Posted on 08/03/2019 8:41:28 AM PDT by Kaslin
We’ve all looked up a word to find out its definition, but some of the political terms on Google’s “dictionary” are biased and could have long term implications for our nation’s political future.
If you look up the word “conservative,” for example, you get these acceptable synonyms: traditionalist, conventional, orthodox, stable, prudent, and old-fashioned. But these are also accompanied by these rather unflattering words: dyed-in-the-wool, unchanging, hidebound, timid, unadventurous, unenterprising, and set in one's ways, and stick in the mud.
Terms associated with leftist politics did not have such condescending synonyms.
The word “progressive” was described as modern, liberal, advanced, forward-looking, forward-thinking, go-ahead, enlightened, enterprising, innovative, up-and-coming, new, dynamic, avant-garde, modernistic, disruptive; radical, left-wing, reforming, reformist, revolutionary, revisionist, and progressivist.
The word “liberal” had similarly positive results: tolerant, unprejudiced, unbigoted, broad-minded, open-minded, enlightened, forbearing; permissive, free, free and easy, easygoing, laissez-faire, libertarian, latitudinarian, unbiased, impartial, nonpartisan. The only remotely negative words were indulgent, lenient, lax, and soft.
Perhaps the most offensive term on Google’s dictionary is the word “patriot.” The synonyms offered are nationalist, loyalist; chauvinist, jingoist, jingo, flag-waver, isolationist, and xenophobe. It almost sounds like they’ve hired Colin Kaepernick to supply their synonyms.
According to a February 2018 article in The Guardian, Google apparently gets their dictionary data from Oxford Dictionaries, which supplies “thumbnail definitions, audio recordings of pronunciations, etymology, a graph of usage over time and translation facilities.” To test this, I looked up the word “patriot” in its database and received the same damning list of insults: nationalist, loyalist, chauvinist, jingoist, jingo, flag-waver, isolationist, xenophobe.
Regardless, Google is ultimately responsible for passing off these inaccurate, rude definitions to millions of unsuspecting users.
As kids, we’re taught that certain books are informational resources that do not include opinion or bias. The dictionary and the encyclopedia are supposed to be such resources.However, in recent years, some of these resources have chosen to shirk their responsibility of fairness and become political.
For example, a couple of weeks ago, President Trump tweeted about Democratic congresswomen of color "who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe.” He said they should "go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came."
Amidst the outcry of racism, Fox News political analyst Brit Hume said he believed this message was not racist, citing Merriam-Webster Dictionary’s first definition of racism, which reads, “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.”
Afterwards, the official Webster’s Twitter account appeared to reprimand Hume. “Many of our entries have helpful usage notes if you scroll farther than the first definition.”
Amidst the outcry of racism, Fox News political analyst Brit Hume said he believed this message was not racist, citing Merriam-Webster Dictionary’s first definition of racism, which reads, “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.”
Afterwards, the official Webster’s Twitter account appeared to reprimand Hume. “Many of our entries have helpful usage notes if you scroll farther than the first definition.”
And no, I’m not trying to use that word as an insult. I’m using it as it’s been used throughout the ages – as putting aside our petty differences and doing what’s right for our nation.
Google Communists are anti-American. So there.
Next stop Gulag.
I hate google and refuse to use it.
If Google is using the Oxford Standard Dictionary as the basis of words isn’t the dispute with those scholars and not the engineers at Google who just mine OSDs data? It seems more likely the liberal bias is at Oxford.
I use Dictionary.com anyway mostly because its been around forever, its independent, and helps me solve crossword puzzles.
Naturally, if you love your country, you have to hate everyone else’s. Love is hate and hate is love. Up is down, light is dark. That’s common sense to a liberal.
A thought occurred to me. Google is rigging search results, altering the English language and discriminating against conservative thought. The evidence is undeniable. Concerned Americans are now attempting to deal with the situation by regulating and or boycotting Google. I am wondering if it is possible to construct an application that can use the google search engine and algorithm to help people navigate google and unbias the google results? In other words, a person would engage this “Google decoder application” before entering google search engine, set some peramaters and effectively undo the google biases.
I am not IT savvy enough to know if this is possible but I am betting it could be done. In principle it would work similar to polarizing sunglasses. If there is too much “white light” for the eye to process, polarizers filter out the extraneous white light allowing the eye to see only the useful rays. This “google polarizer” would be placed over the search engine and filter out all the “white lies” google is emitting only allowing the actual relevant light to come through.
Someone like Peter Theil would have the resources and expertise to get this done and would absolutely make hundreds of millions if he could pull it off. Any freeper thoughts on this?
My bookmarked list of dictionaries include:
Free Dictionary
Power Thesaurus
Urban Dictionary
Wouldn’t consider Google. Google, along with Facebook and others is EVIL.
pa·tri·ot
noun
plural noun: patriots
1. a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors. "a true patriot"
synonyms: nationalist, loyalist; chauvinist, jingoist, jingo, flag-waver, isolationist, xenophobe
"a great patriot who had died for his country"
antonyms: traitor, Google.
Silicon Valley panty waist cuckholds
Firm majority of the the men
The women ? Picture nurse ratchet on a bad day
GOOgle —> Gu-gl —> Gu-lg —> Gulag
Got in a fight with my liberal sister the other day. I used the word “niggardly” to describe something (I can’t remember one). Sister said “don’t use that word.”
My response: “Why not? It is a perfectly good word and there is no substitute word for it.”
Her: “It is from slavery since the slaves did not have anything.”
Me: “Totally untrue. The etymology of niggardly precedes slavery and has nothing to do with it.” I also added “I hope we don’t find any CHINKS in your armor.”
Her: “I don’t want to have this conversation.”
THAT is liberalism in a nutshell. When facts belie your position, just shot the discussion down.
For family harmony I dropped the subject but later heard from the rest of my family (most conservative or middle of the road) they think my sister is ridiculous and hypocritical.
if it is possible to construct an application that can use the google search engine and algorithm to help people navigate google and unbias the google results?
_______
Not a coder or even close(a little SEO knowledge is a dangerous thing), but my understanding is that the Goog algorithm is AI that learns and constantly changes. For example, it has semantic recognition that allows closely-related words to the input keyword to come up in the results. (See “People also ask....” and “Related Searches...” as indications.)
While Goog can and likely does input changes, adds words that are then weighted for and against, any decoder would necessarily need to be as powerful and as intelligent as the present goog AI.
Theil could get it done, perhaps. Goog could then bias the decoder algorithm per se. If the decoder is detected, then the AI would institute whatever alterations it needs.
This is like the warring AIs in “Person of Interest”. Besides the ideological interests of Google, the search rankings are manipulated by everyone with a product or idea to sell. I think Google monetizes keywords in their ad programs, but I’m quite clear on how that works.
Every marketing department has SEO experts. There must be a few on this thread.
dictionary.com is an avid anti-Trump troll.
It tweeted the words “patriot” and “traitor” when Trump-Putin summit was being held in Helsinki last year.
errata: ‘I’m NOT quite clear....’
Webster's dictionary does not got there. It is objective.
Lesson: If you have children, DO NOT allow them to use Google as their dictionary.
Hard to believe there are people around who don’t like the word niggardly. We learned that word in the 5th grade in English class.
I went to google (bad choice) to look up the word. It’s from he 16th century - certainly not before slavery but before slaves were being brought to North America.
Then I looked at synonyms. One of the synonyms was illiberal!!!
Illiberal is defined as: opposed to liberal principles; restricting freedom of thought or behavior.
“illiberal and anti-democratic policies”
synonyms: intolerant, narrow-minded, unenlightened, puritanical, fundamentalist;
And they call *us* intolerant.
“Webster’s dictionary does not got there. It is objective.
Lesson: If you have children, DO NOT allow them to use Google as their dictionary.”
>
Webster’s web editors are funny.
“treasonous”
Bannon: Meeting at Trump Tower ‘Treasonous’
https://www.merriam-webster.com/news-trend-watch/bannon-meeting-at-trump-tower-treasonous-20180103
Compare google’s meaning of the word with Mirriam Webster’s and Oxford. Miriam and OED both stick to the original meaning of the word.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.