4 ms·
Did you read further along? There's also suggestions for bestiality and borderline child pornography, both of which definitely fall under adult images and in on
by jonchang 8y ago
Did you read further along? There's also suggestions for bestiality and borderline child pornography, both of which definitely fall under adult images and in one or both cases are very illegal.
- true_religion 8y agoYou said borderline, because it is not past the line of illegality. Thus your second sentence makes no sense.
- jonchang 8y agoThere is a debate whether nonsexualized images of minors (e.g., toddlers playing in baths, which is mentioned in the linked article) actually constitutes child pornography. Jurisdictions vary about their interpretation, hence "borderline". I don't feel the need to define this so precisely in my original post because it distracts from my main point, which is that Bing is not only not filtering hate material but also stuff that many would generally agree fall under adult content. I will not respond to any replies to this post because I will assume that further argument is in bad faith aimed at obscuring my main point.
- yorwba 8y agoBorderline but legal child pornography would still be classified as "adult", no? To me, the second sentence makes perfect sense.
- true_religion 8y agoIf you have safe search on, all the results should be non nude, non adult. I reread the article, and see where I went wrong. They mix up two issues: bing returning odd suggestions with safe search on, and bing returning results for searches for illegal material with safe search off. I had thought they were only talking about safe search being on. In my misreading, I made the assumption that Bing would never return illegal results for searches for children, as it would never return pornography since safe search is on. Apologies to the OP.