SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the that-didn't-work-out-quite-like-we-hoped dept.
Google has apologized on behalf of its algorithm(s), which promoted a fake news story identifying the wrong man as the recent Las Vegas shooter:
After yesterday's mass shooting in Las Vegas, Google briefly gave its "Top Stories" stamp of approval to two 4chan threads identifying (and triumphantly smearing) the wrong man as the shooter. Google apologized for including "inaccurate" web pages in its top results, saying that its algorithm had spotted a burst of activity around a little-used search term (the name of 4chan's so-called suspect), created a Top Stories carousel, and favored "fresh" content there above more authoritative sources.
This is far from the first time Google's search results have purveyed misinformation. In March, it finally instructed human quality raters — who manually evaluate web pages to train the Search algorithm — to flag offensive and factually incorrect material, which Search could then downgrade for users seeking general information about a topic. As the 4chan incident shows, though, it still has blind spots. And that's not really because of a problem with Google's algorithm. It's happening because Google's core business has never been about defining truth — yet that's what Top Stories is implicitly promising.
Facebook also promoted the "fresh" content:
[A] story by the pro-Trump political website "The Gateway Pundit" named a different person as the shooter, citing a Facebook page to claim the individual was "a far left loon" and "a Democrat who liked (MSNBC host) Rachel Maddow." Posters on the anonymous, anarchic 4chan.org forum likewise trumpeted supposed findings that the same individual was both the shooter and a "social democrat." BuzzFeed saved screenshots of the stories, which no longer turn up on either Gateway Pundit or 4chan.
[...] Facebook said its security team removed Gateway Pundit results and other similar posts from its social network, some within minutes. But because that removal was "delayed," the company said, images of the incorrect story were captured and circulated online.
"We are working to fix the issue that allowed this to happen in the first place and deeply regret the confusion this caused," a Facebook spokesman said in a statement.
Also at BBC.
Previously: Over 50 dead in mass shooting in Las Vegas
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ledow on Wednesday October 04 2017, @12:43PM (9 children)
More important than a "top news" / "popular story" ending up as such on Google/Facebook without fact-checking (okay, not ideal, but it does what it says on the tin - promotes popular stories without any guarantee they're actually true), is that random people think that they can just go hunting people down online vigilante-style without comeback and present what they find as "evidence".
I know, if I were on the receiving end, I would be consulting a lawyer right about now. It's libel/slander of the highest order. You could literally get someone killed like that.
Which is EXACTLY my problem with the people trying to trap child abusers, etc. outside of the police. You get the wrong person and you literally fuck up their life, possibly permanently if some idiot takes it too far. On the basis of rumour and "Facebook research".
Though your intentions may be good, it's far too easy to make a mistake and random chance says that you will eventually. Everyone does. Even the police, the courts, etc. Which is why courts / law enforcement are often loathe to give out names unless they are ABSOLUTELY sure. And why they say "person of interest" or "help with our enquiries" because they know that some portion of those people are entirely innocent and just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time or share the wrong name with someone else.
If you have information, feed it to the police. Crowd-funded vigilantism is only a short step from anarchy.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Wednesday October 04 2017, @01:08PM (4 children)
Actually, that's not such a good idea. In fact, at least in the U.S., you should never talk to the police [youtube.com] under any circumstances.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @11:51PM (3 children)
No. An-archy: From the Greek for "without rulers", is a governmental form with the decisions being made as close as is possible to those whom those decisions will affect.
On the political palate, this charts at the far edge from Authoritarianism and is sometimes labeled "Libertarianism".
The word you are seeking is "chaos".
Many poorly educated people confuse the 2 terms.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @11:56PM (1 child)
Clicked 1 comment too low.
Please do forgive my clumsiness.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday October 05 2017, @12:03AM
You are forgiven.
However, you really should watch the video. I think you'll find it eye-opening.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday October 05 2017, @12:02AM
I'm not promoting vigilantism or anarchy.
Merely pointing out that police generally try to pin whatever they can on the easiest target they can find.
If you talk to the police, you become an easy target.
That's not to say you shouldn't call emergency services if there's, say, an emergency. But way too many people have been railroaded into long prison terms just because they wanted to "help out."
Watch the video I linked, _gewg_. It's a lecture for third-year law students by a practicing criminal defense attorney and another third-year law student (who had been a cop for almost 20 years).
Or don't. And talk to the police all you want. But I won't be coming around to post your bail. Good luck with the plea bargain.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @01:25PM (3 children)
I mostly agree with you, but you imply that the police are somehow different? That they don't fuck up people's lives when they go after a wrong suspect? Basically all the protections for the wrongly accused are in court, but by the time you're actually on trial, your life is already fucked up.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday October 04 2017, @02:12PM (2 children)
True. I've heard the difference between "jail" and "prison" is that the first is for suspects, and the second is for the convicted. You can be jailed without any conviction, just suspicion. They're not supposed to hold you for long. Seems there should be a standard on that, 3 days maximum? Yet there are people who were left to rot in jail for months without ever being formally charged. Happens through carelessness, neglect, and bureaucracy, and sometimes vindictiveness.
Even 1 day in jail can mess up your life. While in jail, obviously you can't go to work, and a lot of employers will fire you in an instant for missing work because you were in jail. You can't pay bills either. When released, you may no longer have a job and be facing a bunch of penalties for being late with bills. Maybe you're even facing eviction. And there's the suspicion that maybe you are a criminal, even though you were never charged with a crime. As if that's not bad enough, the prison system itself loves to pile on fees. Phone calls are extremely expensive. The poor get the harshest treatment, are the most likely to have that low paying job with the fire-you-in-a-heartbeat for the-least-tiny-mistake management, and to be constantly treated as if already guilty, because everyone just knows the poor are more likely to commit crimes.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday October 04 2017, @03:12PM
In fact they should be called openbsd prisons. I have fellows who lived there all the time.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Wednesday October 04 2017, @03:44PM
On top of that you can be held in prison for two years while awaiting trial.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek