5 ms·

But Google drily noted that in some cases Web users are overestimating just how much of the online space the company can control: "Sometimes we even receive req

But Google drily noted that in some cases Web users are overestimating just how much of the online space the company can control: "Sometimes we even receive requests to remove content 'from the Internet,'" the company reports. Google might have a great deal of power over what happens online. But not that much. Removing something from Google search results effectively does remove it from the Internet. If you can't find something, then it may as well not exist. It's a bit scary how much control Google has over the Internet.

longlivegnu 12y ago
I am not sure everyone uses google :^), while a vast majority might there are other options
barkingcat 12y ago
this is an overgeneralised meme. Just because you can't find something on google doesn't mean that other people (who actually know of these site locations, or are the hosters of these sites, or are searching via different search engines) aren't accessing it. Google is also not the be all and end all of search. According to comscore (take with giant salt crystals) google has around 67% of the search market in the US. Now taking only the US, this means that there are around 33% of the web-going population in the US who could care less what google does with its index (because they simply never see it at all in the first place). Is irrelevance the biggest slap in the face? For some people even if google deletes their entire index, it wouldn't even make a difference.
- rgbrenner 12y ago
  Google's share of search in the EU is above 90%.
thisjepisje 12y ago
If you can't find something [through Google], then it may as well not exist. If, for example, a director wants their movie removed from Google search results, it will still show up in searches on imdb, wikipedia, rottentomatoes &c., and is thus accessible to quite a large number of internet users.
- kbd 12y ago
  Or you could always search Google via proxy to some jurisdiction that doesn't have these silly laws.
- return0 12y ago
  how often do you use wikipedia's or imbd's search function?
  - 1971genocide 12y ago
    Quite Often, I frequently use wikipedia search, facebook search ( to find certain people ), bing search , github search, npm search,stack overflow search, reddit search. But yes I agree removing someone from google will make them less visible.
  - learnstats2 12y ago
    At least once per day, each. Why would I use google to search wikipedia or imdb? Both of those sites have now got search engines that are very effective; I have a two character shortcut in my address bar thanks to DuckDuckGo.
    - Springtime 12y ago
      Direct browser addressbar searches do make it much easier to use a site's own search. Certainly for Wikipedia my keyword search of 'w <query>' is used daily to find things.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
  - XorNot 12y ago
    Pretty often. Site-specific searches are still more efficient then Google. StackExchange comes to mind.
smsm42 12y ago
There are other search engines than google. I'm using duckduckgo.com for years for searches. It occasionally misses some stuff, but so does google. And there are also Bing, Yandex, etc.
return0 12y ago
Yep, the celebrities are only a tiny tiny fraction of the people who don't want their online profiles/comments to be found. Removal from google makes it exceedingly harder to trace someone's possible online presences.
- happyscrappy 12y ago
  I don't understand who would choose to use the neutered euro-search when they can just go to the US site. Maybe they think people won't know.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
gumby 12y ago
> Removing something from Google search results effectively does remove it from the Internet. If you can't find something, then it may as well not exist. ... Well, if you believe the "social" hype[], people increasingly find info via shares from friends (e.g. Facebook posts). If I chose to make a Facebook post about Max Mosely (the "media figure in the United Kingdom" referred to in the article and strangely not mentioned by name) how could the "right to be forgotten" be applied? I think that even in Europe, that level of individual censorship would be unacceptable. [] BTW I don't believe "social discovery" is nuking general search. But it's an interesting "what if"

longlivegnu 12y ago

I am not sure everyone uses google :^), while a vast majority might there are other options

barkingcat 12y ago

this is an overgeneralised meme. Just because you can't find something on google doesn't mean that other people (who actually know of these site locations, or are the hosters of these sites, or are searching via different search engines) aren't accessing it. Google is also not the be all and end all of search. According to comscore (take with giant salt crystals) google has around 67% of the search market in the US. Now taking only the US, this means that there are around 33% of the web-going population in the US who could care less what google does with its index (because they simply never see it at all in the first place). Is irrelevance the biggest slap in the face? For some people even if google deletes their entire index, it wouldn't even make a difference.

rgbrenner 12y ago
Google's share of search in the EU is above 90%.

thisjepisje 12y ago

If you can't find something [through Google], then it may as well not exist. If, for example, a director wants their movie removed from Google search results, it will still show up in searches on imdb, wikipedia, rottentomatoes &c., and is thus accessible to quite a large number of internet users.

kbd 12y ago
Or you could always search Google via proxy to some jurisdiction that doesn't have these silly laws.
return0 12y ago
how often do you use wikipedia's or imbd's search function?
- 1971genocide 12y ago
  Quite Often, I frequently use wikipedia search, facebook search ( to find certain people ), bing search , github search, npm search,stack overflow search, reddit search. But yes I agree removing someone from google will make them less visible.
- learnstats2 12y ago
  At least once per day, each. Why would I use google to search wikipedia or imdb? Both of those sites have now got search engines that are very effective; I have a two character shortcut in my address bar thanks to DuckDuckGo.
  - Springtime 12y ago
    Direct browser addressbar searches do make it much easier to use a site's own search. Certainly for Wikipedia my keyword search of 'w <query>' is used daily to find things.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
- XorNot 12y ago
  Pretty often. Site-specific searches are still more efficient then Google. StackExchange comes to mind.

smsm42 12y ago

There are other search engines than google. I'm using duckduckgo.com for years for searches. It occasionally misses some stuff, but so does google. And there are also Bing, Yandex, etc.

return0 12y ago

Yep, the celebrities are only a tiny tiny fraction of the people who don't want their online profiles/comments to be found. Removal from google makes it exceedingly harder to trace someone's possible online presences.

happyscrappy 12y ago
I don't understand who would choose to use the neutered euro-search when they can just go to the US site. Maybe they think people won't know.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

gumby 12y ago

> Removing something from Google search results effectively does remove it from the Internet. If you can't find something, then it may as well not exist. ... Well, if you believe the "social" hype[], people increasingly find info via shares from friends (e.g. Facebook posts). If I chose to make a Facebook post about Max Mosely (the "media figure in the United Kingdom" referred to in the article and strangely not mentioned by name) how could the "right to be forgotten" be applied? I think that even in Europe, that level of individual censorship would be unacceptable. [] BTW I don't believe "social discovery" is nuking general search. But it's an interesting "what if"