31 ms·
Yet the mechanism to "erase history" (in terms of referencing) is in place and Google controls it. As a citizen I would fell better knowing that a Law define w
by Twisell 11y ago
Yet the mechanism to "erase history" (in terms of referencing) is in place and Google controls it.
As a citizen I would fell better knowing that a Law define what can and cannot be erase instead of bargaining on the promise of a Big Company : "Don't be evil"
An ideal solution would be that an international treaty globaly redefine for the best all the laws about copyright which are all utterly outdated and inappropriate for digital media.
(RTBF is as far I know is in France either a part or an extension of copyrights laws)
- DannyBee 11y ago"Yet the mechanism to "erase history" (in terms of referencing) is in place and Google controls it. " Because the EU and france forced google to control it. They didn't want to control it at all. They tried desperately not to. They wanted the source of these stories to be responsible for what they publish, and be forced to update or remove the stories. Which seems much saner to me.
- Twisell 11y agoThis make sense. Now I get why EFF support this. The FUD and comparaison with China still bother me, but in the end they are right cause yeah indexing engine should be agnostic... But excuse me if I prefer DuckDuckGo over Google on that matter :P
- tptacek 11y agoYou're saying here that absent external requirements from governments, Google would never make any policy decisions about what was and wasn't revealed in its SERPs? I find that hard to believe. You're making a lot of sense in general and I don't think RTBF is good policy, but you might be overstating your case.