drew
Reformation
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
clubs: | to be fair
I'm sure there's a reason for it. |
|
steven s
Premium
join:2002-09-14
Dearborn, MI
1 edit | mehh
neveermind |
|
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY | reply to drew
Re: to be fair
lol
I'm sure there IS a reason for it.
And I'm sure i'm not going to find it satisfying.
hidden censorship is rarely satisfying. |
|
xdeadhead
220, 221, Whatever It Takes.
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Mechanicsburg, PA
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Comcast
| well, there's always rotten.com
if you must have images from abu ghraib or of that hog lyndie england they are archived at rotten.com but viewer beware, there are a lot of other disturbing images there as well. it makes you wonder who is deciding what you can and cannot view. thank ashcroft, rumsfeld, cheney and some guy named bush. |
|
pike
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-01
Cleveland, OH
clubs:
 ·Vonage
 ·AT&T Midwest
| Why?
Hmmm, that's kind of scary actually. I just lost a lot of respect for google.
I've noticed lately google has been blocking and/or censoring a lot of things they didn't in the past.
-Mike
--
XM411.com - Your #1 site for all things XM
XM Satellite Radio |
|
howie
Premium,MVM
join:2003-04-08
Little Falls, NJ | Lyndie England
Who would WANT to see a pic of Lyndie England anyway? YIKES! 
--
"I could be wrong, now... but I don't think so! - Adrian Monk |
|
xdeadhead
220, 221, Whatever It Takes.
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Mechanicsburg, PA
1 edit | reply to drew
Re: to be fair
please explain what reason justifies censoring images that are plainly already in the public domain. (responding to techie) |
|
drew
Reformation
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
clubs:
·wavebroadband
| reply to justin
you're right... mostly.
I highly doubt google is trying to censor from the public (you CAN still find pages about it), but there must be a (good) reason for them not allowing them to come up on images.google.com
Or I could be wrong 
--
|DSLR IRC||hostingking.us||quotes| |
|
atangel
Now What??
Premium
join:2002-02-18
Bronx, NY
| Need a New Search Engine
Before they went public, they claimed not support any kind of censorship and that all the rankings were driven by user searches.
Now that they are a public company, they worry about their share price.
There needs to be a non-profit search engine on the net...... You can't trust a company when $$$ on are the line (it's like trying to make a profit when running a city. It doesn't make sense and doesn't work).
--
The reason you think I'm way on the left is 'cause you're so far to the right.
Dell Dimension, XP Pro, 2.4 Ghz, 512MB, BEFSX41, ZAP 5, NOD32, BOClean, a2, Adaware, Spybot, MW Pro, The Bat! |
|
agent_007
Premium
join:2003-07-25
Simi Valley, CA | Google censoring is just wrong. |
|
Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans
join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
·Bright House
·Rogers Hi-Speed
1 edit | Conspiracy 101
Give credit where credit is due.
Unfortunately the answer is far simpler then those wandering in the land of conspiracy theories. The index cycle is set at about 6mo. You are using the wrong tool for the job. |
|
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY | reply to drew
Re: to be fair
google should understand their popularity rests on transparency. If there were told by the government to remove those images because of [insert stupid reason] then they should tell us that is what happened. |
|
jrsmooth
join:2000-05-17
Washington, DC | reply to drew
Sure there is going to be a reason, and I thought the Chinese Gov. is the only who does that...
--
JR "Always" Smooth |
|
Anon00
Premium
join:2001-09-25
USA
2 edits | reply to justin
said by justin  :lol I'm sure there IS a reason for it. And I'm sure i'm not going to find it satisfying. hidden censorship is rarely satisfying. I'm curious as to why too. It's highly unlikely (and Bush-haters attempt to use rational thinking) that our government is doing it, cause we all know what will happen if they did. And Google does bring up images if you search within the main site but it doesn't work when you use the Image search function so it is curious. The only way I could see our government to have a legitimate claim for censorship is that it is an ongoing criminal investigation and in the past it has been upheld that Judges can censor certain information, if it was deemed that if the information would be made available to the public, it would prejudice the prospective jury pool. But that goes out the window because not only can you view the images from Google search but this is a military investigation... Curious.
--
"Ah, women. They make the highs higher and the lows more frequent." - Friedrich Nietzsche
"'It's the law' is just an excuse for the unintelligent to remain that way" - Me |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
1 edit | Different Google?
Am I using a different Google than the rest of you?
EDIT" BTW, Moderate Safe Search is ON... want to see what I get with it off? 
--
Nuke 'em all, let God sort 'em out. |
|
BonezX
Basement Dweller
Premium
join:2004-04-13
Canada | reply to justin
Re: to be fair
google.com is american.
someone try it on google.ca |
|
drew
Reformation
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
clubs: | nothing.
but it could be my American IP (if it is censorship because of the government.) |
|
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY | reply to dadkins
Re: Different Google?
a) just images.google.com
b) do you see ANY england or torture snaps in images.google.com with safe search OFF. if so, post a screenshot.. compare to lycos or altavista. |
|
drew
Reformation
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
clubs: | reply to dadkins
That IS odd. |
|
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY | reply to Mashiki
Re: Conspiracy 101
someone else posts below that comment that images.google.com has no trouble finding recent images. |
|
