3 ms·

So not censorship in this case. They are removing illegal software sites from their company websites. Side note, I'd like to hear the age of people who argue e

So not censorship in this case. They are removing illegal software sites from their company websites. Side note, I'd like to hear the age of people who argue either side of this topic.

mdekkers 10y ago
47, strongly believe this is inappropriate censorship
vetinari 10y ago
38, born in a communist country. Yes, it is a censorship. It is manipulating the output in order to not provide an information, that would be otherwise available, caused by interest of some third party. To expand on the topic: 1) it is not illegal to tell other people where to find bootleg software or media, 2) in many countries it is legal to download such software or media (and they pay for the privilege in the form of an extra fee on their blank media, memory cards and hard drives, whether they do it or not) 3) what is illegal is to distribute software or media without the consent of the rights owners. Point 3) is an issue between those sites that do it and the rights owners, nothing between the end users or search engines. Neither of them do 3) themselves.
- overcast 10y ago
  Are you OK then with Google removing sites that are spam, or sites that aren't mobile friendly, or removing a site from the top 10 page one results? Are you good with children being presented with porn/cigarette/alcohol/whatever advertising/results? At what point does "censorship" fall off, and common sense take over.
  - vetinari 10y ago
    Neither of those you named are Google problems. Nobody of us might like spam, but there is obviously something that keeps these in the business. What? Eradicate that, remove their cash flow. I might not like sites that aren't mobile friendly, but fortunately, when I'm not in a mood so scroll around it, I can always close it. No need for Google to step in. I also do not like children being presented with porn/cigarette/alcohol/whatever advertising/results. But - these result do not come themselves, they are initiated, usually by those children. There is more need for parenting, than for Google protection. If it really bothers you, most routers allow for filtering the web, and some ISPs provide that as a service - for those interested, as it should be. The problem with common sense vs censorship is: where you draw the line? That's the hard question, and easily abused one at that. Especially by entities like Google, who are not a harmless protector of innocent or knight in shiny armor. They are businesses, who have interest that may not align with yours, especially in the long run.
    - no_wizard 10y ago
      Which is also why you're free to take your business elsewhere. There are a myriad of search engines out there. They have competition. I would say Google's right to do what google wants to do trumps any real arguments against them doing this here. I doubt they'll have any notable downtick in users. Of course, you right to have an opinion on their practices is valid, i hope its not coming across as if its not, i just wanted to focus on the realities of the situation for the broader reading audience
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
krzyk 10y ago
Also 38 (and also born in communist country, censorship was rampant there), for me this is censorship. And arguments for it are similar to the usual "think of the children" way of thinking which eventually leads to harder censorship, more surveillance and generally poor place to live.

So not censorship in this case. They are removing illegal software sites from their company websites. Side note, I'd like to hear the age of people who argue either side of this topic.

mdekkers 10y ago

47, strongly believe this is inappropriate censorship

vetinari 10y ago

38, born in a communist country. Yes, it is a censorship. It is manipulating the output in order to not provide an information, that would be otherwise available, caused by interest of some third party. To expand on the topic: 1) it is not illegal to tell other people where to find bootleg software or media, 2) in many countries it is legal to download such software or media (and they pay for the privilege in the form of an extra fee on their blank media, memory cards and hard drives, whether they do it or not) 3) what is illegal is to distribute software or media without the consent of the rights owners. Point 3) is an issue between those sites that do it and the rights owners, nothing between the end users or search engines. Neither of them do 3) themselves.

overcast 10y ago
Are you OK then with Google removing sites that are spam, or sites that aren't mobile friendly, or removing a site from the top 10 page one results? Are you good with children being presented with porn/cigarette/alcohol/whatever advertising/results? At what point does "censorship" fall off, and common sense take over.
- vetinari 10y ago
  Neither of those you named are Google problems. Nobody of us might like spam, but there is obviously something that keeps these in the business. What? Eradicate that, remove their cash flow. I might not like sites that aren't mobile friendly, but fortunately, when I'm not in a mood so scroll around it, I can always close it. No need for Google to step in. I also do not like children being presented with porn/cigarette/alcohol/whatever advertising/results. But - these result do not come themselves, they are initiated, usually by those children. There is more need for parenting, than for Google protection. If it really bothers you, most routers allow for filtering the web, and some ISPs provide that as a service - for those interested, as it should be. The problem with common sense vs censorship is: where you draw the line? That's the hard question, and easily abused one at that. Especially by entities like Google, who are not a harmless protector of innocent or knight in shiny armor. They are businesses, who have interest that may not align with yours, especially in the long run.
  - no_wizard 10y ago
    Which is also why you're free to take your business elsewhere. There are a myriad of search engines out there. They have competition. I would say Google's right to do what google wants to do trumps any real arguments against them doing this here. I doubt they'll have any notable downtick in users. Of course, you right to have an opinion on their practices is valid, i hope its not coming across as if its not, i just wanted to focus on the realities of the situation for the broader reading audience

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

krzyk 10y ago

Also 38 (and also born in communist country, censorship was rampant there), for me this is censorship. And arguments for it are similar to the usual "think of the children" way of thinking which eventually leads to harder censorship, more surveillance and generally poor place to live.