The politics of adaptive search

cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I had an awful insight the other day.

My search preferences, which are determined by what I usually click, seem to actively steer me away from sources that do not conform to a profile stored in the big web search firm’s IT assets.

Even when I put in every suggestive dog whistle I could remember offhand, I still was not finding the sites that seem to disinform the steady flow of right-delusion believers who come through here.

So, when a relatively uninvested skeptic is so effectively constrained, it follows that the adaptive search feature is worsening and hardening our tribal divisions.

This strikes me as a clear and present danger to the republic. I also cannot believe that management is unaware of this issue. This points suggestively to the search engine operators pursuing a detrimental agenda on purpose, and on a national scale.

If it is that hard for me to get in, it stands to reason that it is just as hard to get out. A delusion consumer can make a serious bid at broadening the source scope … and fail due to obstruction, and get a boost from ensuing confirmation bias.

1) am I observing correctly?

2) if 1 is stipulated, does this suggest that the adaptive search feature services dangerous desires because the One Thing is that there is revenue in it?

3) if we stipulate both above to be a yes,
what do we do about it?

Thoughts are welcome. Slogans are not.
 
Last edited:
cannabineer said:
I had an awful insight the other day.

My search preferences, which are determined by what I usually click, seem to actively steer me away from sources that do not conform to a profile stored in the big web search firm’s IT assets.

Even when I put in every suggestive dog whistle I could remember offhand, I still was not finding the sites that seem to disinform the steady flow of right-delusion believers who come through here.

So, when a relatively uninvested skeptic is so effectively constrained, it follows that the adaptive search feature is worsening and hardening our tribal divisions.

This strikes me as a clear and present danger to the republic. I also cannot believe that management is unaware of this issue. This points suggestively to the search engine operators pursuing a detrimental agenda on purpose, and on a national scale.

If it is that hard for me to get in, it stands to reason that it is just as hard to get out. A delusion consumer can make a serious bid at broadening the source scope … and fail due to obstruction, and get a boost from ensuing confirmation bias.

1) am I observing correctly?

2) if 1 is stipulated, does this suggest that the adaptive search feature services dangerous desires because the One Thing is that there is revenue in it?

3) if we stipulate both above to be a yes,
what do we do about it?

Thoughts are welcome. Slogans are not.
Click to expand...
Start a second account and see how it responds to your attempts at going down the rabbit hole.

My guess is that those websites you are trying to get to just score shittily in credibility and that is why they are not showing up more than being actively steered away from them due to your prior prefrences.
 
cannabineer said:
I had an awful insight the other day.

My search preferences, which are determined by what I usually click, seem to actively steer me away from sources that do not conform to a profile stored in the big web search firm’s IT assets.

Even when I put in every suggestive dog whistle I could remember offhand, I still was not finding the sites that seem to disinform the steady flow of right-delusion believers who come through here.

So, when a relatively uninvested skeptic is so effectively constrained, it follows that the adaptive search feature is worsening and hardening our tribal divisions.

This strikes me as a clear and present danger to the republic. I also cannot believe that management is unaware of this issue. This points suggestively to the search engine operators pursuing a detrimental agenda on purpose, and on a national scale.

If it is that hard for me to get in, it stands to reason that it is just as hard to get out. A delusion consumer can make a serious bid at broadening the source scope … and fail due to obstruction, and get a boost from ensuing confirmation bias.

1) am I observing correctly?

2) if 1 is stipulated, does this suggest that the adaptive search feature services dangerous desires because the One Thing is that there is revenue in it?

3) if we stipulate both above to be a yes,
what do we do about it?

Thoughts are welcome. Slogans are not.
Click to expand...

I see the same thing here. How much is my privacy worth? Sadly it's in the fine print.
 
i don't find that i'm led in a particular direction, but more that you just cannot get an answer to some questions, the search engine will lock on to certain words and ignore what to me is the operative word..
i just tried to google "non whites rejecting diversity and multiculturalsim"...to refute an asshole we all know...but all i kept getting was hits about white racism...i changed the search to "minorities rejecting...." and got better results, but still got at least half the original results...
 
Roger A. Shrubber said:
i don't find that i'm led in a particular direction, but more that you just cannot get an answer to some questions, the search engine will lock on to certain words and ignore what to me is the operative word..
i just tried to google "non whites rejecting diversity and multiculturalsim"...to refute an asshole we all know...but all i kept getting was hits about white racism...i changed the search to "minorities rejecting...." and got better results, but still got at least half the original results...
Click to expand...
Google search has changed over the last year. Used to be you could put a phrase in quote marks and limit results to only that phrase. This is no longer the case, and it does seem like the algorithm is telling me what I meant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top