4 ms·
The curious thing is not _everything_ is obscured. Namely, `Attorneys for Plaintiff Tesla, Inc. ` isn't. Either is `Identifying Critical Infrastructure During
by Operyl 6y ago
The curious thing is not _everything_ is obscured. Namely, `Attorneys for Plaintiff Tesla, Inc. ` isn't.
Either is `Identifying Critical Infrastructure During Covid-19`
So eventually this is probably going to get indexed by Google.
EDIT: It is already!
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Identifying+Critical+Infrastructure+During+Covid-19%22+%22tesla%22&oq=%22Identifying+Critical+Infrastructure+During+Covid-19%22+%22tesla%22 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Identifying+Critical+Infr...
EDIT 2: Why the downvotes already? I was pointing out that not all text is obfuscated in the text, namely COVID and Tesla are not. So it _is_ going to get indexed to some extent, it seems. If you want to downvote me, at least give me the courtesy to reply to your reasoning for it!
EDIT 3: You can check it yourself. Open the PDF, ctrl+f tesla, the only sentence unobscured shows up. ctrl+f for Covid-19, only one unobfuscated occurrence..
- danso 6y agoWhat Google is indexing appears to be the original and normally behaving PDF (before processing by wholemars.com):https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/15116056/2020/05/Tesla-Incorporated-v.-County-of-Alameda-5-9-20.pdf https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/1... (the submitted link for this thread should probably be changed to the sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com hosted version of the PDF) But yes, I do agree that not all the text in the wholemars.com version was obfuscated. Seems like the metatext and boilerplate stuff was left as is in this processed version.