
Inside Google's Mysterious Ethics Board - yawz
http://www.forbes.com/sites/privacynotice/2014/02/03/inside-googles-mysterious-ethics-board/
======
secstate
Not sure if I'm being an old fart here or not, but what the hell happened to
writing?

The title of this post makes reference to an existing ethics board at Google,
and then the third paragraph, without mentioning anything about an ethics
board besides the title, references the ethics board the DeepMind would like
to create at Google without any other contexts.

I think I'm done with Forbes. What a piece of trash article.

~~~
darkrabbi
The problem stems from "Forbes Contributor" system

"It’s a simple deal: there is a flat monthly fee, a bonus for hitting certain
unique visitor targets, and a fee per unique user after bonus targets are
achieved. For paid contributors, the arrangement requires a certain number of
posts per month and a specified level of audience engagement through our
commenting system."

With a setup like that, of course it's ideal to push sensationalist articles
that will stir up controversy/comments even if it's fabricated. We saw a ton
of this in eSports with a particular Forbes contributor milking the
communities "OMG WE'RE ON FORBES" attitude for 30+ articles.

They're not the only major outlet using a similar content farming system, and
I can't really blame anyone for their moves in this situation. Sensationalist
Misinformation > Meaningful Editorial Content online and it's been that way
for a long time.

~~~
yuhong
How about getting rid of the bonuses and just mandate a certain number of
posts per month, with support for reporting posts filled with garbage for
example?

------
pasbesoin
I've continued to become increasingly uncomfortable with Google's opaqueness.

Just the other day, I went to adjust Dad's advanced settings in Chrome,
because they are now using Google Cloud Print. That was actually connected to
their non-cloud-ready printer using Mom's Google/Gmail account.

But when I tried to go in the check and adjust settings, Chrome itself --
_not_ the Google web-based interface to Cloud Print -- prompted for renewed
sign in, even though I'd just signed into the web property as Mom. When I
attempted to use her ID to do this for the _Chrome browser_ , I received a
message back that the last/previous such authentication had occurred under
_Dad 's_ Google ID.

 _Despite_ the face that, the other week, I _set up_ this Cloud Print-ing
nonsense using _Mom 's_ ID.

And... no links to documentation. Just this sudden sort of "fuck you" opaque
messaging.

And _all this_... because their very reliable wireless network printing to
their Brother 2170W printer has stopped working, and I was trying to
investigate whether this Cloud Print functionality and the Windows service or
whatever that it can and did apparently drop as an option to support printing
when not signed into one's Google account on the Windows PC supporting and
driving the non-Cloud-Print-ready printer, whether that might be getting in
the way of the normal, non-Cloud-Print wireless/network printing.

Argh!

By the way, the printer did start printing just fine, once I had Dad connect
it with a USB cable. So, it is basically working. I _suspect_ this Cloud
Printing nonsense. (Set up so Mom can print from her new Samsung Android
tablet.)

Troubleshooting it -- especially if they want to continue using it while also
being able to use normal wireless/network printing? Not looking forward to
that, so much.

Add in everyone else's "Google does this (or doesn't) and refuses to
communicate on it nor actively support it" story, and...

You are becoming your own version of Microsoft, Google. Except... for a while,
with Microsoft, if you _paid_ , you actually got support.

------
milesf
"Is Google building an unstoppable robot army powered by AI?… Whatever the
answer, we don’t want to feed the rumor mill here."

Uh... you just did. #FAIL

~~~
vetrom
I've always found that Betteridge's Law of Headlines is an excellent first
(but not 100% accurate) measure for early-warning of link and 'content' farms.

------
EdwardDiego
> Right now, AI controls airplanes, stock markets, information searches,
> surveillance programs, and more

...are they correct? I can't really imagine anyone sticking existing AI
implementations in aircraft. Or do they have a looser definition of AI?

~~~
nbouscal
This article uses a _very_ loose definition of AI.

------
jlockfre
He doesn't mention Kurzweil once. #fail

