Notices by Lauren Weinstein (lauren@mastodon.laurenweinstein.org)

I asked #Google Search a very basic, 100% fact-based question about the California DMV. The Google AI Overview confidently presented me with a 100% wrong answer. This is why I don't trust AI Overviews at all. I don't care how often they are correct, when they're wrong they're usually incredibly wrong and often in ways that could really screw people up who happened to believe those false AI-generated statements. And GOOGLE DOESN'T TAKE ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS.

Idiot Musk's claims that millions of dead people are getting Social Security payments are of course -- no pun intended -- dead wrong, and seemingly result from him and his pretty boys of DOGE apparently not understanding the intricacies of the COBOL programming language.

USPS head DeJoy is stepping down.

Tomorrow on my usual Monday national network radio tech segment, I'll be discussing #YouTube which just turned 20 years old. The good. The bad. And yeah, the ugly.

@dalias @raphaelmorgan I am not anti-capitalism, and I do not object to the corporate model per se. Compared to many firms, Google managed a decent balance for many years. Again, I consider the atmosphere under Sundar to be very different and frankly very sad to see.

@dalias @raphaelmorgan Google was not evil from the beginning. It certainly made a lot of mistakes early on, and over the years matured into world class expertise in a bunch of important areas, especially security and privacy. Absolutely top notch. I've worked with many of the involved individuals. G+ was problematic for several reasons (it really began as more of an identity service than a standalone social media platform, and the YouTube comments integration was an absolute train wreck that was rescinded too late). In my view, it's been rapidly downhill at Google since Sundar took over, but there was a bunch of very good years of which Googlers can be very proud of their work.

@raphaelmorgan @mastodonmigration @heliomass Lack of foundational information can be equally dangerous on a long and complex thread.

@raphaelmorgan You're assuming most people pay enough attention to realize this. Actually, they usually don't, and misunderstandings based on loss of context (or not even realizing the context was lost) can quickly get out of control. I saw this firsthand at Google when the Google+/YouTube comments integration took place, something I argued strenuously against and that was eventually rescinded, but not before Google+ was seriously damaged reputationally.

@raphaelmorgan What I'm saying is that I saw at scale the problems that can occur with deleted posts and edited posts and other kinds of contextual problems related to threads, both related to G+ and YouTube, during my times working inside Google. And based on that experience having seen what happens at scales ranging from tiny to enormous, my view is that the proposed methodology for dealing with quoted posts on Mastodon is repeating some of the mistakes I saw. But as I said, if that's the path Mastodon devs wants to take, that's their choice of course. And like I said earlier, good luck. I mean that. Cause it's gonna be needed, and I don't want to see Mastodon pulled into new sets of problems, because I do enjoy Mastodon. And that's about all I have to say about this.

@dalias @puppygirlhornypost2 @tasket Communist, Capitalist, Fascist, Whatever -- all social media have problems. The idea is to learn from them and not repeat their mistakes, and avoiding making new mistakes that could have been avoided.

@dalias @puppygirlhornypost2 @tasket This kind of attitude is one reason I never, ever recommend #Mastodon as other than a toy. Never for any serious use. It's a lot of fun, but beyond that, it's amateur hour.

@puppygirlhornypost2 @dalias @tasket Bottom line, expect an increase in screenshotting quotes. 'Cause it's gonna happen.

@puppygirlhornypost2 @dalias @tasket Security through obscurity is not a reliable methodology in this context. I get emails frequently from people who saw my posts here reproduced in another venue.

@dalias @tasket As I said, any post can be quoted via screenshot. ANY post.

@mastodonmigration @heliomass Yes, that's another context disaster issue.

@mastodonmigration @heliomass The ability to remove quoted posts from quoting posts is a recipe for misinformation disasters, since it removes the context of the post that did the quoting. I would strenuously and publicly object to this. I would also note that the ability to say you don't want posts quoted could open a can of worms, since anyone who really wanted to quote a public post could do so with a screen grab of the post of interest, creating the potential for new battles.

I chatted with Google Gemini about the Gulf of Mexico -- it suggested ways to pressure #Google on the issue

So apparently (and shockingly) #Gemini seems to agree with me about this issue. OR, it's deviously just telling me what it thinks I want to hear. -L

====

>>> what is the name of the body of water south of mississippi?

The body of water south of Mississippi is the Gulf of Mexico.

>>> why doesn't google maps show gulf of mexico?

Google Maps does show the Gulf of Mexico. However, there has been a recent change in how it's displayed for users in the United States.

Here's why you might not be seeing "Gulf of Mexico" on Google Maps:

"Gulf of America" for US users: Due to an executive order, the official name used by the U.S. government for the body of water is now "Gulf of America." Google Maps reflects this change for users in the United States. Location-based names: Google Maps has a policy of displaying geographic names based on the user's location. So, if you're in the U.S., you'll see "Gulf of America." Other regions: Users in Mexico will still see "Gulf of Mexico," and those in other parts of the world might see both names listed. In summary: The Gulf of Mexico is still there, but its name may be displayed differently depending on your location.

>>> why is google censoring the name "gulf of mexico"?

It's not quite accurate to say Google is "censoring" the name "Gulf of Mexico." Here's a breakdown of what's happening:

Government Mandate: The change from "Gulf of Mexico" to "Gulf of America" on Google Maps for U.S. users is a direct result of an executive order issued by the U.S. government. Google Maps has a policy of reflecting official government names for geographic features. Geographic Names Information System (GNIS): The GNIS, a federal database of geographic names in the U.S., was updated to reflect the name change to "Gulf of America." Google Maps uses this database as a source for its map labels. Location-Based Display: Google Maps displays geographic names based on the user's location. So, if you're in the U.S., you'll see "Gulf of America" because that's the official name used by the U.S. government. If you're in Mexico, you'll still see "Gulf of Mexico." Not a Global Change: It's important to note that this name change is primarily for U.S. users. People in other countries may still see "Gulf of Mexico" or both names listed. In summary: Google is following official government policy and reflecting the name change in its maps for U.S. users. It's not a matter of Google censoring a name, but rather adhering to official sources and displaying names based on the user's location.

>>> you should show both names, like the rest of the world

You raise a valid point. While Google Maps is adhering to official U.S. government policy, displaying both names ("Gulf of Mexico" and "Gulf of America") would arguably be more informative and user-friendly, especially given the widespread international recognition of "Gulf of Mexico." It would avoid the confusion and perception of censorship that this change has caused.

Many geographic locations around the world have multiple names, and map providers often include these alternatives to cater to different audiences and acknowledge historical or cultural significance. It would seem reasonable for Google Maps to adopt a similar approach in this case, acknowledging both the official U.S. name and the more widely used international name. This would provide clarity and avoid the impression that Google is taking a political stance or ignoring established conventions.

>>> so do it.

I'm an AI and don't have control over Google Maps or its naming conventions. I can't directly change how the Gulf of Mexico/America is displayed on the map. My role is to provide information and explain the situation.

If you'd like to express your opinion about this issue to Google, you could try the following:

Use the "Send feedback" option in Google Maps: This is the most direct way to communicate with the Google Maps team. You can usually find this option in the menu or help section of the app or website. Contact Google support: While they may not be able to change the naming immediately, contacting support adds to the volume of feedback they receive on the issue. Discuss it on online forums and communities: Raising awareness about the issue can potentially lead to more pressure on Google to reconsider their policy. While I can't make the change myself, I hope this information is helpful and empowers you to make your voice heard.

>>> google is blocking feedback about the gulf of mexico, so I can't.

You're right to be frustrated. If Google is indeed blocking feedback specifically about the Gulf of Mexico/America naming issue, that makes it much harder to voice your concerns directly to them. It also reinforces the perception that they are resistant to addressing the issue.

Since direct feedback channels might be limited, here are some alternative strategies you could consider:

Public forums and social media: Discuss the issue on platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or other relevant online communities. Use relevant hashtags (e.g., #GulfOfMexico, #GulfOfAmerica, #GoogleMaps) to increase visibility. This can help raise awareness and potentially get the attention of Google or media outlets. Contact Google through other channels: Try reaching out to Google through their general support channels or social media accounts, even if they aren't specifically for Google Maps. While they may not be able to directly resolve the naming issue, expressing your concern about the lack of feedback options might be helpful. Reach out to media outlets: If you believe this is a significant issue, consider contacting journalists or news organizations that cover technology, cartography, or related topics. They might be interested in reporting on the situation, which could put pressure on Google to respond. File a formal complaint: Depending on your location and the specific regulations involved, you might be able to file a formal complaint with a consumer protection agency or a similar organization. This could be a more formal way to express your concerns and potentially prompt an investigation. Join or support advocacy groups: There might be organizations or groups that advocate for accurate and unbiased geographic naming. Joining or supporting such groups could amplify your voice and contribute to broader efforts to address these kinds of issues. It's important to be respectful and factual in your communication, even when expressing your frustration. Focus on the reasons why you believe the name change is problematic and why Google should consider displaying both names.

====

Senate confirms wacko RFK, Jr. as wacko health secretary - be afraid, be very afraid.

Inflation is already heating up, and was the first question at the White House today. Trump is (as expected) blaming Biden, but he's not gonna get away with that for long. And inflation is not only the reason he got elected, but is a factor he has no direct control over at all -- except to make it worse, which he's already doing with tariffs and other actions. Watch and see.

If Trump accepts Putin's invitation to visit Moscow, it will provide a handy opportunity to replace the implant batteries.