Trump looking at regulating Google because of hurt fee-fees

thehill.com/policy/technology/403956-kudlow-trump-administration-taking-a-look-at-regulating-google

White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow on Tuesday said that the administration is “taking a look” at potentially regulating Google, following President Trump’s tweets criticizing the search giant.

Trump tweeted on Tuesday morning that Google search results for “Trump News” showed results for “only the viewing/reporting of Fake New Media," he wrote, referencing prominent news outlet CNN.

“Republican/Conservative & Fair Media is shut out,” Trump’s tweet read.
Kudlow's comments were in response to being pressed by reporters on if, in light of the president's comments, the administration is considering imposing regulations on Google.

In his tweets, Trump went on to accuse Google and other tech companies of being biased against conservatives, an increasingly common attack from Republicans.

“Google & others are suppressing voices of Conservatives and hiding information and news that is good. They are controlling what we can & cannot see. This is a very serious situation-will be addressed!” Trump tweeted.

Google shot back at the president's claims, refuting charges that it is biased against conservatives or any other political groups.

"When users type queries into the Google Search bar, our goal is to make sure they receive the most relevant answers in a matter of seconds," a Google spokesperson said in a statement.

"Search is not used to set a political agenda and we don't bias our results toward any political ideology," the statement continues. "Every year, we issue hundreds of improvements to our algorithms to ensure they surface high-quality content in response to users' queries. We continually work to improve Google Search and we never rank search results to manipulate political sentiment."

Trump joins high-profile Republicans like House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in accusing technology companies of treating conservatives on their platforms unfairly.

With support from McCarthy, the House Energy and Commerce Committee is set to hold a hearing on the matter on Sept. 5, which Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey is set to testify.

Dorsey will also testify during the Senate Intelligence Committee’s hearing that day on how foreign governments have run misinformation campaigns on American tech platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Google Plus.

Attached: 232.png (495x407, 339.6K)

Other urls found in this thread:

wsws.org/en/articles/2018/08/25/cens-a25.html
searx.me/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Are you a liberal or something? This shit affects leftists as well, whoever supports the bourgeoisie cracking down on uncomfortable news outlets as a radical leftist saws the the branch they sit on.

epicly maga'd fellow pede

How is it bad news for us? Trump is making a complete ass of himself, and the US government will never actually risk an economic meltdown that would invariably result from an Internet that lacks freedom of expression.
Keep in mind that rightards think their views are being persecuted because they believe a lot of objectively false things, which are considered less relevant by search engines. These accusations are unprovable. Only Twitter actually has a liberal bias, which the company openly admits.

They're filthy filthy ⛏️rotskyites, but wsws is on point here
wsws.org/en/articles/2018/08/25/cens-a25.html

Pray do tell comrade, how the politically motivated speech controls in the wsws article linked have caused an economic meltdown

This is only a ploy to merge state and corporate powers to extinguish any anti-imperialist anti-capitalist dissent.

Telling one website what to do won't prevent people from hosting their own content.

Side with google to own drumpf

There's no possible way Trump can regulate Google anymore than it already is, this literally doesn't matter lmao.

Attached: stalin laugh.jpg (344x400, 22.74K)

Attached: dac03f3f7a79a1eb417797690630a4408d13aca535a236d7b1bc0c9471266505.jpg (963x682, 127.35K)

wtf I love google now

This would be a point of discussion if it wasn't just Trump complaining about not being treated as a deity on media.
Trump is like the spokesperson and embodiment of boomers, he thinks that everyone will treat him like how Republicans treat Reagan and is disgusted when they aren't, that's all this is.

Attached: Flip Flappers - 13 (1280x720 HEVC2 AAC).mkv_snapshot_19.42_[2017.01.28_12.23.37].jpg (1280x720, 123.18K)

Google censors leftist shit all the time.

This.
There's literally nothing Trump can do to make them censor anything else, they've taken down everything they already could, left and right.

This is truly the only way to revolution.

Just a friendly reminder: there's a difference between fake news and biased news. Fake news is shit that literally did not happen. Biased news is just a story that supports one side over another, which isn't necessarily a bad thing depending on context, but it usually is because most media outlets are capitalist.

Just a friendly reminder: capitalists won't make a distinction between "fake news" and "biased news" if the "biased news" is against them and the imperialist actions of the state that supports them.

Litterally just as retarded as owning the libs by getting rid of NN.

Uh, yeah it would. The actual existing government has already gone after net neutrality and passed SESTA (which actually resulted in a bunch of pressure against general sex and prostitution discussion).

This. Google's algorithm is absolute shit. I remember back when they had competition and you could go through like 100 pages of results even for obscure stuff, and results tended to be more relevant. Now big companies almost always get the first results, it's very hard to weed out recent shit that doesn't match the search criteria, and most things cut off after page 7 even if there are more results.

The best actual way to solve this is to introduce actual search engine competition. Google has gotten so bad of late that I actually have started using DuckDuckGo just out of convenience where before it was mostly a privacy thing.

Does anyone have the link to that youtube video that someone who hated the media would get elected or some shit? I saw it posted here.

you say introduce competition then name competition that already exist. why are you contradicting yourself?

well shit, now I can't claim trump wants to bring about free market capitalism with ancaps now.

Will Boomers ever understand how algorithms work?

Attached: 1529540937947s.jpg (125x124, 1.76K)

Bing exists too.
Duckduckgo existing doesn't mean they're actually currently competitive within that niche. Not the way AskJeeves or Yahoo! search were in '03. Back then Google's status really wasn't totally cemented, and people would regularly switch between multiple search engines if they really wanted to find something because there was actual competition wrt who was casting the biggest net. I don't think most people even know about DDG today. AskJeeves had, like, balloons in parades and shit.

even duckduckgo is terrible. I think like the best option would be searx.me/ havn't tried very much of it and let DDG fuck my ass.

I haven't tried searx. My latest usages of Duckduckgo actually had an advantage. As of this year, Google has gotten really bad at verbatim searches to the point where it will both bring up a bunch of non-synonymous words as synonyms and also fuck up quotation searches by excluding a bunch of actual matches for no reason. At that point, even DDG (with its limited scope) could be more useful.


What?

Google makes tons of political decisions, and they have to do that, questions like which sites show up under Google news and which aren't serious and professional enough. And the algorithms for sorting results have important parameters that are ultimately set by human decision-makers at Google.

like what`? Leftists say this all the time, but never give examples

It's not difficult to make an algorithm that censors topics or themes, and there are a lot of tools to do so. You can look at the wording, the people who respond to it or use machine learning to reduce its reach

That's a blatant lie.

It's definitely not biased against conservatives, though.

Attached: 1530766944355.jpg (396x263, 12.51K)

Some moderators will undoubtedly be hurt by this so its not all bad

Attached: 5ce7e741246e4080fe708b0c714d4379ebe8e1a0b97f5e159b2be3c6e2c793fb.jpg (500x679, 37.14K)

So Zig Forums is against regulation if it's fucking Google.

inb4 muh free speech

Google does not support free speech.

regulation by whom for what purpose through which means?
take your reddit spacing and fuck off, libshit

Attached: tch981.PNG (275x410, 37.29K)

DDG unfortunately cannot compare to G. It doesn't even have its own backend, and the third parties can't compare *free market wew*
Being headquartered in the U.S. also is a problem.
Actually maybe baidu might be safe from western spooks if the servers are foreign located. Of course the chinese will be watching that.

Why not use ixquick instead?


This.

Attached: vpyWb8D.gif (380x284, 947.15K)

Google is already censored anyway. The whole China/Google censorship thing was just implementing what the US already has already done on its own country. Google is heavily censored in regards to politics and is curated with liberal 'status quo' keywords having higher weights and most 'not in the overton window' keywords they want censored having extremely low weights.

Anyone who's been using Google since the early 2000's can pick out the difference, and it happened during the 2016 election cycle.

Attached: dupont-tk554tly3x000100-tychem-tk-hazmat-suit-app1.jpg (301x340, 49.18K)

Oh, and op is a liberal. It couldn't be more clear. Bring out the guillotines.

Ha. You think jerking each other off on a Stalinist larping board is freedom of expression?