Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 152 posts

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#131

Post by mblakele »

vbuterin wrote: post #85
brownbat wrote: post #74

Should Google try to interpret the ruling as closely as possible, only blocking the most clearly irrelevant information, and honoring requests for appeals from journalists whenever possible? That would limit damage to those seeking information, but risk another turn at the courts. Or should they just implement it as broadly and bluntly as possible, lowering their risk of noncompliance, reducing their costs of evaluat…

There should be a name for deliberately making a big fuss of following every regulation as expansively as possible to prove a point; inverse civil disobedience, civil obedience maybe?

There used to be, but it isn't PC: "white mutiny".

See also http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/79793/phrase-for-...

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#132

Post by grrowl »

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #115

I don't understand; did they single out Google, or does the ruling also apply to Bing, Yahoo, DuckDuckGo, Apple, Facebook, and many other companies that cache results? Search engines may cache information, but the content usually originates on some other hosting site. Those hundreds of thousands of hosting sites may still have the content, so what the Court is saying is all the more silly--you must disallow search re…

If they adopt an attitude like that, they'll run out of countries to remove themselves from in not long.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#133

Post by jqm »

lisper wrote: post #119
ewillbefull wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody got in trouble in the U.S. for reporting on/distributing the Snowden leaks. There weren't any newspaper raids. Nobody was asked to "keep quiet". Anyone who did censor did so out of mutual interest. Press freedoms have not been eviscerated here. It's a trendy narrative, but in reality you have enormous freedom to distribute content which was illegally obtained as per the Pentagon Papers cases and others. The wo…

> Nobody was asked to "keep quiet" Given the existence of NSL's ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_security_letter ) there is no way of knowing who has been "asked" to keep quiet. And when Glenn Greenwald visited the U.S. recently it was far from clear that he would not be taken into custody.

Right?

If they were asked to "keep quite" maybe we don't know about it huh?

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#134

Post by andrewfong »

DasIch wrote: post #120
andrewfong wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? People change their names all the time (e.g. for marriage or religious reasons), so there's existing precedence for this. During the name change process, you get a certificate of name change, so that helps with issues with bank account names, contracts, etc. Your friends and family may still refer to you by your old name, but that's generally not an issue from a "right to forget" standpoint. The only differe…

In the US that might be the case, that doesn't make it so in other countries. In Germany the scenarios in which you are allowed to change your name are all defined by law. While you are allowed to change your name for resocialization or as a protection against harassment, you can get search results removed for reasons that wouldn't allow a name change. Furthermore changing your name takes quite a bit of effort, askin…

To be clear, my original post was normative. As a policy, the law should favor name changes over a right to demand Google remove a search listing.

> Furthermore changing your name takes quite a bit of effort, asking a search engine to remove search results is a much simpler process.

Simpler for you, but not for the search engine! Or for society as a whole. More to the point, it should not be easy to erase your name from the Internet. The right to be forgotten is easily abused, and it should be invoked as a last resort not the first.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#135

Post by fortuitous »

rsiqueira wrote: post #124

I also received (yesterday) this same message from Google: Subject: [Webmaster Tools] Notice of removal from Google Search "We regret to inform you that we are no longer able to show the following pages from your website in response to certain searches on European versions of Google: [one url with a post in my site] For more information, see www.google .com/policies/faq/?hl=en The post in my site that was blocked by…

chomps on popcorn

This can only get better.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#136

Post by fortuitous »

josephlord wrote: post #32
gadders wrote: post #7

The EU really is a joke. I think if people want to hide stuff like revenge porn, or obvious slander, then fair enough. But unindexing legitimate journalism is stupid.

I think there are games being played here. The European Court ruled that some things should be made harder to find (revenge porn, obvious slander, spent convictions etc.). Google don't want to do this and are trying to make a mockery of the ruling removing from the results anything that they are asked to as long as it is about a person with the very aim of stirring a backlash against the ruling. Requests to take down…

Yes, it's evil google's fault. Maybe you can be a peach and come up with a better implementation than doesn't require all google employees to work on this full time.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#137

Post by magicalist »

lisper wrote: post #119
ewillbefull wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody got in trouble in the U.S. for reporting on/distributing the Snowden leaks. There weren't any newspaper raids. Nobody was asked to "keep quiet". Anyone who did censor did so out of mutual interest. Press freedoms have not been eviscerated here. It's a trendy narrative, but in reality you have enormous freedom to distribute content which was illegally obtained as per the Pentagon Papers cases and others. The wo…

> Nobody was asked to "keep quiet" Given the existence of NSL's ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_security_letter ) there is no way of knowing who has been "asked" to keep quiet. And when Glenn Greenwald visited the U.S. recently it was far from clear that he would not be taken into custody.

Just to be clear, NSLs are largely unregulated by the judiciary and are frequently overbroad in the information they demand, but they aren't arbitrary gag orders.

They can keep you silent about the fact that you got an NSL (and that therefore there's an investigation going on), but not about the content itself.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#138

Post by magicalist »

exbbc wrote: post #78

Indeed it is clumsy because the media is exempt of this ruling. Which makes me suspect this was an easy way of drawing some media attention, and spreading misinformation.

The media is exempt from having to censor their own stories, but search engines are not exempt from removing links to media stories.

The whole ruling was about forcing google to remove links to news stories about Costeja González.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#139

Post by Dylan16807 »

ewillbefull wrote: post #112
josephlord wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are games being played here. The European Court ruled that some things should be made harder to find (revenge porn, obvious slander, spent convictions etc.). Google don't want to do this and are trying to make a mockery of the ruling removing from the results anything that they are asked to as long as it is about a person with the very aim of stirring a backlash against the ruling. Requests to take down…

> On the one hand Google's results can cause a lot of damage Public, factual information causes damage and Google is responsible because somebody else reported on it and they indexed it? And so Google should stop linking to the article which will still exist and can be found on other search engines in other jurisdictions without any effort? And we can pretend online censorship works all of a sudden now that the EU fo…

I wouldn't classify automatically generated results as expression.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#140

Post by Dylan16807 »

jim-greer wrote: post #59
troels wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For starters, they could require a court order for each case. That would certainly limit the amount of requests.

That sequencing is probably not in compliance with the law. The fact sheet put out by the European high court makes it explicit: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/files/factsheets... "In practice, a search engine will have to delete information when it receives a specific request from a person affected... Google will then have to assess the deletion request on a case-by-case basis and to apply the criteria…

I interpreted 'they' as the lawmakers, not google.
Post reply on HN