- 7/16/2014 8:52:41 AM
@kq4ym -- I do suppose the messaging could go one of two ways. If it goes over each request on an individual basis, it could use messaging such as: "Look how much we care about an individual's privacy as well as the accuracy of search results for the public at large. We're balancing those requirements by assigning each request to a personal response team." If it automates the process, and can prove success (which of course it would before publicizing), it could use that as evidence of its continued technical prowess, as evidenced in applying technology to even the trickiest of problems.
- by kq4ym, Data Doctor
- 7/16/2014 8:46:04 AM
Google probably is taking their time to individually go through the 70,000 to judge wheter they will delete the info or not. They'll stall as much as they can and dispute as many as possible so as to give them leverage with more forthcoming requests. Whether they'll come up with an automatic process eventually to process these requests will be interesting to see. Google doesn't seem to play well with individual one-on-one problems and requests.
- by Jamescon, Editor
- 7/16/2014 8:01:27 AM
@Seth. Of course Google could crowdsource those 70,000 doc reviews among the 47,000 employees. That would be less than two docs per employee.
Yes, Google yourself to see what pops up. It can be interesting. In my case, it's a pretty challenging task, considering I share my same first and last name with a martyr of the Irish rebellion, several singers, and an Olympic gold medal winner. So, some of us have to wade through many pages of results to get even one relevant hit.
- by SethBreedlove, Data Doctor
- 7/15/2014 6:16:41 PM
Well stalling certaintly works. I wonder how difficult it would be to write an algorithm.
I can see why they might be overwhelmed by 70,000 records if they need to be processed by a human being.
This reminds me to google myself and see what comes up.
- by T Sweeney, Blogger
- 7/15/2014 5:47:56 PM
Absolutely! Drummond and the rest of Google can see what a gigantic can of worms this opens, so best to make their public position, "Wow, this is really hard even though we're really, really smart." But Beth is right; the rationale that this can be very challenging just doesn't wash.
- 7/14/2014 4:48:03 PM
Hi Jim, I can't help but to think that the data scientists/algorithm experts/machine learning gurus are a bit irked that the chief legal officer suggested that the "right to be forgotten" task is beyond their capabilities. Certainly that's an embarassment of the worst kind for the datakind at Google!