Author Topic: Google goes NUCLEAR | Project Veritas CENSORED  (Read 5521 times)




i just made this image. theres a lot of pictures of results like these floating around but i just did it myself to see. i'll verify i have never looked up anything like what googles suggesting for either of these results to appear how they do.

it would make sense to assume large amounts of other people are searching this, but this "insider" suggests that google autofills these things themselves, and these results are really specific and a little far fetched. i imagine it takes a lot of people to influence search results so... lack for a better term, direct like this. i mean you know, given that they actually do influence search results, and i imagine enough people know the science behind love to not search "men can have babies now" like its fact. the wording is just weird to me. i think its pretty sus given the political climate revolving around all this. its just too specifically targeted. its so subtle too. doesnt sit well with me honestly

it'll be interesting to see how this develops. if it even does  :cookieMonster:
i literally know tons of people that work at google

all of their search results are based on things people search for and change by location

it's all machine learning and it's not designed to swing elections its designed to sell you products and make you click the most ads as possible, it's loving retarded that people think that they have any incentive to skew any search results to elect leftists because people like elizabeth warren want to break up big companies like google

they benefit financially 5000% under republican rule because they get massive corporate tax cuts and any of their pride stuff is marketing and pandering to the demographic of people who spend the most time online(aka 13-30 year olds which are mostly socially liberal)

if anyones counter argument to this is "they ban people" and "but the person in charge of ads has blue hair and is a woman" i can't take them seriously. i beg any conservative on this forum to give me a concrete explanation on why google would even have the incentive try to elect democrats at all. people being of a certain political position at a company doesn't make the entire company a part of leftist hegemony.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2019, 04:19:21 PM by Aide33 »

i literally know tons of people that work at google

all of their search results are based on things people search for and change by location

it's all machine learning and it's not designed to swing elections its designed to sell you products and make you click the most ads as possible, it's loving retarded that people think that they have any incentive to skew any search results to elect leftists because people like elizabeth warren want to break up big companies like google

they benefit financially 5000% under republican rule because they get massive corporate tax cuts and any of their pride stuff is marketing and pandering to the demographic of people who spend the most time online(aka 13-30 year olds which are mostly socially liberal)

if anyones counter argument to this is "they ban people" and "but the person in charge of ads has blue hair and is a woman" i can't take them seriously. i beg any conservative on this forum to give me a concrete explanation on why google would even have the incentive try to elect democrats at all. people being of a certain political position at a company doesn't make the entire company a part of leftist hegemony.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&q=Hillary%20Clintons%20Emails,Donald%20Annoying Oranges%20Emails

But let's compare starting search terms...
Typing Republican into Google finished with "debate 2019"
However "candidates" is exponentially more popular.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&q=Republican%20Candidates,Republican%20debate%202019

Stranger still is this women are beautiful, the recommended finishing statement vs the unlisted "Women are female"
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&q=Women%20are%20beautiful,Women%20are%20female

Their recommended search terms are entirely arbitrary, and not based on how often it has been searched compared to others.

The fact these searches mostly skew to the left is no coincidence.

The Direct video evidence of Google openly intending and actively attempting to meddle with 2020 is sure as stuff not a one off individual, the follow up leaked email is proof of that.

« Last Edit: June 26, 2019, 04:37:25 PM by Master Matthew² »

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&q=Hillary%20Clintons%20Emails,Donald%20Annoying Oranges%20Emails

But let's compare starting search terms...
Typing Republican into Google finished with "debate 2019"
However "candidates" is exponentially more popular.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&q=Republican%20Candidates,Republican%20debate%202019

Stranger still is this women are beautiful, the recommended finishing statement vs the unlisted "Women are female"
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&q=Women%20are%20beautiful,Women%20are%20female

Their recommended search terms are entirely arbitrary, and not based on how often it has been searched compared to others.

The fact these searches mostly skew to the left is no coincidence.

The Direct video evidence of Google openly attempting to meddle with 2020 is sure as stuff not a one off individual, the follow up leaked email is proof of that.

you still havent answered my post at the beginning of this thread and this doesn't address my post

regardless of whether the search results are directly correlated to whats more popular (I'm sure google has literally millions of data points feeding into their neural net), this doesn't make my post wrong. It's an incredibly complicated algorithm to which they have no incentive to skew to elect leftists.

everytime i bring up something you either cherry pick a thing to refute or entirely ignore my post, whats up master matthew? we won't you debate me?
« Last Edit: June 26, 2019, 04:42:36 PM by Aide33 »


The fact these searches mostly skew to the left is no coincidence.

The Direct video evidence of Google openly intending and actively attempting to meddle with 2020 is sure as stuff not a one off individual, the follow up leaked email is proof of that.


as i said at the beginning of this thread james o'keefe and project veritas literally fabricate evidence

he is a con artist, I posted a list of things (with proof) of what he has done before, i don't believe for a second that none of these videos or emails are not purposefully edited to push a narrative considering the amount of money o'keefe takes in from right-wing billionaires


why the hell are u callin me meth and hulk hogan clowns ? get off the soapbox and explain yourself coward

why the hell are u callin me meth and hulk hogan clowns ? get off the soapbox and explain yourself coward

bad wording. I meant Matthew and co. doing the same unwanted politicposting every day.

bad wording. I meant Matthew and co. doing the same unwanted politicposting every day.
ah i see

why the hell are u callin me meth and hulk hogan clowns ? get off the soapbox and explain yourself coward
bad wording. I meant Matthew and co. doing the same unwanted politicposting every day.
ah i see
two people truly deserving of being exiled from this community. such barbaric behaviour.

After hacking into the google servers I have been able to uncover a explicit bias for president Donald Annoying Orange in the google search algorithm. They clearly let users search for Hillary Clinton's emails, yet they censor any results for Annoying Orange. I will be in contact with project verizon very soon.

The whole point of a neural network is that it decides which weights yield the best results. If you have some dude at Google influencing the weights of each node then it pretty much renders the existence of a learning ai pointless. There's also absolutely no way any technician at Google can know what each weight does. They could probably feed tons of guided search results to train the network and influence it but the amount needed to yield real differences in the algorithm is massive and requires millions of dollars in processing

excuse me? this 'project veritas' of yours never happened

The whole point of a neural network is that it decides which weights yield the best results. If you have some dude at Google influencing the weights of each node then it pretty much renders the existence of a learning ai pointless. There's also absolutely no way any technician at Google can know what each weight does. They could probably feed tons of guided search results to train the network and influence it but the amount needed to yield real differences in the algorithm is massive and requires millions of dollars in processing
My larger concern is how poor of a job big tech and specifically social media has done with stopping election meddling. Despite all the constant, repeated and moronic takes about "DRUMF RUSSIA" my understanding is that the biggest outtake of the entire russia investigation was the stuff on the disinformation they peddled(from both far left and right viewpoints) with ease and sites like facebook and twitter did next to nothing about it. You can bet your ass that Iran and China are going to do and are already doing the same and more. I've seen loving turkey do it on twitter lmfao. TURKEY.

My larger concern is how poor of a job big tech and specifically social media has done with stopping election meddling. Despite all the constant, repeated and moronic takes about "DRUMF RUSSIA" my understanding is that the biggest outtake of the entire russia investigation was the stuff on the disinformation they peddled(from both far left and right viewpoints) with ease and sites like facebook and twitter did next to nothing about it. You can bet your ass that Iran and China are going to do and are already doing the same and more. I've seen loving turkey do it on twitter lmfao. TURKEY.
it's probably money. whole loving mess has always been about money.

Idk why people are arguing when we have actual footage of google employees admitting their political bias and how it affects company decisions, let alone the CEO himself expressing extreme distaste towards the "Annoying Orange situation" and how they want to "prevent" it from happening again

@ This point it's not worth having the argument because people are willfully retarded. Like you have to be intentionally braindead if you think big tech doesn't censor non-establishment views. Dumb as rocks, neck yaself, goofy

Idk why people are arguing when we have actual footage of google employees admitting their political bias and how it affects company decisions, let alone the CEO himself expressing extreme distaste towards the "Annoying Orange situation" and how they want to "prevent" it from happening again

@ This point it's not worth having the argument because people are willfully retarded. Like you have to be intentionally braindead if you think big tech doesn't censor non-establishment views. Dumb as rocks, neck yaself, goofy
I'm not saying that they are not censoring non-establishment views, I'm saying republicans are literally the status-quo and have been for hundreds of years. They have no financial incentive to push a radical leftist agenda because that would eliminate their tax breaks and profit motive.

if you sincerely believe they would undermine the structure of their organization by shilling for leftists so that the leftists break up their organisation you are completely wack. Individual people in the organisation saying they are leftists is like the equivalent of going to a walmart and filming the manager saying Annoying Orange is a baddie. That manager literally has 0 corporate power in the scheme of things and even if the CEO pretends to care about minorities he still willfully subjugates him employees for the profit motive.

Give me an example of an explanation of why Google has incentive to push for people like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. Tell me please, I've begged everyone in this thread to give me the reason why they would do this at all considering they would lose massive amounts of money from it.

EDIT: also to respond to the "we have her on video" thing:

o'keefe has edited his videos maliciously 3184209384290 times and I linked proof, unless you don't think context matters at all (which is a 180 of you and MM's position since you guys constantly complain that racial and homophobic slurs are just jokes on youtube) you need to understand that the context of these videos are heavily edited to make it seem like these people are saying things which they are not

I can also make a video of everytime you said "i am" and "liberal" and mash them together to make you sound like your saying you are liberal. (the videos aren't edited as blatantly as this but you get the point)
« Last Edit: June 27, 2019, 10:48:48 AM by Aide33 »