[HarrietJones]

Two Points. Google answers questions, it sometimes gets those questions wrong, but it's getting better. I'm not that worried about the odd wrong answer because that's a consequence of fledgling deep learning software. Things will get better. Of course, some idiot's going to listen to Google one time, and do something disastrous with the "advice" and then they might have to tone it down a bit, but I for one welcome our question answering overlords.

Of more concern is the possibility that Google is increasingly correct, and the algorithms and heuristics it uses know us better than we know ourself. Nothing's going to fuck with democracy more than the knowledge that free will is a myth and the outcomes for Very Important Things are already decided.

Media in the UK are stopped from reporting on Exit Polls before elections and there's a move to ban all polling because knowing how people will vote is enough to adversely affect elections. I can see this being applied to issues like this, but even that's problematic. I don't know if a machine accurately telling everybody who will win is better or worse than a machine only telling Important People who will win.

[laumars]

I'd rather see the media banned from telling people who to vote for than see a ban on all polling. But something like that would be impossible to enforce given all publications / news networks have a political bias.

[laumars]

Why was this downvoted? A counter argument would be appreciated please.

[laumars]

Thanks for downvoting that comment too.

<rant> This site is getting worse and worse for people abusing the negative karma feature </rant>