Thank you for your response too.
Usually authors don’t respond, perhaps this is a flaw in the system/ but also proves that computers don’t make an argument by themselves.
I respect anyone who is looking for logic. There is a democratic right to choose the kind of logic you want, comparable with freedom of speech and thought/ but logic at the same time has the nasty quality it can be right or wrong. So we have to live with that, on the other hand it is also an advantage, because otherwise we would never know were we are going.
In this case you compare it to wikipedia, presuming it is always right. Yes, probably they are in 95 percent, while fi massmedia usually are only 30 percent right, so it is a relative good option.
In this case though they are wrong. A computer only does what he is told to do. When you program it with a set of equations, he will compare within that set. Its only advantage is that it can do that much faster than humans, given the disadvantage it does not see or understand anything else. It does not feel. Although you could also program it within a set of equations that represent feelings for humans, that still does not mean it feels.
Algorithms are a relative solution to that, because they find similar sets within different equations, to bring them together. Thats why you are annoyed with advertising for things you are no longer interested in. So, even that is not making a good argument, but in a few cases it might help.
Have a good day.