When I search for "Greg Egan", the knowledge panel in the right column doesn't show any photos at all.
And it even has a button "Claim this knowledge panel" that he could presumably use to make corrections.
So is this article just old news, where Google has not only corrected its mistakes but also provided a manual way for people to fix misinformation about themselves?
I'm not understanding why this article is appearing now in 2020.
(Also, a search engine is always going to get some things wrong. Without knowing the rate of errors, a single example doesn't really mean much of anything.)
No information on the web is 100% perfect or accurate. Even the NYT makes a host of mistakes daily across all its edited articles, and publishes corrections for the most serious ones when readers point them out.
Google's results are largely accurate, and as long as it has a mechanism for correcting mistakes does seem to make it pretty OK to me.
What are you suggesting any serious alternative be? That would actually work at scale?
Not copying stuff is trivially scaleable to infinity.
Seriously, if you can't do something at scale, don't do something at scale. Being shitty to everyone involved and then saying "but can't scale with profits" is not OK.
When I search for "Greg Egan", the knowledge panel in the right column doesn't show any photos at all.
And it even has a button "Claim this knowledge panel" that he could presumably use to make corrections.
So is this article just old news, where Google has not only corrected its mistakes but also provided a manual way for people to fix misinformation about themselves?
I'm not understanding why this article is appearing now in 2020.
(Also, a search engine is always going to get some things wrong. Without knowing the rate of errors, a single example doesn't really mean much of anything.)