Slashdot Mirror
Google AdSense Banned a Random Webpage About a 32-Year-Old Bill Because It Was About Sexual Abuse (vice.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Earlier this week, an algorithm made an absurd choice. Google AdSense, Google's advertising program that makes up the bulk of the tech giant's advertising revenue, decided that a web page about a decades-old bill about sexual abuse was "adult content," and wasn't allowed to display ads anymore. The page, which is at least six years old and contains strictly legislative information about a bill called the "Child Sexual Abuse and Pornography Act of 1986" on free legislative research and tracking website GovTrack.us, tripped the AdSense algorithm that decides what pages are allowed to run ads. This single, very dry page being flagged as "adult content" is most likely a minor fluke in the AdSense algorithm, but it's a perfect example of how a tiny tweak in the way a platform uses automation to enforce policies can send a ripple through seemingly-unrelated parts of the internet. The page was flagged by Adsense as "policy non-compliant" on Monday, with Google citing the page's "violations" in a summary of the AdSense adult content policy. Here's what Google told GovTrack: "As stated in our program policies, we may not show Google ads on pages with content that is sexually suggestive or intended to sexually arouse. This includes, but is not limited to: pornographic images, videos, or games; sexually gratifying text, images, audio, or video; pages that provide links for or drive traffic to content that is sexually suggestive or intended to sexually arouse." The GovTrack page contains none of these, yet the page still can't run AdSense.
bots/algorithms make mistakes, get over it.
And this is what real "AI" is. Complete bullshit. And don't tell me this isn't AI, because Adsense is worth hundreds of billions (trillions over its lifetime) of dollars for Google. If they aren't using AI for this, and are using DeepMind for parlor tricks instead, then you need to ask yourself why.
Activists + technical incompetence + blind reliance on technology.
The holy trinity of how to fuck things up.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
This proves that they (google inc that is) is not fit to manage this sort of thing.
Years ago, a search that I did was blocked because it contained the letters SEX. It wasn't for sex but Middlesex but google decided in its wisdom that this was not allowed.
Middlesx is the name of a county in the UK, the name of a University and a County Cricket Club.
But the Google Puritans will keep on trying to censor our lives.
Why is a tax payer funded government website running adsense in the first place?
There's just too much internet to have any hope of filtering it manually, and yet filtering is required both for legal reasons and to avoid social outrage. So automated filtering is the only way - and we all know how well that works. It's got high rates of both false positives and false negatives.
It's leading to a lot of conspiracy theories though. If you read politically slanted news sites, you will see that those on the right are full of stories about how Facebook and Google are striving to force conservative voices off the internet - and if you flip the other political faction, the news sites on the left run many (though not as many) about how Facebook and Google are striving to force liberal voices off the internet. Just throw in a bit of reporting bias and everyone things the algorithms are out to get their team.
Google could turn the filtering off - but then it would be about a week before stories start appearing about how Google "supports prostitution" or somesuch, and politicians would start to threaten regulation again.
What's the downside here?
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Stories like this are designed to make us think... "censorship algorithms make mistakes".
They also make us think... "censorship on the internet is needed to protect us".
And, "most people want censorship".
The problem is censorship. The problem is that the algorithm mistakes are a smoke screen to cover the actual intentional censorship that is taking place. Facebook and Twittter want to make sure that anti-globalist people like Trump are not elected. Facebook and Twitter and Google want to make sure they stay in the good graces of the communist party of China.
Face it, Facebook and Twitter have become public forums. There is no place for censorship in a free society. The algorithms are designed and tuned to deflect attention from intentional censorship, which is a threat to democracy everywhere.
Someone should put a picture of dickbutt on all major websites so we can finally get rid of all of those ads. Although, to be precise, dickbutt shouldn't count as sexually arousing either.
It looks like Twitter and Facebooks are Public Forums in at least some circumstances, according to a Federal judge
https://irontrianglepress.com/2018/05/25/presidents-twitter-account-constitutes-public-forum/
Would it be OK if a privately owned toll bridge required drivers to remove all their pro-obama bumper stickers before crossing the bridge? Would it be OK for the bridge company to require people to remove their hateful anti-Islamic bumper stickers from their cars before crossing the privately own bridge?
And, suppose that I'm offended by your subject line due to my personal religious beliefs (I know many sincere Christians would be offended by your use of Jesus's name as an expletive). Do you think would be reasonable if you were censored from participating on Slashdot because of my sensitivity? Why is it OK for you to offend me with your religious hate speech?
I donâ(TM)t know about you guys, but nothing gets me more wet then reading congressional bills and other legal documents. Ohh just writing this makes me shiver and tingle.
Touch me in Congress!
Definitely legal language is something which children shouldn't be exposed to. Otherwise they never learn write and speak on human language correctly.
Bots and algorithms are trained by people. The people who manually intervene at Facebook and Google have shown a remarkable consistency in letting their personal views inform their decisions. Case in point: the demonetizing of Prager University by YouTube. The fact that Google did not intervene and fire a segment of the YouTube workforce over that manual decision is a perfectly valid data point to call into question the culture training these models.
You said when it comes to flagging suspicious content." I think that's an important word, suspicious. There are now more when pages than there are people on the planet. Billions of web pages to run ads on. Pages which include several words related to child sexual abuse are suspicious. Why put your ads on suspicious pages?
More specifically, on a page that has sexual words, so seems to probably be about sex, what kind of ads would be run? Perhaps a Trojan condoms ad? How pissed would Trojan be when the screenshot was going around Facebook of Trojan advertising on a page about sexual abuse of children?
HTTPS Everywhere is going to make sure that information stays in the walled gardens. Not licensed? Not visible.
When I read these stories, it's obvious there won't be any Westworld robot or Person Of Interest ASI uprising anytime soon.
...is word of mouth.
You have zero successes in business so yeah, tell everyone else how things should be done you feckless cunt. YOU would be the activist in this equation numbnuts, god you're so fucking dumb lol Trump should appoint you something.
"Bullshit Head-in-ass-Republican Trope Czar"
Who says it is "religious hate speech"?
Perhaps he was literally pondering what Jesus would actually think/do in this situation about imperfect 'bots/algorithms that make mistakes', and that perhaps you should 'get over it' at least 76 more times according to your count.
Jesus would probably want you to not be so overly sensitive to some stranger on the Internet and instead learn to forgive and love the people that are trying simply to survive by writing their appy app algorithms.
Perhaps contribute and offer a way the algorithms can minimize or eliminate false positives, so that serious matters concerning sexual abuse can be dealt with appropriately, and perpetrators can be held accountable.
This reminds me of The Illustrated Presidential Report of the Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, back in 1970.
As Wikipedia says:
The report was resoundingly rejected and denounced by congress.
In response to that, along with continued attempts to, nevertheless, enforce existing, and impose new, anti-pornography laws (and otherwise harass publishers of erotic images), Earl Kemp published an illustrated version of the report, consisting of the report's text but "replete with the sort of photographs the commission examined.".
For distributing this book he was sentenced to a year in prison, and served the federal minimum of three months and one day. (This brings up the question of how one is supposed to have a right to view something it's a crime to provide.)
Nearly half a century later the same sort of attacks on free speech continue on the new Intenet medium. And a handful of copies of the ... Illustrated Report ... are available on Amazon (with the asking price of an unused copy of over half a grand.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The problem is when there is no human oversight to correct the inevitable mistakes that bots make either before or after the fact.
Web plublication (some of it automated) occurs at computer speed and there's a lot of it. _Live Science_ estimated total internet traffic at a zettabyte per year, and that
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Activists + technical incompetence + blind reliance on technology.
The holy trinity of how to fuck things up.
And the great part about it is, it's all by design.
The west lost the Cold War. Ex-KGB Yuri Bezmenov tried to warn us for decades about exactly what we see today...
Imagine state actors using ideology to destroy Silicon Valley. Ah, the truth is clear as day.
See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux h t t p : / / a p k . i t - m a t e . c o . u k / A P K H o s t s F i l e E n g i n e F o r L i n u x . z i p (remove spaces between characters & download).
Yields more security/speed/reliability/anonymity vs. any SINGLE solution (99% of threats = hostnames vs. IP address that most firewalls use) more efficiently/FASTER + NATIVELY 4 less!
(Vs. "Bolt on 'MoAr' illogic-logic" competitors slowing you, hosts speed you up 2 ways (adblocks + hardcodes u spend most time @) vs. competition loaded w/ security bugs (DNS/AntiVir) + overheads (messagepass ('souled-out' to advertiser addons) + filtering drivers) & their complexity leads to exploitation).
* ONLY 1 of its kind in GUI on Linux!
Better vs. Windows model in speed/efficiency/merge.
APK
P.S.=> Best hosts file program there is, bar-none, & far better than browser addons... apk
Your software is just fine - well written, functional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine by mmell February 17, 2017
Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is quite valid - by JazzLad April 20, 2016
his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant August 10 2015
his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg September 25 2015
I like your host file system by Karmashock September 09 2015
that APK guy, I use his host file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015
I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017
* Best part's Linux 64-bit model's faster/more efficient (2x the work in 1/2 the time)
APK
P.S.=> For a faster/safer/more reliable internet... apk
Alphabet (Google) forever blameless, it was those darn algorithms again.
You can expect this same kind of thing from self-driving car software as it is corrected event by event until it wipes out the entire driving population of the country.
I've seen plenty of Google Ads blocked script notifications on pages about books/movies/tv shows containing sexually suggestive themes, images, and descriptions. Many clothing advertisements and kids shows contain sexually suggestive themes as well. Everything Disney produces has aggressive sexual overtones too. All those things get Google ads/tracking. When will all of them be blocked?
We need a new way of searching on the Internet, so private companies like Google can't monetize or censor it.
This needs to be part of Internet 2.0.
It took me a while to understand that the Bill in the headline was not supposed to be a man's name, but a noun meaning "law".
(granted, I just woke up...)