It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Google begins censoring BitTorrent, RapidShare and other Big Media profanity

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Google begins censoring BitTorrent, RapidShare and other Big Media profanity


torrentfreak.com

It’s taken a while, but Google has finally caved in to pressure from the entertainment industries including the MPAA and RIAA. The search engine now actively censors terms including BitTorrent, torrent, utorrent, RapidShare and Megaupload from its instant and autocomplete services. The reactions from affected companies and services are not mild, with BitTorrent Inc., RapidShare and Vodo all speaking out against this act of commercial censorship.

google censorshipThe entertainment industries’ quest to root out piracy on the Internet has yet again resulted in commercial censorship. A few
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
ooo they are trying to kick the internet in the balls so it will get scared lets just hope they dont
get to the isps as they are trying.

torrentfreak.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by madmax8
 


It's only going to get worse.

I hate to see the day that they take sites like ATS down.

When SHTF I have a feeling that most sites will be closed if not all.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   
just went to google to try those key words and yup they don't auto show . These are the baby steps to internet censorship . Im proud to been have here with the birth of the internet when it was open , im ashamed to be here where it is now . This f'kn sucks , this blows really hard . I want to punch someone but of course that won't fix anything . Can we please get some intervention from someone!!!!



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Doesnt matter get yourself onto private communities so you search their uploads and stop feeding traffic through Google, get it up them



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I just tried it (from US, UK and CA datacenters) and well its not as bad as the article is making out.

First off all direct hotlinks to the effected domains aren't showing up in the autosearch results, but they are still showing up as soon as you actually hit enter to really do the search.

Secondly tons of sites that link to those sites are being displayed in their place in the autosearch results.

So yea, lol basically.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I liked the internet better when Search engines pulled up peoples personal pages.

Search engines are all commercialized now only showing parts of the internet that give them money.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Don't use Google? It's become a virtually worthless POS anyway. They not only censor but send you to places that have nothing to do with your search argument. And who knows what else.

Oh and start saving the actual IP addresses of the places you frequent so that you can get there if they block domain names (I think I got all that terminology right).

See what happens when they make it "easy" for you?
edit on 1/27/2011 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
This is all a mountain out of a mole-hill.

All they've done is block out these terms from the google suggestion box. You still get these sites if you type it in yourself, it just doesn't offer the prompt for these sites.

It does the same for pornographic sites, non-explicit sexual terms, and porn stars' names ( so someone told me, anyway
).


edit on 27-1-2011 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


Sure. It's not going further than what you state. Yet. And molehill or not, it will impact a good bit of traffic to these sites. It's not a good precedent.

Just because it does (has done) the same for the items you state doesn't mean it's okay. It also goes to prove that they're attempting to chip away at us one bit at a time.

That was okay yesterday, this is okay today...so going to be okay tomorrow? If you get my drift....
edit on 1/27/2011 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Don't use Google?


Thank you.

There are other search engines. Don't like Google's policies? Use another one. Simple.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
not commenting to the morale right or wrong of this or the subject matter of these sites... that said, with ALL the problems people in this country and abroad face, it's great that government finds time and effort to help out people like record industries and such. war, riots, hunger, even mysterious animal deaths, who cares! but god forbid somebody steals a justin bieber song!

yes I know the article dosen't site government outright, but people like hatch were pushing this type of stuff to the top for years.
edit on 27-1-2011 by wingsfan because: ...



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Sure. It's not going further than what you state. Yet. And molehill or not, it will impact a good bit of traffic to these sites. It's not a good precedent.


There is absolutely no indication that it will go further than that.

The fact that it will impact traffic to these sites is entirely the point, I would think. While the programs themselves aren't illegal, sites such as BitTorrent facilitate illegal downloading of copyrighted and illegal material.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
It also goes to prove that they're attempting to chip away at us one bit at a time.

That was okay yesterday, this is okay today...so going to be okay tomorrow? If you get my drift...


It doesn't prove that, though. That is a connection that you've personally drawn from this.

It could just as easily be interpreted as them not encouraging people to use a site that 99% of people are using for illegal purposes.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


There is absolutely evidence that they're chipping away at their own effectiveness and your freedom to decide for yourself.

But it's true...it's only their and their partner companies' in this endeavor products and values they're shooting in the foot. For now we still have choices, and if things work out, we always will.

The fact that they partner with other companies at all to block you from what's out there is entirely their choice. As it is ours not to use their products.

You might be making an assumption based you your own opinions that all of what the subject companies do in this case is illegal.
edit on 1/27/2011 by ~Lucidity because: typo



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
There is absolutely evidence that they're chipping away at their own effectiveness and your freedom to decide for yourself. But it's true...it's their own product and company they're shooting in the foot. For now we still have choices, and if things work out, we always will.


They're not chipping away at us being able to decide for ourselves.

The google suggestion box is just a feature that they added for browsing convenience, and if they want to filter out some search terms, then that is entirely their prerogative.

It doesn't impact anybody's freedom to search for what they want to.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Their product is not exactly working as implied if it's blocking things from their users' view or making decisions for them. Savvy users may be aware, many are not. Sorry. Guess we have to agree to disagree here.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
I use scroogle, does anyone know if it will apply to it as well?
I know it just scrapes google and doesn't hold info but im not sure how that would apply to this...
edit on 27-1-2011 by Solomons because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


No it wont, it only applies to results displayed live whilst your inputting a search term into the google search box (and only from inside a browser), Google Instant Results is the term for it. Google normal results are not effected, which are the results you get from Scroogle.

Also if you have a browser like Firefox or Opera and you use the inbuilt browser search feature (located on the top right of the window) rather than the web UI for Google search, you won't notice any difference.
edit on 27-1-2011 by maskfan because: added info

edit on 27-1-2011 by maskfan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by madmax8
 


We should have a list of search engines front and center on ATS, with links.

...Google is NOT the only game.




top topics



 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join