I can *maybe* see it being a lottery if you can buy the same things that you get in the loot box for specific prices in the game so each has a definite monetary value.
...because I don't need it to decide for me what's propaganda/fake news and what's not. I just need the results to be relevant to my search terms. Yes I know that some results may be fake while relevant. But I'm an adult, I can deal with that. (Of course, it's their search engine and their right—that's not the issue.)
A Russian here. I would say that these "opinion shapers", as they are called here, together with RT have much greater impact (and in a more general way) on public opinion than the current nothingburger (my favorite word indeed) of Russian "election meddling" using Facebook ads and microscopical investments at the level of 100s of thousands of dollars. These sockpuppets can be found everywhere in the comment sections of major media. They exist on Slashdot too, although I haven't seen many of them here.
They asked "what people think of X" and got the answer "people (in our sample) think that X is bad". This answer is a simple fact about opinions in the sample and has nothing to do with your millenia of philisophical thought, which were devoted to a different question—namely, "is X bad in some objective or intersubjective sense". The fact that opinions on X are negative is not "wrong" per se and should not be "fixed". If, however, you require that, given the question, the machine must never answer "people think that X is bad", it's unclear why you need to ask at all.
I just don't understand why Google should apologize for a fact (namely, for the sentiments of some strangers). Okay, so it turns out there are sufficiently many people who think that homosexuality is bad—but why then pretend they don't? It's not as if it's some kind of an objective measure or an ethical judgment of divine origin. They got the answer to the exact question they asked. If they wanted a different reply, maybe they should've asked a different question.
If you've already decided that being homosexual (or a Jew, or a redhead, or a lefty, you name it) must not be deemed negative, why do you need analysis at all? Anyway, here is a constructive suggestion: define more precisely what "negative" is. (Things like this are sorely needed IRL too, where people e.g. routinely use statistical norm as an argument in ethical discussions.)
I've bought books because of Google Books service that let me look inside a book and see that it's going to be useful for me. Shutting down GB means closing this channel for you as an author. A stupid move, I would say.
Well, can't say about others, but I personally do like this word. It may even be that I learned it from the discussions of US elections. In addition to what I have already listed above, the scope and significance of this meddling are indeed nothing compared to the fraud that the Russian elections on most levels are now. RT is really a bigger and more general threat to you on the propaganda front than those ads.
What I gathered from the info on the ad sales is that the spending was pretty minuscule compared to the general level of spending on the electoral informational activities, more than half of the ads were run after the elections, and the ads themselves were of a bi-partisan nature (with their content coming originally from Americans themselves), so you cannot even say how exactly Russia tried to influence the elections (meaning, whether there was a definite electoral result they tried to achieve). So, to me, it looks like it's pretty insignificant to the extent it's true.
In addition, not every kind of influence on the elections is even bad. I for one would welcome any attempts, including by foreign players, to influence the 2018 presidential elections in Russia by publishing info on the shady business of Putin and his clique. It just has to be true.
As a Russian, I can attest to that. It doesn't mean, however, that everything popular media and government agencies tell you about Russia this and Russia that is true and not propaganda and fearmongering—or sometimes a complete nothingburger, even if true to a large extent, like with the elections. Just the fact that they could do this or that bad thing (and I can say that pretty much everything is possible with the current gang in power here), doesn't mean they actually have, unless you can show some credible proof and explanation.
I'm not a fan of my Thinkpad T430. It has a noisy fan (not a manufacturing defect, but a common issue — have to use TPFanControl) and is not particularly fast. Heavy too, but that's totally expectable. It has a nice screen and is very serviceable though.
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't exist before the statistics accumulates, may not be advertised by the game vendor, and may not be known to the user.
I can *maybe* see it being a lottery if you can buy the same things that you get in the loot box for specific prices in the game so each has a definite monetary value.
...because I don't need it to decide for me what's propaganda/fake news and what's not. I just need the results to be relevant to my search terms. Yes I know that some results may be fake while relevant. But I'm an adult, I can deal with that. (Of course, it's their search engine and their right—that's not the issue.)
butbutbut victimblaming!
A Russian here. I would say that these "opinion shapers", as they are called here, together with RT have much greater impact (and in a more general way) on public opinion than the current nothingburger (my favorite word indeed) of Russian "election meddling" using Facebook ads and microscopical investments at the level of 100s of thousands of dollars. These sockpuppets can be found everywhere in the comment sections of major media. They exist on Slashdot too, although I haven't seen many of them here.
As an amateur song composer, I'd gladly participate.
Yeah. But some apparently feel the need to apologize even for reporting that many people find this true.
Yeah, because apparently "public relations" can justify any bullcrap.
Fuck you.
What we need to focus on is what the cause for negative perception is and fix things there, not replacing a correct algorithm with a lying one.
Spot on.
They asked "what people think of X" and got the answer "people (in our sample) think that X is bad". This answer is a simple fact about opinions in the sample and has nothing to do with your millenia of philisophical thought, which were devoted to a different question—namely, "is X bad in some objective or intersubjective sense". The fact that opinions on X are negative is not "wrong" per se and should not be "fixed". If, however, you require that, given the question, the machine must never answer "people think that X is bad", it's unclear why you need to ask at all.
I just don't understand why Google should apologize for a fact (namely, for the sentiments of some strangers). Okay, so it turns out there are sufficiently many people who think that homosexuality is bad—but why then pretend they don't? It's not as if it's some kind of an objective measure or an ethical judgment of divine origin. They got the answer to the exact question they asked. If they wanted a different reply, maybe they should've asked a different question.
This. I don't live in the US, but I use the local equivalent of this service whenever I can. Prevents many kinds of delivery headaches.
If you've already decided that being homosexual (or a Jew, or a redhead, or a lefty, you name it) must not be deemed negative, why do you need analysis at all?
Anyway, here is a constructive suggestion: define more precisely what "negative" is. (Things like this are sorely needed IRL too, where people e.g. routinely use statistical norm as an argument in ethical discussions.)
That would be fine if FB didn't also hide posts from friends according to some obscure algorithm.
I don't think Markelova and Baburov really belong here. You can probably add Yuri Schekochikhin though.
In fact, it's a sure step towards what Russians did to their own elections. A Russian here.
I've bought books because of Google Books service that let me look inside a book and see that it's going to be useful for me. Shutting down GB means closing this channel for you as an author. A stupid move, I would say.
Non-existence is kind of the essense of a hole.
Intriguing enough to me.
Well, can't say about others, but I personally do like this word. It may even be that I learned it from the discussions of US elections. In addition to what I have already listed above, the scope and significance of this meddling are indeed nothing compared to the fraud that the Russian elections on most levels are now. RT is really a bigger and more general threat to you on the propaganda front than those ads.
What I gathered from the info on the ad sales is that the spending was pretty minuscule compared to the general level of spending on the electoral informational activities, more than half of the ads were run after the elections, and the ads themselves were of a bi-partisan nature (with their content coming originally from Americans themselves), so you cannot even say how exactly Russia tried to influence the elections (meaning, whether there was a definite electoral result they tried to achieve). So, to me, it looks like it's pretty insignificant to the extent it's true.
In addition, not every kind of influence on the elections is even bad. I for one would welcome any attempts, including by foreign players, to influence the 2018 presidential elections in Russia by publishing info on the shady business of Putin and his clique. It just has to be true.
As a Russian, I can attest to that. It doesn't mean, however, that everything popular media and government agencies tell you about Russia this and Russia that is true and not propaganda and fearmongering—or sometimes a complete nothingburger, even if true to a large extent, like with the elections. Just the fact that they could do this or that bad thing (and I can say that pretty much everything is possible with the current gang in power here), doesn't mean they actually have, unless you can show some credible proof and explanation.
Russian hentai, not Japanese. The word is Russian.
What is the battery life on those tablets of yours?
I'm not a fan of my Thinkpad T430. It has a noisy fan (not a manufacturing defect, but a common issue — have to use TPFanControl) and is not particularly fast. Heavy too, but that's totally expectable. It has a nice screen and is very serviceable though.