If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C|Net)   Google has altered SafeSearch. Pray they don't alter it further   (news.cnet.com) divider line 80
    More: Stupid, Safesearch, search algorithms, Google Images, e-book reader  
•       •       •

22253 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Dec 2012 at 8:35 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-12 08:46:54 PM
5 votes:
Combined with the "improved" search filters (let's get rid of exact image size searches!), this is turning into a pile of suck.
2012-12-12 08:40:19 PM
5 votes:
But, but, how will I still have plausible denial?
2012-12-12 09:03:49 PM
4 votes:
Hopefully someday they can make separate filters for gay and straight pr0n.
2012-12-12 09:07:29 PM
3 votes:

Peki: Sooooo. . .

Anyone got info on a good search engine that isn't run by a douchebag company?


duckduckgo

They don't build personal search filters, so if you call a friend and say 'search for spam duck heritage overture' they will get exactly the same results as you.

They also don't track, so you don't see ads for Taylor Swift popping up on the computer you share with your kid. Or your kid won't see ads for BBC cuckolds I guess.
2012-12-12 08:37:42 PM
3 votes:
Puritans FTW!
2012-12-12 10:24:59 PM
2 votes:
How about just an "Unsafe search" option where when checked it returns nothing but porn.
2012-12-12 09:53:52 PM
2 votes:

stu1-1: [img7.imageshack.us image 850x569]

Results with SafeSearch "off"


Hey that must be every Sash Grey picture on the internet where she is not nude.
2012-12-12 09:41:02 PM
2 votes:

KrispyKritter: WhippingBoy: R.I.P. Google. You're no use to anyone anymore.

Amen. Just like my cable service (we're old, not hip) that censors and bleeps broadcasts to a two adult household. Sometimes I feel life is not worth living.


Never ever watch Blazing Saddles on cable. Not worth the effort.
2012-12-12 09:33:59 PM
2 votes:

Ehcks: So, can't you just... turn off Safe Search?

Or am I missing the joke behind the outrage?


That's what's so stupid about it.
SafeSearch is always on....even if you have it turned off.
2012-12-12 09:17:11 PM
2 votes:

WhippingBoy: I think it's the other way around...


I was trying to say if you're either not logged in to a google account, or leave it logged in to the same account while multiple people share a computer. Those were extreme examples, but at home I know when my wife is suddenly about to buy a new purse or when the kid has been super interested in pokemon, without checking the history.
2012-12-12 08:58:23 PM
2 votes:
I do not comprehend the objections to this move, especially as regards puritanical interests, which Google is not an advocate of nor biased for. This simply lessens the ability to accidentally view pornography. If someone wants to view naked people farking with each other or animals or whatnot, type precisely that in, the same as one would do with anything else.
mjg
2012-12-12 08:48:37 PM
2 votes:
Google is for losers.

Moved over to DuckDuckGo.com and haven't looked back.
2012-12-12 08:48:04 PM
2 votes:
RIP rule 34
2009-2012
2012-12-12 08:39:18 PM
2 votes:
Sooooo. . .

Anyone got info on a good search engine that isn't run by a douchebag company?
2012-12-12 08:38:46 PM
2 votes:
Maybe now people will use Bing.
2012-12-12 08:15:59 PM
2 votes:
GIS may never be the same.
2012-12-13 09:02:02 AM
1 votes:
I like the suggestion of the new Google Categories:

- Safe Mode On
- Safe Mode Moderate
- Safe Mode Off
- FIND PORN
2012-12-13 07:57:55 AM
1 votes:

natmar_76: StoPPeRmobile: Thanks for your understanding during the process of going backwards.

I hear you. I, too, am outraged at the extra 0.2 seconds it takes to specify that I don't just want tits, but I want completely nude tits. This isn't why I fought in the internet wars of 1999. This isn't the future I wanted for my children. My entire life has been moving towards a future where pornography is more and more immediate and accessible, not slightly LESS completely convenient and easy. I'm outraged like you are, internet compatriot.

I had a dream, friends, I had a dream that everything was pornography. I had a dream that web browsers only showed breasts, mammaries, pubes, vulvas, flesh of the hottest sweatiest kinds. No Amazons, no video games, no politics, just sweaty smelly pornography, all day, every day. I had a dream, and this is not that dream. Tomorrow I'm organizing a million nerd march on Washington D.C. We are going to take this country by the throat and WE WILL NOT STOP UNTIL OUR DEMANDS ARE SATISFIED.

But until then, my friends, and I know this is difficult for all of us, but we're just going to have to take that 0.199 seconds to type in "naked" before our image searches, or at least that we want to see "hairy pussies", not just plain old "vaginas".


3/10 for being vaguely amusing in your trolling. You still are deliberately avoiding the main principles involved:

1. Plausible deniability - it is basic human nature to feel more comfortable with the guilty pleasure of a search that brings explicit results for a non-explicit term. Most cultures have taught us from childhood for centuries that nekkid peepulz are naughty, so even though your intellect says "I can look up adult things with no shame", your gut says 'you are burning in hell for typing 'naked'".

2. Filtering algorithms - the real crux of the issue for most web-fluent people, really - no one likes the idea of their search being cherry picked before delivery, porn or otherwise. Aside from the obvious censorship concerns, this tactic says two things to the consumer: A) You are not smart/adult enough to make your own decisions, and B) because you have no control or knowledge about the filtering being used, you have no way of knowing or controlling what you are not being allowed to see, even on searches that are more specific in nature because those searches are also being filtered. How do you know some non-porn search is complete when images may get improperly tagged as porn by this filter?

I have nothing against the filtering, per se - but I think it sucks that Google is going all 1984 and not allowing people make their own decisions to turn the filter off if desired.

/stepping down from the troll feeding stand
2012-12-13 02:16:37 AM
1 votes:

Zombalupagus: stu1-1: Yuri Futanari: Begoggle: RIP rule 34
2009-2012

For all your rule34 needs

/do I really need to say NSFW?

[img546.imageshack.us image 850x421]

RULE 34 FAIL

"tinker bell"
No results.

FAIL


you have to use an underscore for all spaces. so don't search for tinker bell search for Tinker_Bell. took me a while to figure that out when i started using paheal years ago.
heres the diresct link for tinker bell, there are 14 pages. NSFW, NSF childhood purity
/for gods' sakes, there's Persepolis rule 34
2012-12-13 12:37:08 AM
1 votes:

Froonium: Don't ya just love being treated like little Puritan kids?


They are just getting ready for the new laws that are coming.
2012-12-12 11:39:22 PM
1 votes:

Peki: Sooooo. . .

Anyone got info on a good search engine that isn't run by a douchebag company?


If you want relevant results, you use Google. I can construct a search for porn in whatever language I want as long as it's in google translate. I have done this with good results. I have no problem with this. Google's basic idea of giving you a better defined output to your search results is a laudable goal. I don't want American porn results filling up my search results when I'm looking for something in Polish or Hungarian, thanks.

However, if you are a technologically impaired duck, and want porn, lots and lots of porn, use Bing with the kiddie filter off. No, really, it's the best search engine for vague searches that will always turn up porn that isn't even SEOed.

All the brouhaha and claims of censorship are utter nonsense. Learn how to construct a search.
2012-12-12 11:08:07 PM
1 votes:
Well, if it means not hiving my childhood raped when doing GISs for TaleSpin references if Fark threads, so much the better.

/Seriously what the fark is wrong with some people?
//Why, WHY WHY would you ever draw a picture of Col. Spigot getting orally satisfied by Baloo, much less post said picture on the internet?
///Sick fark raped my childhood.
2012-12-12 11:02:03 PM
1 votes:
I invite you all to follow up on the donkey balls thread to further push Google into their new place. A farewell for that beaver shavers!!  
There will be pics. Oh yes, there will be pics.
2012-12-12 10:58:59 PM
1 votes:

stu1-1: [img7.imageshack.us image 850x569]

Results with SafeSearch "off"


Lot of deep-throating on Google UK. Looks like they haven't made the switch yet for non-US engines.
2012-12-12 10:58:38 PM
1 votes:
What, did the porn search engines hand over a bucket full of cash?
2012-12-12 10:33:53 PM
1 votes:

LordJiro: stu1-1: Yuri Futanari: Begoggle: RIP rule 34
2009-2012

For all your rule34 needs

/do I really need to say NSFW?

[img546.imageshack.us image 850x421]

RULE 34 FAIL

You forgot the underscore.


What he said. Have to use _ to separate words.
2012-12-12 10:32:39 PM
1 votes:

diaphoresis: Fark gets no love.. they quote some loser on Reddit, but not Fark...

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 400x300]


Well, they tend to pick up stories sooner than Fark does. If it makes you feel any better, even the users over on Reddit think it's ridiculous that news stories are quoting some random asshat on an internet forum.

/Fark is more readable
//Reddit feels like some monster child of LiveJournal comments
2012-12-12 10:28:36 PM
1 votes:

Cyno01: How about just an "Unsafe search" option where when checked it returns nothing but porn.


img202.imageshack.us
2012-12-12 10:26:20 PM
1 votes:
Sigh. Every change they make makes using google more odious. Last time it was the farking mail change, now this. Anyone know how to send them feedback without parceling out a bunch of my life to google farking feedback tm?

Pic related, it's what they've been sucking of late.

knowledgering.com

Oh, and hi to Nathan, Walter, Brett, Steve, John, other John, Joe and any of my friends I'm forgetting who work for them. Seems like half the people I know now.
2012-12-12 10:24:58 PM
1 votes:

stu1-1: Yuri Futanari: Begoggle: RIP rule 34
2009-2012

For all your rule34 needs

/do I really need to say NSFW?

[img546.imageshack.us image 850x421]

RULE 34 FAIL


You forgot the underscore.
2012-12-12 10:24:30 PM
1 votes:

Podmore: Someone else alluded to this, but here's the issue for me. I keep safe search turned off, not because I'm actively looking for porn (or maybe I should say, even when I'm not actively looking for porn) because I don't want my searches filtered. When I search for something, I want to see ALL the results in the order that the algorithms say best match my search terms. Now I get those results with the adult stuff stripped off, or I can add a term to get ONLY the adult stuff. There's no way to just get an unfiltered list of what I'm looking for.


Yes. They should have a "do not filter either way" option. I couldn't stand google instant nor google suggestion taking over my browser's autocomplete, but at least they left a way so I don't have to use them (http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0). Perhaps they have or will put in a way to disable this new "feature" as well. 

Also, what's up with Google forgetting my preferences a couple times a month?
2012-12-12 10:18:47 PM
1 votes:
They didn't alter Safesearch. Their altered their entire search algorithm. Doesn't make matter if you have Safesearch on or off. You'll have to use keywords that tells Google you're really looking for porn. I think they suggest to actually use ther word 'porn'.
2012-12-12 10:18:28 PM
1 votes:
In other Google related news, word is that Google Maps for iOS is to be released tonight.

Source
2012-12-12 10:17:30 PM
1 votes:
Google screwed up GIS when they changed the page layout and took out the image info (unless you scroll all the way to the bottom of your eight page search results and click to restore the legacy view). They wanted to be all cool and pretty (like Bing). This decreased the utility of GIS for many users.
Then they started fooling with the UI and now they've changed the filter interface.
They pester you to use Chrome, they pester you to sign up for Google+.
Are they trying to drive away users? Seriously, they are not improving things, they are fixing what ain't broke.
2012-12-12 10:11:48 PM
1 votes:
Someone else alluded to this, but here's the issue for me. I keep safe search turned off, not because I'm actively looking for porn (or maybe I should say, even when I'm not actively looking for porn) because I don't want my searches filtered. When I search for something, I want to see ALL the results in the order that the algorithms say best match my search terms. Now I get those results with the adult stuff stripped off, or I can add a term to get ONLY the adult stuff. There's no way to just get an unfiltered list of what I'm looking for.
2012-12-12 10:10:25 PM
1 votes:

Corvus: So on DuckDuckGo how do you do image searches?


By using another search engine.
img15.imageshack.us
2012-12-12 10:06:58 PM
1 votes:
4.bp.blogspot.com
2012-12-12 10:02:25 PM
1 votes:

Nuclear Monk: Accidental porn is the best kind of porn. Why would anyone want to get rid of that!?!


exactly. It's "holy crap, there is porn of this!" - 3 hours gone
2012-12-12 10:01:18 PM
1 votes:
So on DuckDuckGo how do you do image searches?
2012-12-12 10:00:37 PM
1 votes:
Accidental porn is the best kind of porn. Why would anyone want to get rid of that!?!
2012-12-12 09:57:52 PM
1 votes:
Am I the only person on Fark with a clean browser history?

/I mean, jeeze, I'd have thought Fark of all places knew how to hide porn use...
2012-12-12 09:55:09 PM
1 votes:

Do the needful: The real question here is "does someone have a job looking at and filtering out all of the 'porn', or does google have some sort of genital recognition algorithm?"


My guess is it looks for dirty words on the site, porn site urls and maybe it looks for skin tones in the pics themselves. I bet it does the first 2 for sure but the last one is a maybe.
2012-12-12 09:53:50 PM
1 votes:

edmo: big dicks, teen sluts, cum babes... um, I'm not even trying and it's the same old pile of NSFW or anywhere else. I've not adjusted my search (Safe search off) so I'm not sure what others are missing. Looks the same to me


Now search "dicks" or "sluts" or "babes". All these searches are G-rated.
2012-12-12 09:52:56 PM
1 votes:

Ehcks: So, can't you just... turn off Safe Search?

Or am I missing the joke behind the outrage?


Yes you are not getting it they are making NON-safe search safer.
2012-12-12 09:51:25 PM
1 votes:
big dicks, teen sluts, cum babes... um, I'm not even trying and it's the same old pile of NSFW or anywhere else. I've not adjusted my search (Safe search off) so I'm not sure what others are missing. Looks the same to me
2012-12-12 09:50:19 PM
1 votes:
Wait a minute... There is porn available on this Internet thing? For Free? How long has this been going on?
2012-12-12 09:50:12 PM
1 votes:
So can we hold Google responsible for "explicit" images that pass the filters?
2012-12-12 09:48:49 PM
1 votes:
img7.imageshack.us

Results with SafeSearch "off"
2012-12-12 09:47:08 PM
1 votes:

red5ish: If their goal is to protect the children I have only one thing to say:child proof caps on medicine bottles.

To olden a thread

2012-12-12 09:40:59 PM
1 votes:

mjg: Google is for losers.

Moved over to DuckDuckGo.com and haven't looked back.


DuckDuckGo doesn't have its own image search engine, so who is the loser now, genius?
2012-12-12 09:30:48 PM
1 votes:

tetsuo02: It is a sad day when "shaved beaver" returns pictures of hairless water-mammals.


Shaved pussy agrees.

www.naughty-nature.com
2012-12-12 09:29:20 PM
1 votes:

Yuri Futanari: Begoggle: RIP rule 34
2009-2012

For all your rule34 needs

/do I really need to say NSFW?


img546.imageshack.us

RULE 34 FAIL
2012-12-12 09:24:00 PM
1 votes:
F*ck you, Google. I use Google extensively at work to do background investigations on people and companies, and I have never once accidentally found porn, despite some really weird search strings.
2012-12-12 09:22:01 PM
1 votes:
NEWSFLASH: Google tries to make its search results more accurate

*yawn*
2012-12-12 09:19:54 PM
1 votes:
Bing Images... still works
Yahoo Images... still works

Yeah, it's still not hard to find porn.

If you are having trouble finding porn on the internet, you aren't looking for porn.
2012-12-12 09:17:54 PM
1 votes:
So, can't you just... turn off Safe Search?

Or am I missing the joke behind the outrage?
2012-12-12 09:15:42 PM
1 votes:

that was my nickname in highschool: Hopefully someday they can make separate filters for gay and straight pr0n.


Want straight porn? Add "porn" to your query.

Want gay porn? Add "gay" instead.

Works pretty well from what I can tell.

/searching for "cock" gets you lots of roosters
//searching for "gay cocks" gets you so much more
///slashies come (giggity) in threes
2012-12-12 09:09:58 PM
1 votes:
BTW this has got to be great for ornithologists.
2012-12-12 09:08:52 PM
1 votes:

Shrinkwrap: Combined with the "improved" search filters (let's get rid of exact image size searches!), this is turning into a pile of suck.


And the dilution of quotes... adding in "or" if your search returns no results as an "and" query.

Remember when google was a raw interface for geeks?
2012-12-12 09:08:14 PM
1 votes:

mjg: Google is for losers.

Moved over to DuckDuckGo.com and haven't looked back.


Sorry, I didn't notice you had it covered.
2012-12-12 09:06:09 PM
1 votes:
I just noticed that Bing's "nice tits" has a lot better results than Google's "nice tits" all of a sudden.

Maybe Bing is good for something after all.
2012-12-12 09:04:21 PM
1 votes:
Sounds like if I search for "tits" I still get tits, but if I search for "little red riding hood" I don't get porn.

I don't see the problem here.
2012-12-12 09:04:14 PM
1 votes:
Now I'm going to have to add "naked" to all my searches.

Just in case.
2012-12-12 09:04:12 PM
1 votes:

KungFuJunkie: Because I have such a difficult time finding porn on the internet.... Is there a bet on when porn on the internet will surpass the 50% mark of all content on the internet, or has it already happened?


It's never been less than 50%. The internet was invented for porn.
2012-12-12 09:04:07 PM
1 votes:

aremmes: So now I can't search for random word combinations to see what kind of porn it'll turn up? Damn you, Mountain View Chocolate Factory.


I have come across nekkid wimminz through Google image searches on several occasions while trying to find something completely unrelated. I don't really care as long as I'm on my home/work at home computers, but I'd be kinda pissed if that happened while on a school or work computer. You can get in tons of trouble for that (as I'm sure we're all aware).
2012-12-12 09:03:54 PM
1 votes:

Jument: Actually that seems like a pretty decent feature. Not everyone is a porn hound, you guys.

I mean, well, everyone reading this is a porn hound. I meant other people. The "squares". Your Mom, for example. Ok bad example. Your Mom probably surfs for porn all day. But you know what I mean.


Some people turn all the lights out, close the curtains, take the phone off the hook, turn the monitor, and peek out to make sure no one notices. Some people check /d/ on their 72" TV while blaring porn sound effects. But everyone, everywhere, eventually seeks porn on the internet.
2012-12-12 09:01:33 PM
1 votes:

Skywolf Philosopher: WhippingBoy: It's the principle of the thing.

What do you expect principals to do all day?


Gotcha.
2012-12-12 09:00:45 PM
1 votes:

Begoggle: RIP rule 34
2009-2012


For all your rule34 needs

/do I really need to say NSFW?
2012-12-12 08:59:40 PM
1 votes:

Skywolf Philosopher: I do not comprehend the objections to this move, especially as regards puritanical interests, which Google is not an advocate of nor biased for. This simply lessens the ability to accidentally view pornography. If someone wants to view naked people farking with each other or animals or whatnot, type precisely that in, the same as one would do with anything else.


It's the principle of the thing.
2012-12-12 08:59:31 PM
1 votes:
If only Google would search for what I actually type instead of anything it feels like I might have meant, usually while ignoring the most important words. Having to specify exact words and inclusion every time gets to be a bit much, and even then it often ignores specifically included words. Perhaps if I were illiterate it'd be easier.

/Any regular web search term plus "TGP"
2012-12-12 08:57:33 PM
1 votes:
Also, doesn't this kind of defeat the whole purpose of safe search? I thought the point of turning it off was to find "explicit" images?
2012-12-12 08:53:32 PM
1 votes:
No change, image search for "subby's mom nude' still shows a naked fat woman.
2012-12-12 08:44:50 PM
1 votes:
R.I.P. Google. You're no use to anyone anymore.
2012-12-12 08:43:47 PM
1 votes:
In other news, Booble and Jughunter shares skyrocket.
2012-12-12 08:43:38 PM
1 votes:
makes it tougher to stumble across adult pictures, whether or not you're searching for them.

This is pretty farking stupid. If you're doing a search for pussy, chances are you're NOT looking for 528,000,000 images of Pussy Riot.
2012-12-12 08:43:18 PM
1 votes:

Peki: Sooooo. . .

Anyone got info on a good search engine that isn't run by a douchebag company?


AskJeeves
2012-12-12 08:40:54 PM
1 votes:

EnglishMan: Maybe now people will use Bing.


Or perhaps DuckDuckGo will develop an adult version...
2012-12-12 08:40:49 PM
1 votes:
So now I can't search for random word combinations to see what kind of porn it'll turn up? Damn you, Mountain View Chocolate Factory.
2012-12-12 08:40:17 PM
1 votes:
But slutty Asian cum junkies still returns the appropriate pics
2012-12-12 08:39:08 PM
1 votes:
The company says the move is designed to ensure adult content is shown only to those who explicitly request it.

Nicely done.
 
Displayed 80 of 80 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report