by _etyf on 6/24/21, 8:31 PM
Google's Knowledge Graph info boxes are automatically-generated and littered with errors. I've been burned twice on operating hours, once for my local bank and once for a convenience store, driving over each time only to find the place closed. In both cases, the correct hours were posted on the business's website. I've also seen bad KG results for medical conditions, listing the wrong symptoms or describing easily-treatable maladies as "Incurable". Now I actively ignore the info box and intentionally click through to an authoritative non-Google website.
To a non-technical user, I'm sure the box looks like a human-curated result which they're more likely to trust. Maybe that's the goal of Google's UI choices. Couldn't be further from the truth.
by cwkoss on 6/24/21, 9:28 PM
You should seriously consider suing for defamation if this isn't fixed within a few days. This is an egregious error, especially if it was done by an automated system (and this could be a systemic issue affecting many others).
I think you have a decent chance of getting a five figure+ settlement from this. Talk to a lawyer about your options.
EDIT: When I search "Hristo Georgiev" (from US IP) there is no longer an image in the infobox. (As of 21:55:10 UTC, June 24, 2021)
I think a google engineer saw this HN post :-D
(You could still talk to a lawyer - remedying it now does not alter the fact that you were previously defamed. But Google has a stronger position having now remedied it)
by tzs on 6/24/21, 7:41 PM
> It turns out that Google's knowledge graph algorithm somehow falsely associated my photo with the Wikipedia article about the serial killer. Which is also surprisingly strange because my name isn't special or unique at all; there are literally hundreds of other people with my name, and despite of all that, my personal photo ended up being associated with a serial killer. I can't really explain to myself how this happened, but it's weird. In any case, I am now in the process of reporting this Knowledge Graph bug to Google.
I believe that there is a simpler explanation.
The Wikipedia article is there in that side box because it is the top hit for "hristo georgiev" on Google's main search page. The picture is there because it is the top hit for "hristo georgiev" on Google's image search page.
by jetrink on 6/24/21, 7:15 PM
The info boxes sometimes contain surprising errors. I recently searched for Picasa and was informed that it was invented by Pablo Picasso in 2002! Google 'knows' Picasso died in the 1970s and it 'knows' he released a popular software program in 2002. That's an obvious contradiction requiring the simplest of rules to detect, but the system is just a dumb text extractor. (Interestingly, Google assistant gave the correct answer for 'who created Picasa?' so that system must use a different knowledge-base.)
I, being compulsively helpful, reported the error and it was quickly fixed. Maybe I'm part of the problem.
by yongjik on 6/24/21, 7:57 PM
I think it was Rachel - many years ago, for a few days, when you search "Rachel" at Google it would show a snippet from Wikipedia:
> Rachel was a Biblical figure, the favorite of Jacob's two wives, and the mother of Joseph and Benjamin, two of the twelve progenitors of the tribes of Israel ...
... along with a happy smiling face of some office worker somewhere, named Rachel, of course. It was glorious.
by teraflop on 6/24/21, 7:10 PM
Sci-fi author Greg Egan has written about falling victim to a similar phenomenon, where photos of other people were showing up next to descriptions of him. No serial killers involved, though.
http://gregegan.net/ESSAYS/GOOGLE/Google.html
by hpkuarg on 6/24/21, 6:50 PM
I'm glad this guy has a sense of humor about this, but I really hope that Google does right by him and that he doesn't get stuck in their Byzantine customer service process.
by SrslyJosh on 6/24/21, 9:51 PM
> The rampant spread of fake news and cancel culture has made literally everyone who's not anonymous vulnerable.
Google screwing up their knowledge graph is neither "fake news" nor "cancel culture". Misusing these terms makes them useless for actual discussion.
by DoreenMichele on 6/24/21, 8:26 PM
This kind of thing is part of why I go ask people questions in areas where I don't have a lot of domain knowledge rather than just search for it. (That's not to imply I don't do a search first. That seems awkwardly worded and I can't think of a better way to say it.)
I'm a decent read of people and talented at figuring out who actually makes sense and should be listened to. So going to people with domain knowledge and talking to them is usually the most efficient and effective means for me to get meaningful information when I am out of my depth.
It's also why I try to be patient with people online and answer seemingly "dumb" questions instead of telling people to google it. In many cases, if you aren't familiar with the subject, you won't know the best search terms and you won't know that the top result is commercial garbage and not really the gold standard source on the subject.
I routinely provide links for things like SRO because not only do people often not know that stands for Single Room Occupancy, if you google it you get a variety of unrelated hits (Standing Room Only, for example).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_room_occupancy
I was involved for a time with The TAG Project. I generally try to remember to provide a link for that as well because when I search for it, the thing I was involved with is not the top hit.
The top hit is thetagproject.com. I worked for tagfam.org and it is typically the third hit when I search for it.
I fairly often see people being obnoxious about "you should Google that" and I sometimes understand why they are aggravated with certain things, but I generally think that's asshole behavior.
by walrus01 on 6/24/21, 7:25 PM
If you want to see a terrible example of Google automatically finding a "best" search result for the #1 entry of something, google the following:
"how many raccoons can fit"
by generationP on 6/24/21, 11:39 PM
by a-and on 6/24/21, 7:03 PM
What's unfortunate is that Hristo Georgiev is a very common Bulgarian name.
This isn't a case where a highly uncommon name can lead to a high degree of certainty in association.
by ab_testing on 6/24/21, 9:25 PM
I think this is a legit case of defamation and the author should be able to sue Google in local courts and get a judgement.
by eitland on 6/25/21, 4:23 AM
News at 11: Google search results are now almost as bad as what they replaced, sometimes worse.
I've said some time ago already that there is a multi billion niche waiting for whoever wants to do what Google used to do:
- input field in middle of page
- user types text into field
- software shows list of pages that contain said text. Modifiers can be used to influence exactly how exactly the matching will be
- the company is nice and reliable and goes out of their way not to be evil
by tanto on 6/24/21, 6:57 PM
Is not really hard to imagine that more automation of this kind might result in some automated processes which results in someone get shot at a border by light handed policy.
This kind of thing should have very hard legal consequences for a company like Google.
Imagine being labeled as some kind of murder/rapist/pedophile whatever and moving into a neighborhood which gets angry fast.
by varjag on 6/24/21, 6:53 PM
A great ice breaker for your next job interview.
by html5web on 6/24/21, 7:14 PM
Google your name from time to time. I do it to protect my personal information. I don't want my personal information, including my home address, email, phone number etc. to be exposed on search.
by neil_s on 6/24/21, 8:10 PM
I filed a bug. I don't work on the KG team but hopefully it'll get redirected to the right people and fixed asap.
by murphyslab on 6/24/21, 11:28 PM
I recently encountered the same underlying problem with Google's knowledge graph.
I do a lot of scientific image analysis using an ancient (but reliable!) piece of software called ImageJ [0]. There's a more recent distro of the same called FIJI [1]. So when I tried looking for how to extract EXIF data for GPS coordinates using ImageJ (not even mentioning FIJI), Google returned an info box about the Fiji-the-nation and provided the coordinates of said nation:
https://i.imgur.com/HxSh8Zv.png
[0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5554542/
[1]: https://imagej.net/software/fiji/
by pulse7 on 6/24/21, 6:51 PM
I would sue for damage.
EDIT: Because they put an image with unterlated information together in such a way that it misleads people.
by smdz on 6/24/21, 8:05 PM
Similar mismatch stuff exists with Google Scholar on two patent applications(now abandoned) where I contributed. It has my name but somebody else's photo and job title. Cannot apply to correct it just because I do not have any University email.
by frumper on 6/24/21, 7:14 PM
This is a winning headline. It's got drama and levity that just drew me in. Bravo sir.
edit: The article was an interesting read too.
by protomyth on 6/24/21, 8:12 PM
Google also has a problem with its news.google.com when they get their news from certain sources. Snoopes headlines are shortened and put up as if they were true. This resulted into some really vile headlines.
by bryanrasmussen on 6/24/21, 8:53 PM
>I am now in the process of reporting this Knowledge Graph bug to Google.
In an ironic twist, the process of trying to get support from Google will probably drive him to become a serial killer.
by DevKoala on 6/24/21, 7:00 PM
When solving problems at scale with a 0.0000001% error rate ends up destroying someone’s life.
by throwdbaaway on 6/25/21, 9:00 AM
by romseb on 6/24/21, 7:16 PM
Suggestion: Create a new Wikipedia article with the same Name, upload your own profile photo onto it and put a Disambiguation (Programmer/Hacker) in it so that Google will associate it correctly.
Alternatively, add a drawing of the rapist to the original Wikipedia article.
Interestingly, for me, another Hristo (german principal investigator) appears on the right side when I google the name.
by spoonjim on 6/24/21, 10:31 PM
If you find the right lawyer you will get at least $1 million out of this. Even if you don't feel like doing this, PLEASE do it for the greater good. Google will only start caring about these things if it costs them money. Money is the only language a corporation is fundamentally equipped to understand.
by draaglom on 6/24/21, 9:21 PM
See also the google results for:
"when was running invented"
"how many terashits does the ps5 have"
by annoyingnoob on 6/24/21, 7:24 PM
Next time LinkedIn asks why I don't have a profile picture I'm going to provide a link to this article. Scenarios like this are why I do my best to keep my photo off the internet.
by silviot on 6/24/21, 8:06 PM
by anigbrowl on 6/24/21, 8:33 PM
Google is being eaten by its own algorithm at this point, and increasingly reminds me of Lycos (if you don't get it, be glad you're still young).
by coding123 on 6/24/21, 11:27 PM
You know what bugs me about these kinds of things - the millions of people that have already had this happen to them, but are terrible at public speaking or writing pretty much have no chance of getting these things corrected. Yes, we're all glad Hristo seems to have his situation fixed, but it did go viral and he's a great writer.
What about all the others out there that can't do this for themselves?
by gumby on 6/24/21, 8:41 PM
If I knew the author this would be cool: AFAIK I've never met a serial killer!
Of course were I him it might be pretty bad. Serial killer is serious enough that people might consider there to have been a bug (as there was). But something less outlandish, like a misattributed fraud arrest, could have some pretty bad consequences.
by qwerty456127 on 6/25/21, 9:38 AM
This seems a hardcore case of moral damage worth at least some hundreds thousands dollars in a settlement or even suing some millions dollars out of them, doesn't it? Perhaps you should at least ask a lawyer before just humbly reporting the bug to them and forgetting.
by ramblerman on 6/25/21, 10:14 AM
It seems per the blog post that google fixed it quite quickly.
I wonder how they do that. Do they just have a manual intervention list, where they can code exceptions to the ML results?
Otherwise it seems non trivial to quickly come up with another algorithm that does't have this particular problem.
by ElijahLynn on 6/24/21, 7:18 PM
That seems like defamation too. Some legal consequences on Google's end if you ever pursued it.
by dannyphantom on 6/24/21, 10:19 PM
by rdiddly on 6/24/21, 9:44 PM
Even if I didn't know about the mistake, I would still think idly that something was amiss, because that's the best-dressed and friendliest-looking goddamn serial killer I've ever seen!
by bor100003 on 6/25/21, 6:25 AM
I'm sharing a name and surname with a (Bulgarian)
criminal. Not sure what to do since it's not a problem so far and google doesn't show any of my pictures.
by dave0585 on 6/24/21, 7:37 PM
Such nice smile on a corporate picture, that's hilarious
by prezjordan on 6/24/21, 8:51 PM
The riff on cancel culture sort of soured the entire post for me, to be honest. But otherwise I really enjoyed this read and hope you get it sorted out.
by martin1975 on 6/25/21, 6:33 AM
the best google result I ever saw was "disney children songs" with a google image search returning a very explicit pornographic picture.... I have no idea whether this is result of deliberate bombing or maybe something else. This does not surprise me at all - as I've seen completely wrong results for many other things...wrong years...wrong names...associated with people or events....
by varispeed on 6/24/21, 9:53 PM
Were you ever emailing a company a serial number of a device or told your friends that you made a killer deal on something?
Probably that's why :-)
Please don't kill me.
by Aeolun on 6/24/21, 11:34 PM
What I think is more interesting is that the box displays that the serial killer is 65 years of age, even though they were executed in 1980.
by nomoreusernames on 6/24/21, 8:02 PM
blows my mind that people didnt see this coming. and these guys want self driving cars. and all i ever wanted was a hoverboard that can go over water AND land. maybe fly an x wing. already it in VR. so im pretty ok with that. pretty disappointed that the future isnt more like the jetsons. it should go flintstones -> looneytunes -> jetsons
by pvaldes on 6/24/21, 8:53 PM
I hope he don't try to fly, or take a train, or cross a frontier in a few years, or things could escalate really fast. Some people wouldn't need much more excuses to shoot first and ask later.
I wonder if the local sheriff could give him a small signed note explaining the problem to be shown to other policemen just in case. To assure at least that the local police in this place is aware of the situation (maybe ask them directly for advice?) could avoid future troubles.
by wly_cdgr on 6/24/21, 10:58 PM
You say you should focus on more productive things than suing, but suing in this situation seems very productive
by stewx on 6/24/21, 7:47 PM
Praying that Google turns me into a serial killer so I never have to work again. Settlement deal will be epic.
by armatav on 6/24/21, 8:04 PM
Thankfully you already have a job - next job should be journalism with a title like that, lmfao - 10/10
by mjparrott on 6/24/21, 11:44 PM
It shouldn’t require a HN front page story to fix something like this
by ape4 on 6/24/21, 7:31 PM
by flyrain on 6/24/21, 7:30 PM
It is still there up to my search. Please fix it, Google.
by make3 on 6/24/21, 8:51 PM
He still shows up as the image of a serial killer to me
by cbsmith on 6/24/21, 7:47 PM
All I'm saying is try being named Chris Smith. ;-)
by throwaway789256 on 6/24/21, 8:22 PM
And Twitter turned me into an a*hole. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
by architectonic on 6/24/21, 9:58 PM
That's exactly what a serial killer would say!
by ISL on 6/24/21, 7:00 PM
Of course, with a blog post and an HN article, algorithms for decades will now say, "Yep. $(THAT_GUY) <--> $(SERIAL_KILLER)".
by dqpb on 6/24/21, 7:20 PM
Could he sue for slander?
by m1117 on 6/24/21, 7:55 PM
That post is just a justification and alibi.
by eingaeKaiy8ujie on 6/25/21, 9:23 AM
Never post your photos on the Internet.
by bjarneh on 6/24/21, 7:19 PM
Ultimate click bate title.
by exporectomy on 6/24/21, 7:18 PM
This kind of mixup isn't too rare. I remember Googling "sigmoid" used to show a mixture of information about the function and the colon as if they were the same thing. There was also a famous case of something like "7 deadly sins" showing a rainbow flag for the sin of pride. It's creepy because it's presented in such a well designed integrated way yet a completely ridiculous mistake that a human wouldn't make.
by elliotbnvl on 6/24/21, 6:52 PM
>
Maybe letting a single internet company "organize the world's information" probably isn't such a great idea. Some food for thought.When put like this, the thought that one company controls virtually all information flow on the Internet is more than mildly terrifying.
by MeinBlutIstBlau on 6/24/21, 9:41 PM
If you search my first and last name, the first result is of two 18 year olds who burned a house down because one kid has my first name and the other has my last name. For me it goes:
github
burned a house down
twitter account I no longer have access to
Thanks google...
by teawrecks on 6/24/21, 9:35 PM
Nice try, serial killer ;)
by whamtet4 on 6/25/21, 8:42 AM
Well dressed serial killer!
by tytso on 6/24/21, 7:40 PM
I don't see what the big deal here. The serial killer really did exist, and has the same name as the author of the blog post. Searching for "Hristo Georgiev" using Bing and DuckDuckGo turns up the article about the serial killer as the first link. Why is this not "DuckDuckGo turned me into a serial killer", other than people hating on Google?
Suppose his name was "Thomas Edison"; would the title of the article then read, "How Google turned me into the inventor of the light bulb"?
Or suppose someone shared the name, with say, Slobodan Milosevic; is it Google's fault that a web search of that person's name turns up articles about someone who was charged with genocide and other war crimes?
