2013, 5:05 am

It is the beauty of Google.

I may not agree with censorship, overall, as a practice when there is respectful disagreement and people are trying to resolve issues of difference.

However, with Google a good controversy always generates additional freedom of speech. Where there is cost in censorship there is usual equal, if not greater, benefit in freedom of speech. :)

This issue has greatly increased my freedom of speech.

I will provide a few examples.

If one types in either Autistics Should Be Loved or Autistics Should Be Killed, all this information I have provided is now available at the finger tips in top search results for anyone on the spectrum who finds fascination with Patterns generated by Algorithms like I do.

I also enjoy decoding patterns in almost everything else in life. It is part of my "Hyperlexic Flavor" of Autism.

The Opportunity to discuss "Algorithms and Autistics" in one sentence is a dream come true for me, that I never realized existed, until someone started this controversy.

How happy could I be that from now until some point in the future when someone types in Algorithms and Autistics in a search, for whatever reason, they will have the opportunity to share my out of the box thinking, for some time to come, whether I am alive or dead.

That is Freedom of Speech at the highest levels of human imagination.

They will never know my name but that does not matter, as we are all in this game of life together, whether we exist on or off a spectrum. :)

Google makes an amazing tapestry of minds, or what could be described as cosmic consciousness, come to fruition, in concrete reality, in words that are edifice of mind.

Not likely, that anyone else has ever described it that way. Huh? :)

Even more amazing is the fact that I can type the sentence in Google and it "tells me no".

It is part of the beauty of the Autistic mind in art of word.

Read the Bold sentence a couple of times and see if one's mind replaces Google with God.

Does it even matter?

"Who" knew Algorithms could be this deep? :)


Also too, I thank you Jaden, as our respectful discussion with each other has inspired another Blog Post for me, per the stimulation of my mind, from others on this site, as has been the case many times in the past.

I don't usually mention names, in my Blog posts, but never the less, I credit you, in part, for the effort here today, at this point in time. here, on this 'Wrong Planet'. :)

Here is my Blog Post, that is almost identical to my response to you.

It is titled 'Praising' the 'Google' Algorithm :)

http://katiemiaaghogday.blogspot.com/20 ... rithm.html


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


bonsai
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 22
Location: .

23 May 2013, 10:31 pm

WrongWay wrote:
starkid wrote:
I don't understand the purpose of this. Why try to hide what other people have searched for?


Because it promotes hate towards autistic people. Someone just looking for information on autism might see the autofill results first thing and therefore get a unjustifiably bad first impression about autistics.


People wanting to make a difference in the autistic community will not be swayed by autocomplete terms that pop up and hit them in the face on Google.

As for affecting NT's first impressions of those with ASD, if you really want to change NT's' opinions, get up out of the chair and change them. I agree with an earlier post that questioned the purpose of search algorithm modification by calling it unnecessary. It's a futile behaviour- changing associations in the algorithm tree just hacks away at the symptom and fails to address those mean old people. Weren't those the opinions you wanted you change in the first place? Trying to curtail what they see in a Google bar so they won't see or think mean, hurtful things is micromanaging, it's puerile.

Call me socially inept, call me shy, call me weird, tell me to get lost. Think of the worst phrase you can, get angry, and say it. You only live once, I'll live it with or without mean words and those supposedly hateful search terms. Time is not worth wasting on pejoratives in person, why are we (us) doing this the internet? If an easily-influenced NT ended up being flashed that phrase 'Autistics should be exterminated' by accident, well, they'll either believe it and that person couldn't have contributed to this community anyway (nobody believes something so polarizing in either direction with such a lack of scrutiny), or like most people who see something extraneous on the street and keep walking, that person will just ignore it and keep living.


_________________
Your Aspie score: 169 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 37 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
AQ: 47


Last edited by bonsai on 23 May 2013, 11:18 pm, edited 5 times in total.

bonsai
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 22
Location: .

23 May 2013, 10:49 pm

ShamelessGit wrote:
I don't think you should try to restrict what people talk about. People should be allowed to say mean things to me. I was going to use a lot of derogatory words in this post to be ironic, but I was afraid then that my post might get removed. You're a wussy if you want to keep people from googling mean things about you. Hate speech wasn't a crime until fairly recently, and I don't think that was an improvement.



I'm in agreement.


_________________
Your Aspie score: 169 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 37 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
AQ: 47


quietgirl
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 40
Location: United States

01 Jul 2013, 4:52 pm

eric76 wrote:
I just checked and it hasn't been changed yet. I wonder how long it will take.

There are also the "are annoying", "are evil", "are retarded", "are rude", "are dangerous", "are violent, "are stupid", "are selfish", and so on. Also, for "can autistic people", there are "be violent", "be gay", "talk", "become violent", and so on.

Google has its work cut out for it.


Looks like everything is gone except: autistic people should killed

44,000,000 results, many of which are about the Google removals, which are included. <shakes head and laughs>

https://www.google.com/search?num=50&ne ... RGq2cTwvWw


_________________
Everything I know about social interaction I learned from emulating talk show hosts.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,382

02 Jul 2013, 6:20 pm

quietgirl wrote:
eric76 wrote:
I just checked and it hasn't been changed yet. I wonder how long it will take.

There are also the "are annoying", "are evil", "are retarded", "are rude", "are dangerous", "are violent, "are stupid", "are selfish", and so on. Also, for "can autistic people", there are "be violent", "be gay", "talk", "become violent", and so on.

Google has its work cut out for it.


Looks like everything is gone except: autistic people should killed

44,000,000 results, many of which are about the Google removals, which are included. <shakes head and laughs>

https://www.google.com/search?num=50&ne ... RGq2cTwvWw


HA1 HA! I told them so....

Signed,

Just another K...

It's Magic...

K1!

44,000,000 REsults...

Sychronicity!!

"Trust Me"

This is not off

TopicK...

OBTW,

Thanks, Quiet Girl...
Synchronicity loves your start date...
12/22/2012....


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Kiki1256
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2012
Age: 22
Gender: Female
Posts: 886
Location: Somewhere...

12 Jul 2013, 8:22 pm

Google's search suggestions are just sick. No matter what you type, you'll see the most disturbing suggestions...like people would actually search them. If u do search them, get a life!



EsotericResearch
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 23 Jul 2012
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 457

13 Jul 2013, 2:17 am

No, I don't have a problem with it. When I google various cultures including my own for example, I get answers that are racist. But it's a good thing, in my opinion, that people are googling racist things to find out the facts instead of fictitious stereotypes. It's the same with the autism search results.



BigHig
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2013
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 5
Location: Massachusetts

14 Jul 2013, 3:59 pm

They don't like the way we think and sometimes act... :wink:


take for instance my blog 421blog dot com

8O