I know exactly what you mean. The presentation is a bit off what you'd normally consider news. All caps, lighting bolt emoji. Massive bars with cyan text at the top and bottom of the video. An interesting mix of fonts.
I'm not sure what Dr. Coppola's intentions are. But it's a bit of a shame trying to inject what seems like to me sensationalist tone via the presentation, since his message could probably stand alone (although let me watch the whole thing first).
Wait, so they brought on a Google Assistant engineer to talk about Google Search and News results?
And he admits he has no "smoking gun"? And also says Google Assistant has no bias? And uses appeals to authority ("I have a PhD in CS and have worked at Google for years")?
Basically, the whole interview boils down to needing to trust this guy who isn't a known public figure with a proven track record.
I'm hungry for Big Tech insider info like many people, and I'm not naive enough to think Google is benevolent and unbiased, but this is starting to look like controlled opposition.
There doesn't seem to actually be any news here. It seems mostly to be this guy speculating on products he doesn't work on, did he say anything specific about his product?
I can’t imagine the pivot to alt-right conservative pundit is all that profitable. Going off the fact that he’s not a public figure at Google and the anecdotal data that any two (or 32) bit engineer will tell you that “tech is dangerous” - me included, I doubt this gets much traction other than him getting immediately terminated for cause.
9 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 37.0 ms ] threadI'm not sure what Dr. Coppola's intentions are. But it's a bit of a shame trying to inject what seems like to me sensationalist tone via the presentation, since his message could probably stand alone (although let me watch the whole thing first).
I don't suppose we'd believe this story otherwise.
And he admits he has no "smoking gun"? And also says Google Assistant has no bias? And uses appeals to authority ("I have a PhD in CS and have worked at Google for years")?
Basically, the whole interview boils down to needing to trust this guy who isn't a known public figure with a proven track record.
I'm hungry for Big Tech insider info like many people, and I'm not naive enough to think Google is benevolent and unbiased, but this is starting to look like controlled opposition.