| General > General Technical Chat |
| Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back |
| << < (27/61) > >> |
| rsjsouza:
--- Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 29, 2022, 08:35:48 pm --- --- Quote from: rsjsouza ---IMHO the only reliable authoritative source is indeed research done by oneself --- End quote --- Which means what? How do you research stuff yourself? All you can do, unless you are omnipresent, is read/watch/listen someone elses research. --- End quote --- Unless you are a field journalist that is eyewitness of a specific event, research means you look for information from various sources in an attempt to have a balanced view from many sides. This is obviously only reasonable if you have enough interest vested in a specific subject, as this requires a lot of time and effort. Most people do only cursory reading of headlines and/or use a single source with the newfangled fad of "fact checkers", blue marks, etc. --- Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 29, 2022, 08:35:48 pm ---We're going round in circles here, not actually zeroing in on anything. --- End quote --- My post expanded yours with the fact that you can't trust the ethics of corporate journalism more than the independent guy anymore. At any rate, you can't possibly think that anyone here at EEV will have a magical solution for a century-old problem nor point you to a single source of absolutely unbiased source, do you? :) The only point that one can "zero in" is this: get your information from different sources and read past the headlines - now with the internet it is easier than before, but it expanded exponentially. |
| PlainName:
--- Quote ---At any rate, you can't possibly think that anyone here at EEV will have a magical solution for a century-old problem nor point you to a single source of absolutely unbiased source, do you? --- End quote --- Of course not, but that seems to be the solution being proposed here. Hence my comments. |
| NiHaoMike:
|
| station240:
--- Quote from: james_s on April 27, 2022, 06:25:15 pm ---I typically read the online text versions of the local TV news stations, I used to read some of the local newspapers online years ago but I think they all went behind paywalls at which point I stopped. The same problem of belonging to large groups with agendas is true to both though. --- End quote --- It's worse than that though, News Limited owned newspapers have been caught out distorting news stories for financial reasons. See how accurate the story is, depends on how much you spend on advertising with them! small ad=accurate story, no add=distorted information, large ad=full page news story that is basically a poorly disguised ad. A non profit running an event just wanted to have it listed on the paper's events page, nothing fancy just a brief mention. Newspaper agreed to promote it for free, and send out reporter who took down the details, they double checked the notes she took were accurate. When published all the details were wrong, times, entry cost, actual event details etc, it was just pointless changes that helped no one. Newspapers have a limited amount of space, so actual useful information has been replaced with mass appeal crap in the hope of selling more papers, doesn't work anymore. Anyway these are the same problems we have with google/youtube, they want zero risk content that will attract advertisers and hence get higher prices for ads. it's going to fail, for the same reasons newspapers and TV are failing, people abandoned TV and moved to youtube as they got sick of dumbed down content and tons of ads, getting to choose what sort of content you watch/get recommended is vital to keeping people watching. Naomi Wu is having problems because Youtube have decided for whatever reason her presence is a financial risk to them, be it offending advertising agencies, the Chinese government, or just moron housewives who freakout when their husband is so interested in this woman with big tits (when he's just watching the 3D printer review). |
| rsjsouza:
--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 30, 2022, 04:07:30 am ---(video) --- End quote --- As Dave pointed out on the comments section of this video, there is very little to be done other than providing feedback on this portion of the search results page. I personally don't see a problem with the "algorithm" as she mentioned: it is returning an unfiltered result based on what people actually search*. What one does with that information is what matters. In a society that is more accepting of the trans community, such piece of information, despite distorted, could be the spark of a broader conversation about the word or even be used as PR currency in a partnership. On the other hand, if this information alone is enough to steer a potential partner from getting involved, wouldn't it be killing a partnership that shouldn't have happened in the first place anyways? Of course the first impression is the one that tends to last, but I don't believe that everyone serious in wanting to make money will overlook the body of work and achievements. *Sure, this is a "chicken and egg" situation: the more proeminent a search result is, the more people will click on it, making it even more popular. Both the good and the bad comes with the popularity. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |