Google's Jigsaw Was Supposed To Save the Internet. It Became a Toxic Mess Instead. (vice.com) 288
Google's internet freedom moonshot has gotten glowing attention for its ambitious projects. But current and former employees, leaked documents, and internal messages reveal a grim reality. From a report: It's an organization that over the years has earned a seemingly endless run of glowing press coverage: Jigsaw has been called the "internet justice league," an "elite think tank," and a team that is "fighting the darkest parts of the internet." While trying to save the internet from censorship, extremists, and hackers may sound like one of the best jobs in tech, more than a dozen current and former employees of Jigsaw told Motherboard that the reality inside Google's moonshot is bleak. [...]
Current and former Jigsaw employees describe a toxic workplace environment, mismanagement, poor leadership, HR complaints that haven't resulted in action, retaliation against employees who speak up, and a chronic failure to retain talent, particularly women engineers and researchers. Sources describe a place full of well-intentioned people who are undermined by their own leaders; an organization that, despite the breathless headlines it has garnered, has done little to actually make the internet any better. Jigsaw's internal problems are driving away employees. Since mid-2018, a total of roughly two dozen Jigsaw employees have left, according to sources on the team. As of this week, Jigsaw has about 60 employees, according to a current employee.
Current and former Jigsaw employees describe a toxic workplace environment, mismanagement, poor leadership, HR complaints that haven't resulted in action, retaliation against employees who speak up, and a chronic failure to retain talent, particularly women engineers and researchers. Sources describe a place full of well-intentioned people who are undermined by their own leaders; an organization that, despite the breathless headlines it has garnered, has done little to actually make the internet any better. Jigsaw's internal problems are driving away employees. Since mid-2018, a total of roughly two dozen Jigsaw employees have left, according to sources on the team. As of this week, Jigsaw has about 60 employees, according to a current employee.
The ironicalness of it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The ironicalness of it (Score:5, Informative)
i was thinking of that, "While trying to save the internet from censorship" is just a mockery of what Google is really doing.
For thosw who've not seen it:
https://www.bitchute.com/video... [bitchute.com]
Re:The ironicalness of it (Score:4, Insightful)
That's a lie. He always provides the full unedited video. When being released for mass media consumption he provides a copy edited for time. Like they ALL do and have ALWAYS done.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You say that every time, and it isn't to clarify, you do it to passive aggressively claim it's been spliced together. It's edited for time not for content.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Where is the full, unedited video?
This guy has a long history of misleading editing, so we need more proof than just his edited version.
That is the most FULL-OF-SHIT post AmiMoJo has ever made, of many full-of-shit posts.
You bald-faced, lieing, low-down, mendacious, sack of festering gonorrhea-from-your-mother pus.
Like ALL Project Veritas videos, it's not hard to find the full, unedited video. [projectveritas.com]
Project Veritas doesn't need to pull "progressive" tricks like blaming Obama-era illegal immigrant kids-in-cages on Trump.
Re:The ironicalness of it (Score:5, Informative)
Where is the full, unedited video?
This guy has a long history of misleading editing.
No he doesn't. He has a long history of releasing full videos along with edited versions for people who don't want to watch hours and days of videos. He also has a long history of people like you repeating the lie that he doesn't release full videos.
In this case, the person in the video has already responded and - surprise! - didn't say that the video was wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
Misleading editing isn't the only problem with his style though, part of it is also about tri
Re: (Score:3)
https://www.projectveritas.com... [projectveritas.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, fair enough, it didn't load on mobile for me but it's okay on desktop. Just got bounced to the homepage on Android/Firefox.
Anyway, it's still not the full unedited video, it's the edited one. Where is the raw footage? Where are the camera files?
Re: (Score:2)
Ha, you want to see CNN - I saw a mobile phone video uploaded by someone who watched a CNN crew hand out placards to a group of people and told them where to stand before filming a piece as if the presenter had just turned up to some demonstration.
The guy videoing it all was just laughing, but .. its quite a serious matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Google "censors" anyone the advertisers don't like (Score:2)
Re:Got a source for that? (Score:5, Interesting)
I will not live in a society where government tyranny can be carried out simply by offloading it to a private cooperation.
I would prefer not to live in a society where the cost of freedom is offloaded to a private corporation
Hilary Clinton is a corporatist (Score:2)
Re:The ironicalness of it (Score:5, Insightful)
insane conspiracy theories
So what you're saying is that Google's Jen Gennai, which the company has put in charge of "Responsible Innovation," didn't actually say the words she's shown on video saying? Be specific.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously she said the words she's shown on video saying, but she presumably also said a lot of other words before and after the short clips shown in the video which would provide valuable context to the words you actually hear her say, and probably completely change their perceived meaning. Carefully editing out this context is a common technique employed by those who try to push their own world view by painting their opponents as sinister or evil. (Playing sinister music and showing a silhouetted speaker
Re: (Score:2)
It's equally hilarious to take any number of bizarre, isolated statements from the Bible out of context in exactly this way.
Read as a collection of independent, disjoint sentences, it's one of the scariest works in recor
Re: (Score:2)
You still don't understand. I don't like Trump, but I voted for him because of your *reactions* to all this.
So your general election vote was to troll, to stick it to people?
Well I for one didn't see that coming (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this sounds like a close enough approximation.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why everyone goes to church, not just atheists.
It begins! (Score:2)
I'm certain this the real origin story for the villain in Saw. [wikipedia.org] ;)
The problem is that management... (Score:2)
The problem is that management have mistook the purpose of the project entirely, only considering it to be an extension of the Saw movies with a same named character.
For anyone wondering what Jigsaw is (Score:5, Informative)
Re:For anyone wondering what Jigsaw is (Score:4, Insightful)
There is a lot of moral judgment calls in this type of work. Then you mix in Analytical thinking to the mix then things really break down.
Humans are bad at thinking morally and analytical at the same time. That is why many doctors are rude to patients, and more so patients who are tough cases. Because they are trying to work out the problem in their head, and they are forgetting that it is person suffering in front of them.
They are people out there who I see as morally repugnant who are calling me morally repugnant. So you then need to make sure there is a real problem, or just your world view is being challenged.
Now for Jigsaw to work, the people need to be diverse with different backgrounds. However that isn't Googles MO Google likes to hire people who will fit into the company and its values. Often more then ones ability to do the work. So what is needed vs what Google is use to managing is in conflict with each other. So I am not surprised by the nature of the work, with dealing with Google Management has made a Toxic Work environment.
Re: (Score:2)
Insightful analysis, and I wish I had a mod point to give you. The actual moderators apparently mostly disagree with me.
You're trying to shift blame to Google (Score:2)
There's plenty of stories about how shitty it is being a paid moderator. But paid moderators at least get to see the good stuff too. The uplifting stories and the like. These were people knee deep in white supremacy, black supremacy, Nazism, pedos, homophobes and bigots of every possible strip ("Ok, we'll give some land to the n*****
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not surprised it's a rough place to work, when your job is to read analyze and parse the worse the Internet has to offer that's not going to be conducive to a good work environment.
I almost laughed out loud when I read in the story summary "that this might sound like one of the best jobs in tech." Uuuugh, no waaay. Anyone who thinks about it for more than a few seconds should realize that it would have to be one of the most stressful jobs in tech. People at Facebook and other companies who have had to review complaints and been exposed to torture pictures from terrorists have literally gotten PTSD. There's real horror out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Rather a narrow definition for an "informative" mod, but apparently no other comments of greater information value? Or so the moderators say.
Not my fault! I never get a mod point to give. Maybe I just see the grapes of moderation as sour, but I think they are wrathful.
On the meat of your comment, I think your summary is interesting but too narrow, though your analysis is sound.
I also think the approach of Jigsaw is fundamentally wrongheaded. I approach the problem from the perspective of time overlaid with
Re: (Score:2)
You can't fight racist bullshit when your department is run by someone deep in the throes of a white savior complex.
Well, that explains the extreme left in a nutshell. A bunch of middle / lower-middle class white people giving gay Vietnamese men brain trauma for not being oppressed enough.
Geek culture is based on merit, not diversity (Score:5, Insightful)
And that's the core of the problem.
Geeks care about one thing: What you do. You create a nifty gadget, some awesome code, something that promotes a free flow of ideas, ANYTHING? Great, you're cool. Yes, you might even be important, or someone we'll listen to when they say something because you accomplished something, produced something, gave something to the geek community and furthered us as a society.
You want merit for being a member of (insert minority group here)? GTFO. Nobody gives a shit about what's between your legs or whether you're black, white. brown or green-purple polka dotted. As far as I'm concerned, you can be a three headed alien with the gender fleen, now show your code or stop wasting my time.
If you try to flip this upside down, you will meet resistance. If you counter that resistance with repression, people will leave.
You're honestly wondering why this happens? For real?
Re:Geek culture is based on merit, not diversity (Score:5, Insightful)
Geeks care about one thing: What you do.
That's never been true. Back in the day it was what computer you had, Commodore or Sinclair or Tandy or Acorn. What university you went to. Vi or EMACS.
These days the lines have shifted, but they still exist. Politics is the big one. Look at Slashdot.
The other true here is that there has never been a pure meritocracy. There have always been other factors, even if they were small. The notion that we can even measure merit empirically is dubious to say the least.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you care what computer Stallman has? Or whether Torvalds wrote Linux on Emacs or vi? I honestly don't even know what university Tanenbaum went to. And I don't know any of those things of Bruce Schneier. But you can rest assured that I do want to listen when he speaks.
Can you measure merit? Hardly. But you can know whether someone has contributed to something that you consider important.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually yes, I am quite interesting in what computer Stallman has, but for other reasons.
Linus is quite controversial for reasons other than the quality of his code.
Re: (Score:2)
As soon as you have to deal with other people, then your communication style and whether you're being an asshole or not is not "irrelevant shit."
Re: (Score:2)
The whole point is that yes, it IS irrelevant shit when you're dealing with geeks. I want content. Not fluff.
Re: (Score:2)
The whole point is that yes, it IS irrelevant shit when you're dealing with geeks.
That's your point and your point is incredibly stupid. You're using your own personal definition of the word "geek" that doesn't include any real people including you:
I want content. Not fluff.
Huh, so you DO care about communication style, interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
I do care about the content of a conversation. Not its decoration.
Re:Geek culture is based on merit, not diversity (Score:5, Insightful)
What is this "geek culture"? Last time I looked, software engineering was a job not a lifestyle choice. Or are you after some kind of special status because you were born that way?
My experience of people who define themselves as part of a "geek culture" is that their view of a "nifty gadget, some awesome code, something that promotes a free flow of ideas" is something that seems cool to them, without any thought as to who might benefit from it either practically or financially in the real world. Silicon Valley is full of ideas that are going nowhere and the world is full of problems that no-one is solving because they only happen to people who geeks have defined themselves not to be.
The fact that the parent post got modded "insightful" proves, regrettably, how little breadth of understanding there is around these parts. Go outside occasionally and meet people who are not like you: your job depends on solving their problems, not revelling in your own awesomeness.
Re: (Score:2)
The core of it is that these people who want to solve problems are also the ones that eventually do so. And in the end, it's not the wishful thinkers of how awesome the world would just be if we only could love each other. It's the ones that put practicality over emotions.
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I looked, software engineering was a job not a lifestyle choice.
It is if you want to be good.
My experience of people who define themselves as part of a "geek culture" is that their view of a "nifty gadget, some awesome code, something that promotes a free flow of ideas" is something that seems cool to them, without any thought as to who might benefit from it either practically or financially in the real world.
Oh no! These people are not doing stuff I think is important, but what they think is important!
Guess what? If they can afford to work on cool projects, it means they've already spent time working on something other people wanted, and was paid for that work. If you want them working on something you think is worthwhile instead, pay them.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
> You want merit for being a member of (insert minority group here)? GTFO. Nobody gives a shit about what's between your legs or whether you're black, white. brown or green-purple polka dotted. As far as I'm concerned, you can be a three headed alien with the gender fleen, now show your code or stop wasting my time.
What rose tinted glasses you wear. I used to think this was the way it was, as well. Then I got into the workforce. I had black coworkers whose code was derided as shit and I constantly heard
Re: (Score:3)
You think it is off merit, but it really isn't.
How many companies based on applying a strong geeky culture produce tones of crappy products. Stuff that breaks when you look at it wrong way. Fails the most basic security standards, in general just crap.
The stereotypical geek culture has the following.
1. The Rock Star Dev. (And infighting to be the next Rock Star) Creating layers and layers of increasingly complex programs, that get harder to manage, with finding a bug is an Ego hitting problem, where other
Not necessarily (Score:4, Insightful)
As she was mulling over whether to release it or not a wave of threats hit her inbox, many of them of a sexual nature. She dropped off the map and the software was never released to the public.
I honestly don't think a guy would've gotten the same treatment. I don't recall death & rape threats when the UltraHLE guys dropped off the map. And nobody laid into the Bleem folks when they disappeared. This kind of thing is what "Toxic Masculinity" means. Maybe you prefer to call it "Troll culture" or something else.
I'll say this, I had to google the male equivalent of misogyny (It's Misandry) because I don't think about it all that much. I'm not saying all men are horrible women haters, but I do think we don't talk enough about it. Oddly enough it feels like these days we can't have a serious discussion of misogyny and it's source and root causes (which I'd argue is an imbalance in power related to child bearing since men lack good birth control options) because, well, people get really, really triggered really fast when it comes up. And I'm not talking about the feminists.
Re: (Score:3)
I had a crappy video game site devoted to Diablo and Warcraft 2 from which I regularly received death threats and hate mail. No forums or anything, just basic info pictures, etc.
Dude, I ran a FF plugin for 5 years (Score:2)
It's also a hell of a lot scarier to get death threats when you're 4'5" and 110 lbs vs me, 6'1" and 240lbs. But that's besides the point. Maybe your community was worse somehow, but the emu community was pretty clean. None 'o that 4chan shit. It was shocking to have death threats made.
Also, how many times di
Re: (Score:2)
Right, because white males never put any of their biases or beliefs into the code they write, or the algorithms they work on.
That's why AI and machine learning code is always, 100 percent unbiased and doesn't take into account race or gender or anything....
https://www.reuters.com/articl... [reuters.com]
Oooops!
So if it's true that having a white male workplace is not ideal for companies writing code, then yes, you have to change the workplace to accommodate others who don't like working in an environment where every other
Re: (Score:3)
Geeks care about one thing: What you do.
bull
fucking
shit
I've been a geek since the phrase was usually "computer geek" was synonymous with "nerd" and you're utterly full of it. What the culture really cares about is whether you pass a minimum (and frankly not very high) bar of ability and whether you can survive the endless shit tests and chest thumping.
Nobody gives a shit about what's between your legs or whether you're black, white.
Says someone who's never had the misfortune of being in such a group while
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
You can't win, AC. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If the unique perspectives of (insert group here) improve a project, I guess that a project done by (insert group here) will replace my project at some point in time due to being superior.
Until then, I shall continue.
Re: (Score:2)
It's obvious you do, at some point, and preferably before it's too late and we start losing money due to it, someone has to come in and say "YOU ARE ALL FUCKING NUTS!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
As much as I don't like cutthroat capitalism, I'm fairly convinced that any corporation that descends into a diversity cesspool won't survive for long and be hoovered up and ripped apart by a corporation more rooted in this reality.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm fairly convinced that any corporation that descends into a diversity cesspool won't survive for long
While I would like to think this would be the case, what is mechanism for such demise? Also, what if the issue is systemic and widespread?
Re: (Score:2)
The mechanism is that they will produce a crap product that no one will want to buy. Their resources will be spent on all types of virtue signalling instead of hiring the best people, and buying the best raw resources. The non-signalling competitors will be free to offer at better product at a lower cost.
Re: (Score:2)
Basically the problem the US is facing right now compared to, say, China.
Re: (Score:2)
If it is systemic and widespread, an outside actor with a superior economic model will come and supplant yours.
For reference see communism vs. capitalism.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps it is overly pessimistic of me, but what if in this case it will also take a very long time to stabilize and return to sanity? What if nobody reading this today would be still alive to see such day?
Fall of Communism gives me a glimmer of hope, it only took 80+ years to get discredite
Re: (Score:2)
You can only reconcile these if you assume that all groups are essentially the same in all abilities. Which is empirically shown as not true. For example, if your inclusive basketball team has pygmies, then they are diverse but not as capable as the team without any pygmies.
Re: (Score:2)
Capitalism is the necessary and only foundation of a free, prosperous, humane Civilization.
Free and prosperous, sure. Humane? Not necessary. Capitalism has a serious and unaddressed issue - what to do with incompetent people. It may be efficient to deny them resources, but if you do so what is there to stop them from starving?
Re: (Score:2)
There is always management. Those who can do, those who can't manage them.
Re: (Score:2)
I think key distinction you need to make is social system vs. economic system. Capitalism is an efficient system for allocating resources and producing short term horizon econom
Re: (Score:2)
Your world view fails very simple test - humans are both cooperative and exploitative. If you don't have a robust framework (usually a function of government) that forces most people to cooperate and play by the rules, then you don't have a way to produce. Instead, might makes right
Re: (Score:2)
I'm also eating the same bread that misogynists and racists eat, that makes me either of that?
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Glad to know that there are people out there who have decided that being an adult means being an unfeeling automaton. Seems the conditioning is working!.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I think you have abusive managers if their staff have to go away and cry in the toilets.
The problem lies with the bully, not the victim who cries.
Re: (Score:3)
" as the bits between the legs is entirely irrelevant:"
They you post something talking about mascara and moisturizing spray. Well unless its a drag queen hangout I think we can guess which sex its refering to without even RTFA.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, Pride Month just ended -- cut him a little slack.
Re: (Score:2)
When possible stories should always link to sites other than Vice. Don't help them out with links.
I mentioned this elsewhere on the thread (Score:2)
I'm not sure what they could have done differently. What they might have done is ask law enforcement how their anti-pedophilia divisions handle it for a start. But even those guys have nightmares and burn out and they can fall back on the emotional support of s
Reminder: Damore was for women, not against them (Score:5, Informative)
The whole point of the Damore memo was to try and have Google provide an environment that women felt more comfortable working in - Damore felt that women were equal in talent, but that most women would benefit from a more communal environment.
So a Google backlash against this eminently reasonable line of thought, rather than discussing if women might benefit from environmental changes, always pointed to Google being a very toxic environment from the start.
Re:Reminder: Damore was for women, not against the (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So you would have voted against women's suffrage?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Even if he "didn't understand the science", though many scientists that he cited expressed support for his thesis, is that grounds to leak his paper to the internet and then whip up a shitstorm to get him fired? Agree with us, or else?
Re: (Score:3)
Even if he "didn't understand the science", though many scientists that he cited expressed support for his thesis,
You made that up. Quite a few of the scientists he cited stated precisely the opposite.
Now I will get modded down for wrongthink because I dared question the prophet Damore.
Re:Reminder: Damore was for women, not against the (Score:5, Interesting)
Damore's problem was that he didn't understand the science, which lead him to make the same arguments that were being made decades ago, and which people thought we had moved past.
I hear that if you keep repeating something long enough it will eventually come true.
The science related to sex-based differences in personality isn't anything controversial or even new. Damore may have made some assumptions (e.g. that women working at Google are representative of the general population of all women) in his analysis that he would need to show to be true to support some of his conclusions, but he wasn't spouting off some kind of disproved theory along the lines of phrenology.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of his "citations" included studies from the 50's. Do you honestly think that gender studies or any type of objective analysis on gender in workplaces could have been completed in the 50's? And that's not even considering that very many social "science" studies are not actually science. Most of it's not even close to objective or cognizant of it's biases. Hell they use the word science to discuss it because they know it's not science.
He deserved derision for what he suggested. People are people, not th
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I hear that if you keep repeating something long enough it will eventually come true.
I guess that's why people keep claiming Damore wasn't full of shit. If they repeat it often enough it might become true!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
nu uhhh you're the real liar.
I read it. I agree with the original assessment. It was an anti-feminist, anti-diversity rant dressed up with bad citations and flawed reasoning to give it a patina of scientific respectability.
That was enough to fool idiots who liked the message. That's you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Involved but not responsible for results. (Score:2)
Can someone explain what they actually do? (Score:2)
Problem is leadership (Score:2)
If Google got rid of a political hack like Cohen, and replaced him with someone who really cared about the mission of Jigsaw, then some of their culture problems in the organization would clear up.
Cohen cares about his personal brand, and press, more than he does about making the world a better place. He doesn't realize that about himself though.
He hired other leadership people based on their ability to make him look good, making the leadership problem worse.
It is okay to get good press about the right thi
Welcome to Clickbait hell (Score:5, Insightful)
This is some prime clickbait designed to stoke nerd anger to a white-hot fire, and this comment section is going to be a shitshow. Hope you're proud of yourself msmash.
Irrational Goals Make for Bad Environments (Score:2)
You can't prevent censorship AND extremism unless everyone holds roughly the same philosophy by their own choice. Censorship is the control of communication/words and thus thought. Extremism is the punishment of incongruous thought and action. Both have the goals of leading to a single unifying philosophy and thought process, but achieved by force and fear.
The opposite of both is education (not to be confused with indoctrination). Our current understanding of education subscribes to the prediction that if e
Google save the Internet? (Score:2)
Put down the crack pipe. Google's mission is to bring the Internet to submission. The last thing they want to do is save it.
Re:I think you mean lack of censorship. (Score:5, Insightful)
Google has actively been trying to social engineer the populous for a while now. Yes, the GP meant censorship.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn that is really naive. Advertisers do not ask them to block particular channels.
The advertisers do care, though. Advertisers want to be non-divisive. They don't want people to actively shy away from their products because of who they're paying. So generally, they go after super-mainstream, bland, "no one will mind if we advertise on this show" fare.
The big exception to that would be niche products looking for a niche audience, maybe if the nicheness of the product is the actual selling point.
Re: Those aren't women. They hate women! (Score:2)
I (a man) would prefer a nicer more social job too. Sadly, these jobs never pay much except for those who are more anti-social than social (management).
Re: (Score:2)
Those nicer, more social jobs don't pay as well for 2 reasons:
3rd reason is that social jobs don't scale well. You can only interact with one or a few people at a time, but you can make a machine that cranks out widgets by the thousands.
Re: SJW censorship being a toxic mess? (Score:2)
It's funny that you complain that Eternal September is trying to censor the internet while the reason why Eternal September came to be was because the internet finally became available to the general public.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Tell me that this wasn't a mistake.
Tell me that opening up what we created to the masses was not one of the worst mistakes we made so far. We should have kept our parts for ourselves and just let the masses into some walled gardens where they can play...
Well, technically, we did that. We just didn't really separate the areas well enough to ensure that nobody could drag any of that dirt in.
Re: (Score:2)
Tell me that this wasn't a mistake.
It wasn't a mistake. Internet for all.
Re: (Score:2)
So I thought at some time long, long ago, too. Invite the people in! Let the information flow, the more people cooperate in this collective project, the better it will eventually be. More hands to build our glorious future.
I tend to compare the internet to a rose garden. Well, when we came here, it was mostly a wild and unruly piece of primeval forest that needed taming, and we tried our best, forging tools that let us whack the weeds and plant our roses. It was quite a lot of work, but it only made us more
Re: (Score:3)
You might want to add that 80s liberals have nothing in common with the cesspool of "progressives" we have today in universities.
I'm a liberal. Actually, the worst kind, the social liberal. The kind that wants certain restrictions on what corporations can do but want any private citizen to do basically whatever they wish to do as long as they don't infringe on anyone's rights.
And until these bozos came along, I could look down my nose at the conservatives for the religious nutjobs that lurk around in their
Re: (Score:2)
Intentional (automated) bias is what got them to where they are in the first place. Their weighted indexing far outweighs the signal/noise problem of keyword stuffing. Extremism is another pervasive problem that makes it hard to find the truth in a search. It's their job.