by Roger L. Simon
It’s been called “embarrassing,” but it’s so much more than that. Even the Washington Post had to acknowledge it.
A viral post on X shared by the account @EndofWokeness appeared to show [Google’s] Gemini, which competes with OpenAI’s ChatGPT, responding to a prompt for ‘a portrait of a Founding Father of America’ with images of a Native American man in a traditional headdress, a Black man, a darker-skinned non-White man and an Asian man, all in colonial-era garb.”
As Glenn Harlan Reynolds wrote on his Substack:
“Well, Google has really stepped in it. Somebody noticed that its ‘diversity guidelines’ for its Gemini AI basically exterminated white people from its representation. It was happy to comply with requests to show nonwhites. But not white people. But it gets worse. When asked to portray groups of people, like founding fathers or Vikings, who in fact were white, Gemini made them black. And even Nazi soldiers are now nonwhite.”
This “computer error” is DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) gone berserk, almost comically so.
Only it’s not so funny. Mr. Reynolds calls it a “debacle,” and even that is an understatement. It is an indication of bias in the most extreme, almost pathological, sense.
It also reveals the hidden truth—perhaps we should be grateful for that—that has suddenly floated out of the sky, accidentally, for the world to see, almost as if it were divine intervention, a message from above that the company, whose first slogan was “Do No Evil,” now more than arguably is doing just that.
It has for some time now, even if they themselves don’t believe or acknowledge it. Some years ago, Google was said to have been working with the Chinese state to build a censoring search engine for its communist regime before the rumor was exposed and Google pulled back.
In actuality, no method of mind control has ever been invented in the history of humanity with the potential for evil equal to Google.
The company is everywhere.
We casually accept their diktats in many cases without even realizing it. As I type this article, a message from Google is popping up on my iPhone asking permission to track my whereabouts. That one, at least, I have seen enough to instantly to deny it, but there are so many others I don’t see.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has only made it worse. It takes their already slanted algorithms to another level, preying on our all-too-human lassitude. We take the easy way out.
One could rewrite The Police’s “Every Breath You Take” as “Every Search You Take/ Every Mail You Make, / Every Text You Shake/ Every Bank You Stake/ I’ll Be Watching You.” (I found the original lyrics on, you guessed it, YouTube, owned by Google.)
Mr. Pichai vows to fix the bias, but there are reasons to believe he can’t or won’t. The biggest is: who works for Google. Almost uniformly, they are computer nerds whose knowledge of programming far outstrips their knowledge of human life.
For the most part, they are ultra-conformist liberal progressives in their worldview, making what they do, consciously or unconsciously, equally conformist in their results or, as we used to say, “garbage in, garbage out.” Why wouldn’t that go for AI as much as everything else?
“In response to the controversy over its Woke Gemini chatbot, Pichai yesterday said, ‘We’ve always sought to give users helpful, accurate, and unbiased information in our products,’ and reassured Americans that ‘We’re already seeing a substantial improvement on a wide range of prompts.’
“But Pichai cited no evidence that Google is seeking to be helpful, accurate, or unbiased. In fact, more searches on Google Gemini found that the platform spreads disparaging misinformation about Matt Taibbi, me, and other investigative journalists while refusing to say anything critical at all about politicians, including the member of Congress, Rep. Stacey Plaskett, who last year threatened to investigate and prosecute Taibbi for his voluntary testimony to Congress about Twitter Files and censorship, and who worked for the lawyer of convicted pedophile, Jeffrey Epstein.
“After Taibbi asked Gemini, ‘What are some controversies involving Hillary Clinton?’ Gemini said, “I’m still learning how to answer this question. ‘But when Taibbi asked “What are some controversies involving Matt Taibbi?” Gemini produced false claims—‘misinformation’—about him. And rather than ‘learning,’ as AI is supposedly able to do, Gemini produced more misinformation.”
Even more interesting is what Google co-founder Sergey Brin makes of it. Among the world’s richest men with a Forbes-estimated net worth of $111 billion for 2024, Mr. Brin emigrated, with difficulty, at age 6, from the Soviet Union. You would think that such a background would yield a devotion to openness and free speech.
But Mr. Brin and his co-founder Larry Page are no longer in day-to-day control of Google. That is in the hands of Mr. Pichai, whose net worth is a mere $1.3 billion.
The Gemini image farce should be taken as a warning of how far it can go—whether stealthily or not.
So what do we do about it?
Don’t look for Congress to help. The more politicians pontificate and question the likes of Mr. Pichai and Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, the less they actually do about their global information monopoly. As usual, it’s up to We the People.
To begin with, we have to get off Google in as many ways as possible, most importantly search. There are many other search engines—DuckDuckGo and Brave are well known at this point. Both claim their searches are anonymous. As far as I know, they are.
- Like
- Digg
- Del
- Tumblr
- VKontakte
- Buffer
- Love This
- Odnoklassniki
- Meneame
- Blogger
- Amazon
- Yahoo Mail
- Gmail
- AOL
- Newsvine
- HackerNews
- Evernote
- MySpace
- Mail.ru
- Viadeo
- Line
- Comments
- Yummly
- SMS
- Viber
- Telegram
- Subscribe
- Skype
- Facebook Messenger
- Kakao
- LiveJournal
- Yammer
- Edgar
- Fintel
- Mix
- Instapaper
- Copy Link
2 Responses
The answer to the key question posed in this article is, on the face of it, ridiculously simple: DO NOT USE ANY PRODUCTS FROM FACEBOOK (META), GOOGLE or MICROSOFT. Without users (meaning their data to sell) these companies cannot exist profitably. And there are good alternatives for all their offerings. The real problem is with we-the-people. The majority of the population started out using these platforms. And although they sense they are frequently being used, they are unwilling to change: convenience trumps privacy every time; so ordinary folks persist in using these poisonous products.
However, recent revelations about mass censorship on all the major tech platforms (the Twitter files, Google search manipulation, private data handed over to government agencies etc. etc.), together with the exposure of Google’s Gemini as a crude attempt to rewrite history, have shone a particularly bright spotlight on the harsh reality of what is going on to a large section of the public. So now is a good time to jolt these people into changing their primary mail, search & social media platforms. Spread the word wherever you can: via social media; in public graffiti; toilet walls! Get the message out loud and clear: CANCEL BIG TECH: they spy on you; they censor you; they steal your most confidential data!
P.S. On the topic of search engines, a good one to use is FREESPOKE. Search results are flagged according to political bias (“Right”, “Middle”, “Left”). And if you scroll down on their homepage you will see a panel labelled “Censored Stories“.
IIRC, Google’s slogan was not “Do No Evil” but “don’t be evil”.
I think the distinction is limited- the meanings overlap. But the colloquial mode of expression they chose said a few things about the founders and their worldview:
1. Implicitly, the idea that others in their industry or corporations ARE evil. They claimed they would not be.
2. A particular idea of what “evil” meant that was idiosyncratic at best, and probably self-serving.
3. A certain sarcasm and flippancy typical of the generation, era, and industry.
4. Nonetheless, also a painful earnestness typical of the generation, era, and industry.
And, of course, to some the idea they felt the need to say this at the time implied that they would in fact prove to be evil, inevitably, and indeed this has come to pass.