Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?
-
@Gwen-Dragon Sorry.
-
@Gwen-Dragon said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:
Please, no political discussion here.
I agree, the political talk is really beside the point. Whether you think Trump or Biden won, whether you think there was massive election fraud or not, is beside the point.
The point is: Search-engines (with the exception of Yandex, Qwant, and Yahoo) are refusing to show "election fraud" as a search-suggestion, despite election fraud being a rather hot-button issue right now.
@luetage said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:
It’s simple in a way. Turn off suggestion. I have never used them. What’s more of an issue are results.
If the search-suggestions are censored, how can we trust the search-results not to be censored?
-
@luetage said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:
Let’s not get political here.
NEWS FLASH from the first post in the the thread it's been political, so there's that.
-
@Catweazle said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:
Who is going to filter what is right or left? Such a filter invariably leads to filtering for outside interests.
Didn't you know someone you never meet before already doing that for you when you use search engine? If you are not the one making these choices, then someone else will do that for you. This is not a conspiracy, afaik machine learning is not 100% fully automatic, it's "tweak" by human from time to time, & thus if these people are bias, then the AI are "program" to be so.
These filters should only start from the user, if we want a free network without zensures. Search results must remain as neutral as possible, the only thing that can be blocked from certain pages for clearly breaking the law, be it for illegal content, terrorism, pedophile, etc., on specific occasions.
That's exactly my point, that's why I try looking for non-partisan search engine. The "curation filter" should be op-in, not op-out; or worst, user have no choice to whatever filter the search engine throw at everyone.
Obviously most big tech doesn't dare to blatantly censored certain political view openly, because everyone would stop using 'em. But the big tech did some shady stuff to make certain content difficult to be found, such as recently you have to typed very specific phrase like "Election Fraud" to search any content about election fraud. Then they push 'em to the end of the search result & priorities counter view point to the content you looking for in the front page to dissuade you to perspective they want you to believe in. And right now they keep stuffing all the fake news about NO EVIDENCE in the front page... LOL
IMHO election fraud ain't political at all, because it happened & it's a history lesson everyone need to know about. I'm not refer to 2020 US election, afaik it happen to other countries too, like the obviously fake election in Venezuela, China, & North Korea! LOL
-
@Eggcorn said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:
Mods, delete this post please.
Mods ignore this request.
-
@AlienProber said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:
Mods ignore this request.
Um ... why?
-
@Eggcorn he's just trolling... it's the best way to shut down any topic in this forum when mods doesn't want to do so.
Anyway, I already got my answer I need, so let's leave this topic to be bury by history.
-
@dude99 , I agree with your view, but I think that the worst problem is not, if the search engine is more or less neutral, or respects more or less privacy, but the named filter bubble that all non-private search engines have, that is, they order the results according to the interests of the user in previous searches, showing them at the beginning.
In other words, a user who believes that the Earth is flat, will always find pages and articles that confirm this delusio in first place.
That is why I use these 'partisan' search engines, because I don't want to ask anyone who always agrees with me, even if I an wrong, I want information as neutral as possible, which Google, Bing, Yandex and Yahoo don't give me. -
@Catweazle The filter-bubble is a problem too. But it's not a choice between fighting one problem or the other. Big tech is misbehaving in lots of ways!
More to the point: I think stunts like censoring "election fraud" do a lot more to show the bad faith of big tech, then the filter-bubble. With the filter-bubble: Search-engines can say "We're just giving people what they want." And they'd have a point, that's a reasonable explanation for how they can put the filter-bubble up in good faith.
-
@Catweazle said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:
a user who believes that the Earth is flat, will always find pages and articles that confirm this delusio
Actually,
Did anyone listen and read about?
I started some months ago and there are some things that .Even the History is fake, so
-
@Zalex108 You lost me there.
-
@Zalex108 Oh boy....
-
Jajajaja
Actually I don't think it's Flat or a Globe.
There are many things related to all the "Officially accepted versions".
When you start watching, listen and reading by yourself, the things changes.You can start to take in count the opposite views and try to understand their points, independently believe it or not, you could also learn some other valuable things.
Mod Flood, Silica Trees, Arikat...
-
-
-
@TbGbe said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:
@Zalex108 said in Any Search Engine that doesn't censored "Election fraud" suggestion search term?:
Arikat...
Detail!
-
| Ari-kat instead of Arikat -
@Zalex108 Oh.. a pyramid scheme!!
Avoid them -
-
Don't worry,
Just a joke about Flat Earth, related on Who censors the information, for what reason?And a fix on Ari-Kat text for those interested to find out behind.
-
@Eggcorn Not really off-topic at all. There is a question whether limiting promotion of purely not-only-false, but actually conflict-promoting misinformation is actually bad faith, or, instead, socially-responsible action. Promoting flat-eartherism is not only irresponsible, it is also bad faith. Some may argue, so is promoting already-disproved election fraud conspiracy theories.
When the physical ballots in hand have already been compared, by hand, one at a time, to the known counts, it is really hard to credit the idea that a conspiracy or plot has changed them. To forward links to already-disproved conspiracy theories is, one might argue, irresponsible. Others may feel differently. But when one is operating what amounts to a public service, it is arguable that one has a responsibility to the public not to harm them. And disinformation is harm, in all cases.
Facts and opinion are not elements of equal value, or of equal kind. Neither are facts and fiction. Facts improve the mind. Opinions soften it. Fictions, presented as facts, damage it.