Slashdot Mirror
Google's Featured Snippets Are Worse Than Fake News (theoutline.com)
Adrianne Jeffries, reporting for The Outline: Peter Shulman, an associate history professor at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio, was lecturing on the reemergence of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s when a student asked an odd question: Was President Warren Harding a member of the KKK? Shulman was taken aback. He confessed that he was not aware of that allegation, but that Harding had been in favor of anti-lynching legislation, so it seemed unlikely. But then a second student pulled out his phone and announced that yes, Harding had been a Klan member, and so had four other presidents. It was right there on Google, clearly emphasized inside a box at the top of the page. "I understand what Google is trying to do, and it's work that perhaps requires algorithmic aid," Shulman said in an email. "But in this instance, the question its algorithm scoured the internet to answer is simply a poorly conceived one. There have been no presidents in the Klan." Google needs to invest in human experts who can judge what type of queries should produce a direct answer like this, Shulman said. "Or, at least in this case, not send an algorithm in search of an answer that isn't simply 'There is no evidence any American president has been a member of the Klan.' It'd be great if instead of highlighting a bogus answer, it provided links to accessible, peer-reviewed scholarship."
If sites like Google and Facebook want to let algorithms decide which information to highlight, they will need to spend more time doing human assisted ranking of various information sources. Crowd sourcing will be very helpful here, but you will still need some human moderators who can perform real research to help determine which information has credibility. I know too many otherwise intelligent people who are becoming so disenfranchised they just don't believe anything they read anymore, which is the ultimate goal of these misinformation campaigns.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
I wonder if Prof took the time to review with the students the difference between a search result and a fact.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
The bigger problem with that teacher's class is his retarded students that are too stupid to check the source of their search.
When I read these stories, I find myself wondering if I am the only one aware that humans write algorithms.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
It'd be great if instead of highlighting a bogus answer, it provided links to accessible, peer-reviewed scholarship."
That scholarship is behind a paywall.
I forget, are we calling out Woodrow Wilson for his racist "Birth of a Nation" behavior, Klan sympathies, and "Northern Aggression" political responses, or are we still rewarding his legacy because of his liberal socialist policies that started the modern era of the all-encompassing federal government?
Looking at the sources for most of the links it's just that there's a shitload of bogus crap on the internet. Good example of false authority though
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
But the snippet problem can easily be resolved. Worse than fake news, not really. Fake news will be around and tossed around almost as a weapon, cf., this thread.
*Everything* Googabet does is worse than the alternative. They aren't terribly deep, nor are they particularly intelligent. They are utterly without any semblence of ethical considerations. They have come to resemble their crappy, half-baked products, all in the name of $$$ and control. F*** 'em!
Typing the same search "presidents in the klan" into DDG also puts the same fake news result at the top (at least it's at the top if I set my location to UK. If I set it to worldwide it comes in second). Bing also puts the same story at the top. So this is not just Google's problem. It's a problem that all search vendors need to tackle collectively.
Tabloid trash used to be contained within that special group of "news" providers, and quarantined near grocery store cash registers.
Unfortunately, the quest to extract revenue derived from clicks has pushed damn near everyone to publish and aggregate a similar flavor of clickbait bullshit.
Hey Capitalism, stop rewarding Bullshit. Otherwise, You Reap what You Sow.
You crowd source checking the sources along with the fact. Any relevant fact will have more than one source pointing to it, and usually source which are trust-able like academic works.
Maybe the problem is that the incorrect information is free and the peer-reviewed article costs $30 to read.
Seriously, it isn't exactly an entirely new controversy by any means. Warren Harding was also alleged to be black, and there were rumors that he was assassinated.
Maybe the teacher just didn't do a good job in general themselves.
Oddly, the captcha is unaware, and that's just freaking scary in terms of coincidence.
What? Our first black president was also a member of the Klan?
STOP THE PRESSES!!
#DeleteChrome
How about he fails the student since the kid obviously doesn't know how to research and cite sources? This is something said student should have learned prior to attending a university.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Wikipedia!
Warren Harding was also alleged to be black,
That was made up by his political rivals to discredit him during an era when to have "black blood" would be scandalous.
DNA tests done show that Harding did not have any detectible black ancestors. Also, Obama is only half black. Genetically he's more "white" than "black" (men get slightly more DNA from their mothers than their fathers, plus all their mitochondrial DNA).
Not that that really means anything. Race has always been more cultural than genetic though, and having any noticably darker skin makes society push you towards the "black" culture. From a genetic perspective, we still haven't had our first "mostly black" President. Given the current political climate, I suspect we may have to wait a few decades for that.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Anything the scum who run the media don't want you to know about, they now call 'fake news', as if the public are stupid enough to believe everything they see on TV, and nothing they read on the internet. As if the controlled media, which is owned by a handful of people, is more likely to be telling you the truth than the millions of people in your country who post on the internet every day.
Given the current political climate, I suspect we may have to wait a few decades for that.
Given the current political climate, I suspect there may not be a POTUS a few decades from now.
That is all.
Yes, yes, but the real question is whether the teacher knew of it or not.
Of course, this is also applicable to other presidents, and yes, believe it or not, I have heard somebody say "Nobody ever questioned a president's birth before" when actually, that also happened with Chester A. Arthur.
It was right there on Google, clearly emphasized inside a box at the top of the page.
A pale pink box? Sounds like an ad to me. Probably an ad for the KKK.
Like I said to a former programmer "trainee": Don't Google, ask you colleagues. You don't have the experience to tell which of the answers Google finds are good and which are total crap.
Speaking of fake news...
Maybe this history teacher needs to research the history of search engines. Maybe he will find that they never were intended to give accurate news. Anyway that "real person review" is not Google's job its the user that is reading the article. If you want an instant "think for me and answer my question" service, may I suggest a genie in a bottle.
I completely agree, but the problem is that we only have ourselves to blame. The only "newspapers" making money are the tabloids. Same with online clicks and views, it's the trash people click on. If the majority of people wanted long-form impartial investigative journalism, that is what we'd end up with next to breath-mints at the checkout line.
Collectively, we, are getting exactly what we deserve and want. Does capitalism as an entity want us to consume immaterial garbage, you bet it does, but again, at the end of the day we are collectively bending over and asking for more.
Truth cannot be determined by consensus, of course. However, you can get close (high probability of truth), and the interesting thing is, it's basically just another application of the PageRank algorithm which made Google.
Suppose I showed you sources written by two people who won Nobel prizes in chemistry both saying the same about some chemistry fact, and a Google search revealed no similarly credible sources who disagree. We'd say the laurettes are very likely telling us the truth.
If you look at all of the sources cited in Encyclopedia Britannica, that'll give you a list of pretty credible sources; not perfect but pretty good. The second-order list of sources which are in turn referenced by two or more of the Britannica sources is a much larger list of pretty credible sources. If two or three or four of these sources agree on some statement, AND none disagree, the statement is very likely true.
Technology will always have short-comes, what is needed is to start teaching people to think critically again. Not to trust everything they read and to double check with multiple sources.
There is no substitute for that.
"... You are the resistance" via APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-7 32/64-bit https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22APK+Hosts+File+Engine%22+and+%22start64%22&btnG=Google+Search&gbv=1/
Ads & malware rob speed/security/privacy
Hosts add speed (via hardcodes/adblocks), security (vs. bad sites/malware/poisoned dns), reliability (vs. dns down), & anonymity (vs. dns requestlogs/trackers).
Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus + less security bugs/complexity & faster vs. addons/routers/remote dns!
Avoids DNSChangers in routers/IP settings & dns redirects (99.999% of ISP DNS != patched vs. it) + lightens DNS load & resolves faster from local system RAM!
* Via what u NATIVELY have built into the IP stack in FASTER kernelmode!
APK
P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/e01211ca36aa02e923f20adee0a3c4f5d5187dc65bdf1c997b3da3c2b0745425/analysis/1433430542/
This should give human opponents a chance on jeopardy at least :-/ Watson has reigned too long!
Fake news and spam, and chain emails, and all that junk has been around nearly as long as the operating Internet (oops, small 'i' now ...internet). The thing that is crap is that real news outlets, those with a recognized brand ala CNN, MSNBC, FoxNews, etc pick up on this stuff and slap it on their web feeds w/out actually checking. Its the race to be first, or at least not left behind. Wish they would just wait 4 hours...I mean outside of a "N Korea nuclear missle enroute to US soil" nothing needs to be that instantaneous.
And for goodness sakes, stop letting Trump troll you (media). Stop reposting his tweets. We all know its hard to do...super hard, but the only way of defeating a troll is to ignore them. The best, cleverest, well-written rebuttal is still food for a troll. Ignoring them is the only way they go away,
I don't like the guy, didn't vote for him, but he is the president, and despite many fantasies about a an impeachment and whatnot, he has a full Republican congress. Dems' should be smarter, eat humble pie on their election losses and know that this guy, however detestable, in many ways is malleable, especially if you stroke his ego. Dems won't get a lot out of him, shouldn't expect a liberal prez (you lost the elections dumbasses, not just the presidential one...all of them!), won't be happy with mot of his choices, but they can get some things they like from this guy.
In theory we should be able to get ourselves out of war(s), should be able to reform taxes for individuals and corps, should get some infrastructure...maybe even some lower govt spending, though his defense dept nonsense seems to blow that out of the water. But just try...think of him as you new brother-in-law, the one you can't believe your sister married, but she did, so make the best of it.
FYI Linus Pauling, laureate in physics and chemistry, spent the last 20 years of his life proselytizing that vitamin C was a cure for what ailed you. He was convinced he'd get a 3rd Nobel in medicine when he was finally proven correct.
Even brilliant scientists sometimes go off half cocked in their later years. When somebody's mind had a fine edge, but it's been lost, they rarely notice and just keep talking.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I don't agree at all. I can find many, many claims made by "credible sources" in Encyclopedia Britannica which were later demonstrated to be wrong. You shouldn't confuse (expert) consensus which depends not only on the known facts, but the "general scientific interpretation" of them with some quantifiable measure of the truth of a claim. Being "the best" approximation isn't the same thing as being a "good" approximation. Scientific dogma is constantly undergoing revision; feathered dinosaurs, tight orbit gas giants, neanderthal ancestors, and on and on. It's apples and oranges to confuse what our best understanding is with what is "very likely true". They may or may not coincide.
Google or your lying history prof?
As per wikipedia, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_United_States_politics], Harry Truman at the very least, paid up his membership dues on one occasion, even if he did not participate in the organization activities. Yes, I know wikipedia can be edited, but on other hand, any source that claims Truman had nothing to do with KKK could also be inaccurate, intentionally or otherwise.
that our education system is raising a generation or two of complete and utter morons who can't pick up a book and verify sources. As the husband of a 4th grade teacher, this is appalling and terrifying that these snowflakes will run the country some day.
We shitcan all the idiot liberal professors and introduce real discipline and rigor into the universities and maybe we'll come out of it okay. Otherwise, America is fucked.
Pax Vobiscum
Like the water well that was poisoned but later cleaned up. Problem is nobody trusts the well anymore, and this is what happened to news media.
mfwright@batnet.com
Journalists have a tough job: entertainment using facts. If we take slashdot's story at face value, the teacher failed to ask the most important question when someone makes a factual claim: "What's your source?". It isn't surprising that some liberal arts prof allows his students to cite google as a source, most liberal arts PhDs are less than academically rigorous in their own work (citation: Google). What is surprising is that the "journalist" didn't ask this dolt how much his proposed solution, investment in human expert intervention, would cost Google. Of course, the dolt had no idea, but since he probably has spent his entire adult life suckling at the teat of government support, it should be no surprise he believes money grows on trees. (Oh wait, with deforestation as far along as it now is, I need to change that metaphor). You'll note that he is quoted as writing:"...the question ... is simply a poorly conceived one." Asking whether a POTUS was ever a member of any radical/extremest group is "poorly conceived"??? Wow! I sure wouldn't want this guy teaching my kids. Anyone who thinks the way he does shouldn't be teaching anyone. The question wasn't "poorly conceived", but answering it was poorly executed/researched.
Suppose I showed you sources written by two people who won Nobel prizes in chemistry both saying the same about some chemistry fact, and a Google search revealed no similarly credible sources who disagree. We'd say the laurettes are very likely telling us the truth.
FYI Linus Pauling, laureate in physics and chemistry, spent the last 20 years of his life proselytizing that vitamin C was a cure for what ailed you. He was convinced he'd get a 3rd Nobel in medicine when he was finally proven correct.
I was under the impression there were many similarly credible sources who disagreed with Linus Pauling, so I'm not sure how this example refutes the GP's point,
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
All you need is two, you could find a second for just about any position. Especially around vitamin C in the 1980s. It was like anti-vax for a minute or ten. Real science was drowned out on public media like google search. You'd have to get to page 2 before getting to credible information. Happens today.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The problem here is not Google snippets, the problem is ignorant/dumb students with poor truth filters. You need to start out with a basic knowledge of history. You used to be able to get this knowledge from your history books in junior high and high school (I am assuming that you still can if you want to). Then you find news outlets who do a good job of being right and reporting the story accurately and in it's entirety instead of grinding a bias into every sentence. When you are browsing the internet, again, you have to evaluate first the source. Wikipedia, for all it's flaws, is usually pretty accurate about non-controversial historical events. If the topic is a historical event and it is locked from editing, it is probably pretty accurate as well. Current political stuff on Wikipedia is pretty useless. Browsing some random website not affiliated with a well established foundation or news outlet for historical facts is just dumb.
If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
On the other hand, google already managed something similar in the past :
its page rank system.
Back when Google was simply a keyword search engine,
it didn't simply return *all* webpages (that it knows off) where the query keywords appears.
it did return *the top* webpages, using a whole ranking system to assess the quality of the page.
Whereas other more primitive search engines could be easily fooled by a link farming (e.g: forum and wiki spamming),
it did require quite some art to manage a google bomb successfully, with the developers at google constantly refining their algorithm
(pages with the same keywords showing up won't be given the same importance depending on their rank and/or the rank of pages leading to them and/or quality of the links).
The same here : instead of feeding the "featured snippets" AI with whatever the google crawler find, the snippets AI will eventually need to have the concept of "confidence level" associated with the information.
Being able to react differently when the AI parses information from a reputable source (a peer-reviewed scientific article) (and/or even being able to autonomously process retraction of such source) and when the AI parse information on some "dubious" site (some extremist's site with an agenda).
That won't save google from a well though-out and coordinated google-bomb (snippet-bomb ?), but will at least avoid the AI blindly believing every bullshit it reads on-line.
(On the other hand, given the gullibility of the average people, the current snippet AI isn't reacting much differently that this weird uncle that is always blabering about some conspiracy theory he read on-line somewhere. Successfully "passing turing test through stupidity" ?)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
If I search a term in Google or any other search engine I want it to find and return websites that match my search terms. If I search for something like 'cars that also perform surgery' then I don't want Google to tell me 'that is silly, no car can perform surgery' - I want it to show me the most relevant web pages that match my search terms. Not tell me if what I am searching for is true or fake.
Part of the reason for the 1st amendment to the U.S. Constitution was the presumption that good information would conquer bad in the 'marketplace of ideas'. Do you believe that the Earth is round? Or that the Earth orbits the sun? With freedom of speech, you could advocate those ideas and, it was hoped, overcome the flat-earth and geocentric hypotheses.
Then we had superstition, urban myths, and fake news.
Perhaps the truth-will-prevail folks failed to account for some important factors:
1) While people might have limited time to spread falsehoods, computers have overcome that.
2) Controversy sells, particularly in the age of click-advertising.
3) While charlatans used to be identified and shunned, internet anonymity lets them persist and reincarnate themselves.
4) No idea, no matter how bad, ever seems to go away entirely; convincing 'most people' is the best you can do.
5) Many people prefer a falsehood that seems to make them happy to an unpleasant truth.
Is free speech a failed experiment in the service of truth?
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
Google search is not a magic tool to learn the truth. If you feed some nonsense in the algorithm, you should not be to surprise of getting some nonsense back. The Google's Snippets feature says nothing about accuracy of the presented information. So you should not be surprise of getting some nonsense if you search for it. To be able to use Google correctly means being able to validate different online source, and not to rely on what came up in Google search first. What is really surprising is how many university students are incapable to work with online sources and blindly believe in whatever Google says. IMHO, that is a much bigger problem than any imperfection of Google's algorithms.
Every day you people run anti-Republican, anti-Donald Trump news.
This is fake News.
apk - I love messing with you, but unfortunately your comebacks are dwindling in quality. Step up your game man
That's exactly the same (partial) counter-example I thought of when I wrote the post you replied to. I suspect we both thought of that exact same thing, rather than some other statement, precisely because it's so unusual. However, before, during, and after Pauling's vitamin C fetish, other reputable sources showed that Pauling was mistaken (many times). Therefore the algorithm as I described it would not be fooled.
My girlfriend was going to go buy a half rick of firewood once, and looked up how much that was in square feet. She told me the amount, which I had also looked up, and I couldn't figure out why she kept arguing with me on how much it was. I finally realized it was the snippet at the top of the search results she was looking it. The page contained the sizes of a rick and half rick, but the snippet showed a full rick as the size of a half.
Inhale my unwashed Ashkenazi Jewish snatch who controls all of the media to formulate your reality.
Everyone rank my unwashed vagina! Tell me whether herpes or HIV is better!
Pauling won the Nobel prizes for Chemistry and Peace (not Physics.)
Pauling was not the first great scientist to go wacky in his later years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
> How would your algorithm handle a eminent scientist making a claim so controversial
If it's controversial, that's the answer Google should give (with the list of links as usual). Where credible sources disagree, there's your quick-answer search result: credible sources disagree.
... the Universe and Everything. So who cares about the rest (like the preferred size for DCP subtitles, which is apparently the same anyway)?
All hail KING TRUMP!
Here's Google Home's answer
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
See subject: Creating things that are of service to others & yourself as I did APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-7 32/64-bit http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22start64.com%22%20and%20%22APK%20Hosts%20File%20Engine%22&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&pq=%22start64.com%22%20and%20%22apk%20hosts%20file%20engine%22&sc=0-41&sk=&cvid=4E6D0ACAB195467CB44CC4E3AA653148/ vs. stalking/harassing me?
* It's a thought - but then, due to your childish antics, I suspect thought's a FOREIGN CONCEPT to YOU - trolling/stalking/harassing & sockpuppet downmodding MY posts as the "ne'er-do-well" do-nothing you evidence yourself to be!
APK
P.S.=> I understand you now: You wasted your time & life in pursuits like bothering others when you're only angry w/ yourself for having been a WASTE of life - due to you doing so you haven't acquired skills that allow you to do what I suggest for you above - it's difficult for me to comprehend "your kind" - I'm not like YOU & yours, @ all... apk
Garbage enters students' heads via their eyes, and then exits via their mouths.
Simple. Sad. Scary.
I consider this an emergency. We need to ensure that either before they are allowed to enter college, OR at the very least before they're allowed to leave, that they be taught how to discern reality from obvious bullshit, including not just believing everything they read on the internet, even on the holy Foolgle box.
Because incredibly, some of these little snot-nosed dipshits actually vote, and they have demonstrated repeatedly that they can't think their ways out of a wet paper bag.
Seriously. I think if they assign negative truth value to anything appearing in a story on a web page which has an ad for "male enhancement products" that features someone holding a geoduck clam in a disturbingly suggestive manner... that would improve the accuracy by an order of magnitude.
Of course there will be a POTUS... ... he may not be democratically elected though.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
See https://radiotherapydictionary...