Google Engineers Discussed Punishing Conservative Media After Trump's Victory

[Mr Person]

I hear what you're saying a lot from people. The left loves to repeat it because they think they are using a talking point from the right against them. It's not true that Google can do whatever they want.

The truth is that when you agree to their TOS you and them are entering into a legally binding contract. I'm not claiming they are violating the contract but if they are they could be open to a class action lawsuit from all its users. Google is playing a dangerous game that some clever lawyer may come along and bankrupt them with.

According to what statutes and which cases interpreting them? What are you even saying?

When you say "It's not true that Google can do whatever they want" that at least is true. Google cannot execute bad employees because that's premeditated murder. But when you say "Google is playing a dangerous game that some clever lawyer may come along and bankrupt them with" what do you mean, specifically?

You realize we don't have wands, right? We can't just magic a judge into doing stuff. (Also, google can afford clever lawyers).

They are agreeing to provide the users with a certain product in exchange for that users personal information. That means they have a responsibility to provide the product they promise. If their algorithm is in violation of their TOS it's not a free speech crime but it is a breach of contract. Its akin to Ford selling you a car they claim is equipped with something and you come to find out its not.

To argue breach of contract, you have to identify a behavior, identify a rule in contract law (usually established by cases), and make an argument about how that contract violates that rule. You can't just decide you don't like FB and say some negative words about them while citing lawyers.



By the way, does anyone even remember the terms of service they agreed to when signing up for Facebook? For installing anything? There certainly is a fuss to be made about whether or not we want companies to bombard you with a 50-page contract they know nobody has the time to afford to read to use what they've sold you (in the case of program EULAs) or something like facebook. But that isn't what I'm responding to...

 

[sangha]

According to what statutes and which cases interpreting them? What are you even saying?

When you say "It's not true that Google can do whatever they want" that at least is true. Google cannot execute bad employees because that's premeditated murder. But when you say "Google is playing a dangerous game that some clever lawyer may come along and bankrupt them with" what do you mean, specifically?

You realize we don't have wands, right? We can't just magic a judge into doing stuff. (Also, google can afford clever lawyers).




To argue breach of contract, you have to identify a behavior, identify a rule in contract law (usually established by cases), and make an argument about how that contract violates that rule. You can't just decide you don't like FB and say some negative words about them while citing lawyers.



By the way, does anyone even remember the terms of service they agreed to when signing up for Facebook? For installing anything? There certainly is a fuss to be made about whether or not we want companies to bombard you with a 50-page contract they know nobody has the time to afford to read to use what they've sold you (in the case of program EULAs) or something like facebook. But that isn't what I'm responding to...

Twitters TOS is relatively short, and VERY simple. For example:

We may suspend or terminate your account or cease providing you with all or part of the Services at any time for any or no reason

https://twitter.com/en/tos

 

[Mr Person]

Twitters TOS is relatively short, and VERY simple. For example:

https://twitter.com/en/tos

Yyyyyes, but I did click on it just to make sure I didn't make a complete arse of myself, and i do note that when I print-to-pdf it produces a 19 page document.



Bottom line: whether we should or not, we don't read this ****.

But, second bottom line: that has little to do with trouble's rambling about a clever lawyer's revenge of facebook or whatever it was.

 

[Deuce]

Google rightfully points out that it’s a bad idea to elevate dip**** blogs to the same status as legitimate media outlets, conservatives get mad. Why am I not surprised?

 

[Deuce]

I hear what you're saying a lot from people. The left loves to repeat it because they think they are using a talking point from the right against them. It's not true that Google can do whatever they want.

The truth is that when you agree to their TOS you and them are entering into a legally binding contract. I'm not claiming they are violating the contract but if they are they could be open to a class action lawsuit from all its users. Google is playing a dangerous game that some clever lawyer may come along and bankrupt them with.

They are agreeing to provide the users with a certain product in exchange for that users personal information. That means they have a responsibility to provide the product they promise. If their algorithm is in violation of their TOS it's not a free speech crime but it is a breach of contract. Its akin to Ford selling you a car they claim is equipped with something and you come to find out its not.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

So, identify the language in the contract that is breached.

 

[Kal'Stang]

I hear what you're saying a lot from people. The left loves to repeat it because they think they are using a talking point from the right against them. It's not true that Google can do whatever they want.

The truth is that when you agree to their TOS you and them are entering into a legally binding contract. I'm not claiming they are violating the contract but if they are they could be open to a class action lawsuit from all its users. Google is playing a dangerous game that some clever lawyer may come along and bankrupt them with.

They are agreeing to provide the users with a certain product in exchange for that users personal information. That means they have a responsibility to provide the product they promise. If their algorithm is in violation of their TOS it's not a free speech crime but it is a breach of contract. Its akin to Ford selling you a car they claim is equipped with something and you come to find out its not.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I never signed any agreement to use the google.com search engine. Did you? Or did you just type in the addy and then do a search?

Plus its standard that any TOS you do sign has a little clause in it that states that <insert whatever company here> the Terms & Conditions can be changed/updated at any time without notification. And another little clause that usually states something along the lines of "online interactions may vary".

 

[American]

Actually thanks to mueller the investigation has actually netted money, not cost. So FAKE NEWS from you is all have.

Link? Make sure it isn't fake.

 

[American]

Aw looks like someone doesn't realize that people don't hate Clinton as much as they hate Trump, and that Trump stuff was and continues to be way more damaging and more and shocking than anything Hillary has ever done.

Damn, temped again. Seems like you're never here anymore. :lol:

 

[trouble13]

So, identify the language in the contract that is breached.

Post the contract they entered into

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[trouble13]

I never signed any agreement to use the google.com search engine. Did you? Or did you just type in the addy and then do a search?

Plus its standard that any TOS you do sign has a little clause in it that states that <insert whatever company here> the Terms & Conditions can be changed/updated at any time without notification. And another little clause that usually states something along the lines of "online interactions may vary".

I believe I checked a box agreeing to their terms when I downloaded loaded their software.

Yes it's TRUE they typically write into it that they can change the terms without notice. The question however is did they change their terms. If they did did they apply the new standard to everyone or just some.

My only point is that it isnt as cut n dry as the company can do whatever they want. They can only do what the contract allows.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Juggernaut74]

I believe I checked a box agreeing to their terms when I downloaded loaded their software.

Yes it's TRUE they typically write into it that they can change the terms without notice. The question however is did they change their terms. If they did did they apply the new standard to everyone or just some.

My only point is that it isnt as cut n dry as the company can do whatever they want. They can only do what the contract allows.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Typically - what’s the remedy granted in breach of contract suits?

And once you’ve answered that, how will that answer “bankrupt” Google?

 

[sangha]

Post the contract they entered into

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

https://twitter.com/tos

 

[Buzz62]

Probably when internet trolls who aren't really conservatives went offline for the first time in years. Was told by the X-Files and Fox News to find your own truth and not to trust American institutions. Claimed to be conservatives b/c they couldn't say racist things in public places without getting the crap kicked out of them and then proceeded to think that they are entitled to sex with every woman who wears heels and short skirts but get angry when those same women blab about their twisted and controlling behavior to the media. Something like that?

Huh...you're really an angry person, aren't you.
Told by the X-Files? Interesting. So you have a vivid imagination too eh?
And while we're-a talkin' 'bout saying "racist things", tell us about how you feel about Don Lemon and his bald-faced racism?
As for this sex comment of yours...what horse kaka.
Man you have issues.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Doesn't this belong in Conspiracy?

 

[Mithros]

They're as intertwined with our government as possible.

"Fascism should rightly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power," according to Benito Mussolini.

Google is the top tech company that receives government subsidies, picking up more than $630 million from states like Oregon, North Carolina and a few others.


https://m.mic.com/articles/85101/10...ve-public-subsidies-from-taxpayers#.o3ivxXuFH

https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/01/g...t-of-military-contract-after-public-backlash/

Brietbart is not equivalent to the NY Times. Brietbart is conspiracy propoganda. If your algorithm is ranking the two as equivalent news sites, then your algorithm rightly needs to be changed.

The real story isn't conservative media being "punished" by Google. It's conservative "media" demanding affirmative action for their viewpoints because they're too intellectually lazy and dishonest to produce an equivalent product.

 

[Deuce]

Post the contract they entered into

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I'm not the one suggesting any misconduct. Burden is not upon me.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tells ya.

Use DuckDuckGo people.

 

[Kobie]

Brietbart is not equivalent to the NY Times. Brietbart is conspiracy propoganda. If your algorithm is ranking the two as equivalent news sites, then your algorithm rightly needs to be changed.

The real story isn't conservative media being "punished" by Google. It's conservative "media" demanding affirmative action for their viewpoints because they're too intellectually lazy and dishonest to produce an equivalent product.

^ This times about 11 million

 

[Deuce]

I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tells ya.

Use DuckDuckGo people.

Do they provide the proper affirmative action for conservative dip**** bloggers?

 

[trouble13]

I'm not the one suggesting any misconduct. Burden is not upon me.

I did not say they violated the contract. I suggested they may have depending on what the contract says.

I am pishing back against the odea that google is free to make up the rules as they go. They are in fact purchasing someyhing from their users and reselling it to 3rd party vendors.

We agree to it under the terms of their user agreement but we do so under the understanding that they are slso agreeing to certain terms too.

If you think what im saying isnt possible look at what they did to big tobacco.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[OlNate]

While Robert Mueller blew millions on an investigation into political meddling from abroad, our own American tech behemoth Google discussed ways in which they could manipulate public opinion in upcoming elections. We also know that Google meddled with the 2016 Presidential Election itself, burying negative information about Hillary Clinton, and pushing anti Trump propaganda to the top of search results.

Google co-founder Sergey Brin was born in Russia, and the given name on his birth certificate is Серге́й Миха́йлович Брин

:lamo

Brin represents the 'acceptable' Russian meddler in American politics however!

I'm confused...you're rather have Russians influencing the American election than Americans?

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

I believe I checked a box agreeing to their terms when I downloaded loaded their software.

Yes it's TRUE they typically write into it that they can change the terms without notice. The question however is did they change their terms. If they did did they apply the new standard to everyone or just some.

My only point is that it isnt as cut n dry as the company can do whatever they want. They can only do what the contract allows.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

The software would be Chrome I expect. Which is different then Google Search, I have never agreed to any terms and conditions or had to download any software to use Google search.

Google search is a commercial enterprise with the end goal of providing a platform in which Google can sell advertising space to make money from. The quality of the search engine is used to ensure repeat users to google search to provide more eyeballs to the advertisers. Only when trying to buy advertising space on Google search would I have to agree to terms and conditions

 

[sangha]

I am pishing back against the odea that google is free to make up the rules as they go.

Their TOS explicitly says they are free to make up rules as they go. :lamo

 

[MrShangles]

In the end, Google is a US company. A private entity, not a governmental one. No matter how much others may find it despicable they can alter their algorithms to whatever they please.

You jump up and down and scream, the Russians meddled in our election to get Trump elected, but not even a little whimper when we see google meddling with the election to get Hillery elected, doesn’t that sound just a little hypocritical? But it’s the normal liberal standard!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OlNate]

You jump up and down and scream, the Russians meddled in our election to get Trump elected, but not even a little whimper when we see google meddling with the election to get Hillery elected, doesn’t that sound just a little hypocritical? But it’s the normal liberal standard!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

lmao...are you calling Kal a liberal?? :lamo

Nah, man, even conservatives are capable of not having head up ass all the time....