Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Christian and Theologically Protestant? Or, sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Fenced Community

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non-Nicene, non-Biblical heresy.
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Sign in to follow this  
William

Christforums Free Android Google Play App

Recommended Posts

Staff

Free for Android users! Check out Christforums' Free App: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tapatalk.christforumsorg&hl=en

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]n22872[/ATTACH]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Staff
I have just downloaded this App; it has a good UI and this will be useful when on-the-go.

 

I went away on vacation last week and found the IOS app really convenient. As a mobile solution I had no difficulty navigating the site. Glad to see the Android app is working. Lemme know how things work out with it.

 

God bless,

William

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

I went away on vacation last week and found the IOS app really convenient. As a mobile solution I had no difficulty navigating the site. Glad to see the Android app is working. Lemme know how things work out with it.

 

God bless,

William

I will do @William.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Topics

    • Christforums' Dark Theme Available

      Introducing our Dark Theme which may make viewing at night time more pleasurable. You may select from two different templates at the footer of any page:    

      in Site Updates and Info

    • Google Employees Sought To Block Breitbart From Ads, Emails Show

      By Peter Hasson - Leaked emails show Google employees plotting to get Breitbart banned from Google AdSense, which dominates the digital ad market The leaked conversation is the third example of Google employees seeking to weaponize Google’s products for left-wing purposes Google CEO Sundar Pichai on Tuesday is testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, where he’s expected to be pressed on political bias at Google Google employees sought to block Breitbart from Google AdSense less than one month after President Donald Trump took office, leaked emails from the company reveal. Google employees sought to use alleged “hate speech” as a pretense for banning Breitbart from taking part in the advertising program, the emails show. Barring Breitbart from the advertising program would have a devastating effect on the site’s ad revenue, as Google accounts for roughly 37 percent of all digital advertising revenue. Breitbart obtained the emails and published them on Monday night, one day before Google CEO Sundar Pichai is set to testify before the House Judiciary Committee. A Google spokeswoman confirmed the emails’s authenticity to The Daily Caller News Foundation. “My team has been reviewing the site on a frequent (at least weekly) from the [original] fake news kick-off discussion,” Google’s director of monetization at the time, Jim Gray, assured employees concerned about Breitbart. Gray now is now Google’s director of trust and safety. Richard Zippel, a Google publisher quality manager at the time, similarly noted that Breitbart was being watched closely. “When sufficient violations have been found we’ll take action at the site level,” Zippel wrote. It’s unclear whether Zippel is still a Google employee. To date, Breitbart has not yet been removed from Adsense. Google’s spokeswoman denied that the company’s advertising program is affected by political bias. “We have extensive and very well publicized policies for publishers who choose to monetize with Google ads. We enforce these policies vigorously, consistently and without any political bias,” the spokeswoman wrote in an email to The Daily Caller News Foundation. “We regularly and routinely review sites in our ad network to ensure compliance with our policies. These emails from early 2017 simply show the AdSense team explaining that such a periodic review was underway,” the spokeswoman said. The leaked discussions are the third example of Google employees seeking to weaponize the company’s products for left-wing political purposes. TheDCNF previously revealed that Google employees debated whether to bury right-of-center media outlets in the company’s search function. The Daily Caller and Breitbart were specifically singled out in that discussion as media outlets to potentially bury. After Trump announced his initial travel ban in January 2017, Google employees discussed ways to manipulate search results in order to push back against the president’s order. A group of employees brainstormed ways to counter “islamophobic, algorithmically biased results from search terms ‘Islam’, ‘Muslim’, ‘Iran’, etc,” as well as “prejudiced, algorithmically biased search results from search terms ‘Mexico’, ‘Hispanic’, ‘Latino’, etc.” Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] Google Employees Sought To Block Breitbart From Ads, Emails Show is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

    • Google CEO Sundar Pichai Set To Testify Before Congress At Last

      By Evie Fordham - Google CEO Sundar Pichai will, at last, testify before the House Judiciary Committee Tuesday to answer questions about the company’s possible political bias and its controversial work with the Chinese government. “Americans put their trust in big tech companies to honor freedom of speech and champion open dialogue, and it is Congress’ responsibility to the American people to make sure these tech giants are transparent and accountable in their practices,” committee chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican, said in a committee press release. The meeting was originally scheduled for Dec. 5 but was pushed back because of former president George H.W. Bush’s funeral. Republican lawmakers are expected to grill Google about recent revelations that the tech giant’s employees debated burying conservative media outlets in the company’s search function as a response to President Donald Trump’s election. Leaked Google emails surfaced as recently as Monday night. Breitbart published emails showing that Google employees tried to block Breitbart from Google AdSense less than one month after President Donald Trump assumed the presidency. Some public figures on the right have come down hard on Google. Republican Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar called on the Department of Justice to investigate Google Nov. 30, and Republican Missouri Sen.-elect Josh Hawley called for Google execs to explain themselves “under oath,” also on Nov. 30 The social media-focused hearing comes after Google employees are made headlines for a late November open letter protesting the company’s work on a censored Chinese search engine. “Today the company accounts for nearly 90 percent of worldwide search traffic. … Unfortunately, recent reports suggest Google might not be wielding its vast power impartially,” committee member and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said in the committee press release. “Its business practices may have been affected by political bias. Additionally, reports claim the company is compromising its core principles by complying with repressive censorship mandates from China,” McCarthy continued. Republican lawmakers also criticized Pichai for skipping a Sept. 5 Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on social media and foreign election meddling. Facebook and Twitter executives testified, and an empty chair with a nameplate that said “Google” sat where the company’s representative would have been. Google had been willing to send senior vice president of global affairs Kent Walker to the Sept. 5 Senate hearing, but the committee said no, reported Politico. Walker submitted roughly five pages of written testimony to the committee despite the rejection. President Donald Trump accused Google of bias against conservatives, including an Aug. 28 tweet calling Google search results “rigged.” Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] Google CEO Sundar Pichai Set To Testify Before Congress At Last is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

    • Google Rolls Out New Conservative Content Filter

      MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA—Google has finally rolled out a long-awaited security feature for its Chrome web browser and various internet-enabled apps provided by the company: a conservative content filter. The post Google Rolls Out New Conservative Content Filter appeared first on The Babylon Bee. View the original full article

      in Christian Satire

    • Measuring the "Filter Bubble": How Google is influencing what you click

      Over the years, there has been considerable discussion of Google's "filter bubble" problem. Put simply, it's the manipulation of your search results based on your personal data. In practice this means links are moved up or down or added to your Google search results, necessitating the filtering of other search results altogether. These editorialized results are informed by the personal information Google has on you (like your search, browsing, and purchase history), and puts you in a bubble based on what Google's algorithms think you're most likely to click on. The filter bubble is particularly pernicious when searching for political topics. That's because undecided and inquisitive voters turn to search engines to conduct basic research on candidates and issues in the critical time when they are forming their opinions on them. If they’re getting information that is swayed to one side because of their personal filter bubbles, then this can have a significant effect on political outcomes in aggregate. Back in 2012 we ran a study showing Google's filter bubble may have significantly influenced the 2012 U.S. Presidential election by inserting tens of millions of more links for Obama than for Romney in the run-up to that election. Our research inspired an independent study by the Wall Street Journal: Now, after the 2016 U.S. Presidential election and other recent elections, there is justified new interest in examining the ways people can be influenced politically online. In that context, we conducted another study to examine the state of Google's filter bubble problem in 2018. Summary of Findings Google has claimed to have taken steps to reduce its filter bubble problem, but our latest research reveals a very different story. Based on a study of individuals entering identical search terms at the same time, we found that: Most participants saw results unique to them. These discrepancies could not be explained by changes in location, time, by being logged in to Google, or by Google testing algorithm changes to a small subset of users. On the first page of search results, Google included links for some participants that it did not include for others, even when logged out and in private browsing mode. Results within the news and videos infoboxes also varied significantly. Even though people searched at the same time, people were shown different sources, even after accounting for location. Private browsing mode and being logged out of Google offered very little filter bubble protection. These tactics simply do not provide the anonymity most people expect. In fact, it's simply not possible to use Google search and avoid its filter bubble. For those interested in more details, we've written out everything below, as well as provided the underlying data and code. We hope this work encourages further study of this important issue. Methodology We asked volunteers in the U.S. to search for "gun control", "immigration", and "vaccinations" (in that order) at 9pm ET on Sunday, June 24, 2018. Volunteers performed searches first in private browsing mode and logged out of Google, and then again not in private mode (i.e., in "normal" mode). We compiled 87 complete result sets — 76 on desktop and 11 on mobile. Note that we restricted the study to the U.S. because different countries have different search indexes. During analysis of the search results, we only looked at websites' top-level domains, for example www.cdc.gov/features/vaccines-travel and www.cdc.gov/vaccines/adults would both be treated as just cdc.gov. Finding #1: Most people saw results unique to them, even when logged out and in private browsing mode. To count variants of results, we noted the order of the major elements: the organic (regular) links, the news (Top Stories) infobox, and the videos infobox. We ignored ads, sections containing related searches, and other infoboxes. There were variations in these too, but we didn't consider them. A quick note on ordering of links: You might think that as long as the same links are shown to users, the ordering of them is relatively unimportant, but that's not the case. A given link gets only about half as many clicks as the link before it and twice as many clicks as the link after it. In other words, link ordering matters a lot because people click on the first link much more than the second, and so on. The amount of variations we saw for each search term is listed below. For this part of the study, we excluded mobile results because the number of infoboxes displayed can vary significantly between mobile and desktop. That's why it says 76 participants instead of the overall total of 87. We also controlled for location (more on that below). Private browsing mode (and logged out): "gun control": 62 variations with 52/76 participants (68%) seeing unique results. "immigration": 57 variations with 43/76 participants (57%) seeing unique results. "vaccinations": 73 variations with 70/76 participants (92%) seeing unique results. Normal mode: "gun control": 58 variations with 45/76 participants (59%) seeing unique results. "immigration": 59 variations with 48/76 participants (63%) seeing unique results. "vaccinations": 73 variations with 70/76 participants (92%) seeing unique results. With no filter bubble, one would expect to see very little variation of search result pages — nearly everyone would see the same single set of results. That's not what we found. Instead, most people saw results unique to them. We also found about the same variation in private browsing mode and logged out of Google vs. in normal mode. Now, some search result variation is expected due to two factors that we controlled for. First, search results can change over time, such as the inclusion of time-sensitive links. We controlled for this factor by having everyone search at the same time. Second, search results can change by location, such as the inclusion of local news articles. We controlled for this factor by checking all links by hand for this possibility, comparing them to the city and state of the volunteer. We saw very few local links for gun control (1 organic link, 1 news infobox link) and immigration (0), though more for vaccinations (15 organic links, 4 news infobox links). To control for these local links, we replaced all of them with the same placeholder — localdomain.com for organic links and "Local Source" for infoboxes — in all of our analysis. This adjustment means two users whose results only differed by a different local domain in the same slot would not count as different. Interestingly, this adjustment didn't affect overall variation significantly. Another reason you might expect some variation is testing of the search algorithm, where you show slightly different results to different people. In that case, you'd expect to see most people seeing the same results, with a few people seeing slight differences. What we saw, by contrast, was most people seeing different results. Finding #2: Google included links for some participants that it did not include for others. Google search results typically have ten organic links. While the ordering of those links really matters (i.e. link #1 gets ~40% of clicks, link #2 ~20%, link #3 ~10% and so on), we also wanted to know how many different domains were being displayed. With no filter bubble, one would expect to see this total to be around ten. We saw significantly more. In private browsing mode, logged out of Google, and with local domains replaced with localdomain.com, here are the totals: "gun control": 19 different domains "immigration": 15 different domains "vaccinations": 22 different domains As you can see this clearly in the visualization above, some people were shown a very unusual set of results relative to the other participants, offered some domains seen by no-one else. If you were one of these people, you would have no way of knowing what you're missing. Finding #3: We saw significant variation within the News and Videos infoboxes. We also wanted to look at variation within the news (Top Stories) and videos infoboxes. We also saw significant variation within those, even though there are only three slots available. Again, these are for private browsing mode, logged out of Google, and with local domains replaced with "Local Source". News infobox: "gun control": 3 variations from 5 sources, appearing for 75/76 people. The most common variation was seen by 69 people (90%). "immigration": 6 variations from 7 sources, appearing for 76/76 people. The most common variation was seen by 35 people (46%). "vaccinations": 2 variations from 3 sources, appearing for 2/76 people. Each variation was seen by one person (1%). Videos infobox: "gun control": 12 variations from 7 sources, appearing for 75/76 people. The most common variation was seen by 24 people (32%). "immigration": 6 variations from 6 sources, appearing for 75/76 people. The most common variation was seen by 42 people (55%). "vaccinations": Not shown in the search results. As an example, the Videos infobox for the "immigration" query showed the following six variations. As with organic search results, the ordering matters here because the second and third slots get far fewer clicks. Today, MSNBC, NBC News (shown to 42 participants) MSNBC, Today, NBC News (shown to 26 participants) Today, MSNBC, MSNBC (shown to 4 participants) MSNBC, Today, Today (shown to 1 participant) New York Times, CNN, MSNBC (shown to 1 participant) Today, MSNBC, RealClearPolitics (shown to 1 participant) Remember, we had people search at the same time, and we changed all local-links to the be same, so this variation is not explained by time or location. And again, some people were real outliers; in fact, some didn't see the infoboxes at all. Finding #4: Private browsing mode and being logged out of Google offered almost zero filter bubble protection. Finally, we saw the variation in private browsing mode (also known as incognito mode) and logged out of Google as about the same as in normal mode. Most people expect both being logged out and going "incognito" to provide some anonymity. Unfortunately, this is a common misconception as websites use IP addresses and browser fingerprinting to identify people that are logged out or in private browsing mode. If search results were more anonymous in these states, then we would expect everyone's private browsing mode results to be similar. That's not what we saw. To test this more rigorously, we took the organic results, excluding ads and infoboxes, and: Assigned each domain a letter (e.g. A for nytimes.com, B for wsj.com, etc.). Made a string of letters for each person's results, e.g. ABDFJKMSL. Compared these strings to see how similar they were to each other. To do this comparison we counted domain changes between different sets of search results, reducing the differences to a number. For example, ABC -> ACB is one change. (Technically, we used a letter to represent each domain within each search result and calculated the Damerau-Levenshtein edit distance between them.) We saw that when randomly comparing people's private modes to each other, there was more than double the variation than when comparing someone's private mode to their normal mode: gun control: Average of normal and private browsing mode (same user): 1.03 Average of private browsing mode (random user): 2.89 Average of private browsing mode (five closest users): 2.65 immigration: Average of normal and private browsing mode (same user): 1.38 Average of private browsing mode (random user): 3.28 Average of private browsing mode (five closest users): 2.80 vaccinations: Average of normal and private browsing mode (same user): 2.23 Average of private browsing mode (random user): 4.97 Average of private browsing mode (five closest users): 4.25 We often hear of confusion that private browsing mode enables anonymity on the web, but this finding demonstrates that Google tailors search results regardless of browsing mode. People should not be lulled into a false sense of security that so-called "incognito" mode makes them anonymous. Study Data and Code The data is available for download in two parts: Basic non-identifiable participant data, and raw data from the search results. duckduckgo-filter-bubble-study-2018_participants.xls contains the instructions we sent to each participant, as well as basic anonymized data for each participant. duckduckgo-filter-bubble-study-2018_raw-search-results.xls contains a separate sheet for search results per query and per mode (private and non-private). The results are listed as they appeared on the screen for each participant, showing both organic domains and infoboxes such as Top Stories (news), Videos, etc. The code that we wrote to analyze the data is open source and available on our GitHub repository. For more privacy advice, follow us on Twitter & get our privacy crash course. View the full article

      in Computers & Technology

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.