John Carlos BaezOct 4, 2023

NOTE: I quoted a report from an executive of DuckDuckGo attending the antitrust lawsuit against Google. This article has now been retracted from Wired:

"After careful review of the op-ed, "How Google Alters Search Queries to Get at Your Wallet," and relevant material provided to us following its publication, WIRED editorial leadership has determined that the story does not meet our editorial standards. It has been removed."

I hope we'll learn more about what Google actually does, since September 28, the court established a process allowing the Justice Department to publish more information about this case.

https://www.wired.com/story/google-antitrust-lawsuit-search-results/

A Note From WIRED Leadership

WIRED
Show threadgjm

@johncarlosbaez I'm not seeing anything anywhere in that article that says what evidence there is for its incendiary claims. The author mentions something that "momentarily flashed on a projector" and quotes the words "semantic matching", and ... so far as I can see, that's it?

I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that Google is doing what the article alleges, or some other equally nefarious thing, but I'm having trouble thinking what could possibly (still less _plausibly_) have been on that slide, short and clear enough to be read when merely "momentarily flashed", that would justify the claims in the article.

Am I missing something here? Can anyone suggest what might actually have been on the slide? Or why the author of the article is so very vague about it?

Oct 4, 2023 at 11:30pmWeb
Show threadJames BrittOct 5, 2023

@gjm @johncarlosbaez

That's my reading of this as well. It's conjecture.

Show threadSentient MortalOct 5, 2023
@gjm @johncarlosbaez this. please critically read articles, people. this piece is slimy.