I have done tests with friends where we pick a search term we all use the same search engine and ask the exact same question and the different results we got were just mind blowing! Especially when it came to history and facts.
My highest respect for your work, Mr. Epstein. Your clean methods in your studies are exemplary and do not get the credit they deserve. I feel incredibly sorry for your loss, and even though I hope you will continue your work, I much more hope that you take all the time and measures you need. Most kind regards from Germany
"A memory hole is any mechanism for the deliberate alteration or disappearance of inconvenient or embarrassing documents, photographs, transcripts or other records, such as from a website or other archive, particularly as part of an attempt to give the impression that something never happened.[1][2] The concept was first popularized by George Orwell's dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, where the Party's Ministry of Truth systematically re-created all potentially embarrassing historical documents, in effect, re-writing all of history to match the often-changing state propaganda. These changes were complete and undetectable."
Most deep research is near impossible in 2020. What is valuable is usually behind paywalls. So instead most settle for the conspiracies or conclusions so thin they debunk themselves...like this Election we have in Nov 2020. The Media is actually bashing the WH for filing lawsuits bashed on what they are sure is no evidence of monkey business...well newsflash, that is kinda WHY you file lawsuits, to DISCOVER the facts and maybe uncover monkeys. This sort of shoddy biased Journalism debunks itself...but do a query as I did phrased..."what is needed to file a lawsuit?" you get nothing really relevant. Basically says GET A LAWYER. No wonder nobody digs because all you hit now are rocks.
I agree 100%!!!! I've been familiar with algorithms for a long time. Initially thought about the impact of politically influenced algorithms for every bit of 5 years or more. I just found this video and subject today..
“And when memory failed and written records were falsified-when that happened, the claim of the Party to have improved the conditions of human life had got to be accepted, because there did not exist any standard against which it could be tested.” George Orwell “1984”
"Those who have put out the people's eyes reproach them for their blindness." -John Milton "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." -old testament "The best slave is the one who thinks he is free." -Goethe
There's also a lot of debate on social media platforms and these companies could ban people by saying a comment is chicken soup (or whatever they want to call it) if they want to.
yes remember Google first and foremost is selling Advertising. Last thing you want is to make users upset, or raise questions which are not specific to their query. Like "is a Chevy s10 good ?"and then present half the articles as =NO the Chevy S10 SUCKs.
I am not sure if this video is still monitored by the author, but I keep hearing reference to our understanding of how lists influence us and how they have been studied for 100 years or more. Yet I cannot find any reference to such studies. It could be that Google, knowing that I was conducting a study of lists right after viewing this video has manipulated the search results, but I also tried Bing and duckduckgo.com (Which by the way, appear to be a near-identical result string of Google) and cannot find any definitive studies on the power of lists. Would it be possible to get a few links from your research regarding this?
....... Things being what they are I have a question.... Please do not be offended but if your name was O'Brian, would you still be able to get these videos on RUclips et al, without being censored or banned?
The Gmail slide (the only slide at about 1:01:37) can simply be explained by the fact that Google knows more about its Gmail users. Maybe subsequent research needs to also account for user's Internet 'profile' (or use 'cut out' profiles). The notion that Google detected an active research project and consequently reacted by specific tailoring of Search Results; should be considered unlikely; barring additional evidence.
Listened to this guy on Rogan. I work in IT, and was frustrated to listen to him speak on topics that I understand quite well. He understands software, but does not understand networking in the slightest sense, or is careless with his words at the very least. Repeatedly, he would say that Google shut down sections of the internet. This displays his lack of understanding. To shut down any resource on the internet would require disabling it's ability to communicate to other devices on the internet. If a website doesn't show in google searches, that simply means that it is not available via google, but if you know the URL, you can still access the site. And you can still ping the site, unless something has specifically gone wrong with the web server that hosts the site. You can still see websites in google search results which may actually not be available on the internet, due to connectivity issues or myriad other reasons. Google is JUST a search engine that shares URLs and other content with you, which they pulled FROM the web servers that make up (are) the internet.
@@g-beazy1505 I'm not sure how to feel about him getting a platform if he isn't being specific or technical. The way I see it, he's spitting out ideas that will be gobbled up by anybody who doesn't know better, and then it will just evolve into some new, obfuscated conspiracy theory. I'm all for Zero Trust, but you have to lack trust for the right reasons, else you're a folktale teller lol
I also work in IT. You misunderstood him. He goes into more detail on this topic in a different interview, and he alludes to it here, but essentially google’s live blacklist of sites is consumed by browsers like Chrome, Firefox, and Safari so that the browser is prevented from loading any of the sites on the list. The only way around it is to use an independent browser like Brave, which less than 1% of the population uses. So yes, Google can essentially shut down any website it pleases, regardless of the network status of the server it is hosted on.
I love how the first question has the implication & clear desire behind it, "dammit, why didn't they try to mind control the populace better for the election"
because your dog doesn't affect geopolitics while also polarizing both sides by pushing them into echo chambers eliminating the ability to compromise, generally speaking
More conspiracy theories than real tech talk. Strange of a stanford seminar. Indeed it's a point of view, but heavily loaded with assumptions and untrue extrapolations on reality. If it was clearly talking about the future, or without naming companies, may appear more true
Well this is peoples own problem. To not be smarter. This Robert is such a clown. He doesnt trust anyone, a typical American and he is a doctor 🤣 just listen to him ob Joe rogan. He thinks so much but he cant answer it 🤣
2024 pre-election hype version of you needs to talk about throwing US elections again. This time it's with chode rogan. What hypothetical part this time?
I have done tests with friends where we pick a search term we all use the same search engine and ask the exact same question and the different results we got were just mind blowing! Especially when it came to history and facts.
Could you elaborate further on this? That's actually crazy.
It's been 3 years so I'm going to assume there was never any conclusive evidence.
My highest respect for your work, Mr. Epstein. Your clean methods in your studies are exemplary and do not get the credit they deserve.
I feel incredibly sorry for your loss, and even though I hope you will continue your work, I much more hope that you take all the time and measures you need.
Most kind regards from Germany
"A memory hole is any mechanism for the deliberate alteration or disappearance of inconvenient or embarrassing documents, photographs, transcripts or other records, such as from a website or other archive, particularly as part of an attempt to give the impression that something never happened.[1][2] The concept was first popularized by George Orwell's dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, where the Party's Ministry of Truth systematically re-created all potentially embarrassing historical documents, in effect, re-writing all of history to match the often-changing state propaganda. These changes were complete and undetectable."
They downplay their lies and character smear you a “conspiracy theorist” for their new lies
Massive respect to you, Professor Epstein. It was amazing to hear you speak in person a few years ago, also.
The irony is that figuring out how to even search for a video on this subject is very difficult.
Most deep research is near impossible in 2020. What is valuable is usually behind paywalls. So instead most settle for the conspiracies or conclusions so thin they debunk themselves...like this Election we have in Nov 2020. The Media is actually bashing the WH for filing lawsuits bashed on what they are sure is no evidence of monkey business...well newsflash, that is kinda WHY you file lawsuits, to DISCOVER the facts and maybe uncover monkeys. This sort of shoddy biased Journalism debunks itself...but do a query as I did phrased..."what is needed to file a lawsuit?" you get nothing really relevant. Basically says GET A LAWYER. No wonder nobody digs because all you hit now are rocks.
I agree 100%!!!! I've been familiar with algorithms for a long time. Initially thought about the impact of politically influenced algorithms for every bit of 5 years or more. I just found this video and subject today..
This was mind boggling, many thanks!
Love this lecturer ! Fascinating info !
Thank you for your work and your honesty!
“And when memory failed and written records were falsified-when that happened, the claim of the Party to have improved the conditions of human life had got to be accepted, because there did not exist any standard against which it could be tested.” George Orwell “1984”
I read that book again recently....😶
Sadly 99% of lemings will jump in the abyss anyway...
So is Facebook considered to actually meddling with the election process or does that only apply when a foreign agent allegedly does it?
Meddling in the election can come from foreign or domestic. It is apparent that Facebook and Google meddled in elections and will probably continue.
"Those who have put out the people's eyes reproach them for their blindness." -John Milton
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." -old testament
"The best slave is the one who thinks he is free." -Goethe
There's also a lot of debate on social media platforms and these companies could ban people by saying a comment is chicken soup (or whatever they want to call it) if they want to.
Now in 2020 it is happening in manners we could have never imagined!
yes remember Google first and foremost is selling Advertising. Last thing you want is to make users upset, or raise questions which are not specific to their query. Like "is a Chevy s10 good ?"and then present half the articles as =NO the Chevy S10 SUCKs.
I am not sure if this video is still monitored by the author, but I keep hearing reference to our understanding of how lists influence us and how they have been studied for 100 years or more. Yet I cannot find any reference to such studies. It could be that Google, knowing that I was conducting a study of lists right after viewing this video has manipulated the search results, but I also tried Bing and duckduckgo.com (Which by the way, appear to be a near-identical result string of Google) and cannot find any definitive studies on the power of lists. Would it be possible to get a few links from your research regarding this?
....... Things being what they are I have a question.... Please do not be offended but if your name was O'Brian, would you still be able to get these videos on RUclips et al, without being censored or banned?
I noticed the difference and I go to the last page!
Facebook did it again in 2020. Just the Dem voters got the voting reminders.
Ikr, it's wild this video is six years old.
The Gmail slide (the only slide at about 1:01:37) can simply be explained by the fact that Google knows more about its Gmail users. Maybe subsequent research needs to also account for user's Internet 'profile' (or use 'cut out' profiles).
The notion that Google detected an active research project and consequently reacted by specific tailoring of Search Results; should be considered unlikely; barring additional evidence.
Why only one eye
You made this video public after 4 years?
Listened to this guy on Rogan. I work in IT, and was frustrated to listen to him speak on topics that I understand quite well. He understands software, but does not understand networking in the slightest sense, or is careless with his words at the very least.
Repeatedly, he would say that Google shut down sections of the internet. This displays his lack of understanding. To shut down any resource on the internet would require disabling it's ability to communicate to other devices on the internet. If a website doesn't show in google searches, that simply means that it is not available via google, but if you know the URL, you can still access the site. And you can still ping the site, unless something has specifically gone wrong with the web server that hosts the site. You can still see websites in google search results which may actually not be available on the internet, due to connectivity issues or myriad other reasons. Google is JUST a search engine that shares URLs and other content with you, which they pulled FROM the web servers that make up (are) the internet.
@@g-beazy1505 I'm not sure how to feel about him getting a platform if he isn't being specific or technical. The way I see it, he's spitting out ideas that will be gobbled up by anybody who doesn't know better, and then it will just evolve into some new, obfuscated conspiracy theory. I'm all for Zero Trust, but you have to lack trust for the right reasons, else you're a folktale teller lol
I also work in IT. You misunderstood him. He goes into more detail on this topic in a different interview, and he alludes to it here, but essentially google’s live blacklist of sites is consumed by browsers like Chrome, Firefox, and Safari so that the browser is prevented from loading any of the sites on the list. The only way around it is to use an independent browser like Brave, which less than 1% of the population uses. So yes, Google can essentially shut down any website it pleases, regardless of the network status of the server it is hosted on.
What's the antithesis here?
I love how the first question has the implication & clear desire behind it, "dammit, why didn't they try to mind control the populace better for the election"
wow, i wan't to sign up for that too
Bro. Jeff Hancock, sos
Who regulates the sunlight society ?
Hmm
Stanford. Creating both Google and Dr. Robert Epstein. Ying and Yang lol
I think your whole premise is hypothetical. I can manipulate my dog by asking him if he wants to go outside, how is this any different?
because your dog doesn't affect geopolitics while also polarizing both sides by pushing them into echo chambers eliminating the ability to compromise, generally speaking
Did that guy dead ass get offended and walk out? Lmao, triggered?
More conspiracy theories than real tech talk. Strange of a stanford seminar.
Indeed it's a point of view, but heavily loaded with assumptions and untrue extrapolations on reality.
If it was clearly talking about the future, or without naming companies, may appear more true
Nice try
Well this is peoples own problem. To not be smarter. This Robert is such a clown. He doesnt trust anyone, a typical American and he is a doctor 🤣 just listen to him ob Joe rogan. He thinks so much but he cant answer it 🤣
2024 pre-election hype version of you needs to talk about throwing US elections again. This time it's with chode rogan. What hypothetical part this time?