Google unveils new slogan


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

News you can use! Google unveils new slogan. Trust me, it is worth it to click on the link.

And this also: New Google technology autocorrects users’ thoughts

At a special press conference held at the technology giant’s sprawling campus Tuesday, Google engineers revealed exciting new technology that autocorrects any errant thoughts its users are having, replacing them with positions approved by the company.

Utilizing advanced retinal scan and proprietary telepathic scanning technology, the new automatic thought correction algorithm is now live for users of Google’s search engine, Android operating system, Chrome OS, and the hundreds of other apps and services the company provides. “Let’s say you start thinking there may be some kind of inherent biological difference between men and women,” Google employee Ryan Vo said in a live demo of the new tech. “Immediately, the thought suggestion program in any nearby Google device, app, or service will scrub the idea of inherent gender differences and replace them with the sure knowledge that there are at least three hundred different genders in existence, and always has been.”

For the background see this story.

And people wonder why I do not use Google, got rid of gmail years ago, and wiped my history at both as soon as I could.

Share

16 comments

  • Cotour

    You do realize that those first two stories are satire. (just checking)

  • wodun

    Currently satire to soon become reality. When we can plug a computer into our brains the people who write the programs can control our thoughts. We won’t be learning as we normally would but at an accelerated rate but rather learning what someone else wants us to know about any given subject.

  • LocalFluff

    Maybe you should try googling something some day. So you don’t need to rely on sites like “babylonbee”.

  • Ben K

    Satire of course. You can however see the path from here to there, and it is all too possible.

  • Laurie

    BTW, if anyone here wishes to reduce Google’s tracking of your page visits, you might consider an ‘addon’ to block interaction with their tracking servers. Not ideal for site hosts, but good for those who care even a little about privacy.

  • Edward

    Another view regarding Google’s definition of Diversity:
    http://wmbriggs.com/post/22420/
    Men and women are not inherently different, which is how we cannot tell men and women apart, except by self-identification, which itself must be based on a fiction since there are no inherent differences between men and women.

  • LocalFluff

    Edward
    That’s a good one! Logic is not applicable.

  • wayne

    Laurie–
    what browser add-on are you thinking?
    Personally, I use CCleaner (constantly) to get rid of persistent cookies, but I realize that doesn’t cover me completely.

    The Alphabet slogan should be:
    “We have all the emails the Obama administration doesn’t want you to ever see, and are making good use of them to protect our monopoly status, forever.”

    They ALL had Gmail accounts, precisely to avoid having their crimes against the people captured by the government email system. No one is ever put under oath and asked specific questions about that factoid, are they?

  • LocalFluff

    I use Google like I use my underwear. And I write some offensive stuff (don’t you agree?) Still, google has never minded. Only responsible bloggers cut me off. Sure, one has to keep an eye on whoever gets a dominant position in society. But this anti-Google thing seems to be a beef a bit overdone. They make things that work. And for free. That’s so good that it is true and highly appreciated.

  • wayne

    When the service is free, you are the service.

  • LocalFluff

    wayne,
    Of course we “the users” are the service. Who else would be? God?

  • wayne

    Google ‘Diversity’ Memo
    Paul joseph Watson
    https://youtu.be/sGBM47Bg3Nc
    (5:47)
    I would not normally reference Watson, so I’ll balance it with–

    Gavin McInnes:
    Stop lying about Google “anti-diversity” memo
    https://youtu.be/WSihA_OWexQ
    (7:02)

    Q; Does anyone have a link to the actual PDF file of this complete Memo?

  • Wayne: the pdf can be obtained here.

  • wayne

    Mr. Z–Thank you!

    LocalFluff–
    I do not know how much Alphabet values each User (monetarily) or for which service. (YouTube for example, does not make a profit within the USA. They go through billions of $, but have yet to generate an actual profit.)
    (and tangentially– “monetized videos,” at YouTube, essentially earn the creator, $2-6 per 1K of “qualified-views,” minus the YouTube-cut. And they have increasingly de-monetized & cut out video’s from viewpoints they do not like.

    Facebook, in one of their initial Stock Filings, (early on) placed a monetary value on each User, in a range of $2 to $110, per-year, depending on ones level of active “engagement.” You log into FB every day, and you become a valuable commodity.

    for a hilarious fake-commercial-skit, from Steven Crowder targeting YouTube, just watch the first 3 minute introduction to show #173. “Tranny Bane Vs. Mugclub w/ (the weasel) Cynk from the Young Turks.”
    (While the explanation is humorous unto itself, it –the ecosystem of YouTube– is entirely accurate.)
    Show 173
    https://youtu.be/bUO8pLRBlas

  • wodun

    And they have increasingly de-monetized & cut out video’s from viewpoints they do not like.

    They have started to shadowban videos and channels rather than just demonitize them. Lot of channels talking about it right now. It started by putting some videos into protected mode (or something like that) but didn’t stop there.

  • wodun

    Being dismissive of the concerns people have over Google is rather shallow. They have a lot of control over the flow of information and not just about news and topics but information about businesses. If some business runs afoul of google, they could find the search engines don’t generate traffic but also generate business killing traffic.

    The amount of information google has on every individual can’t be ignored either. Who trusts google? Wasn’t it Eric Schmidt that proposed de-annonamizing internet traffic to target specific individuals for Hillary’s campaign? Why would they stop there?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *