Further details would be nice. I have a feeling most of the requests are related to illegal content rather than politically offensive. In Brazil there's a Commission in Senate against child exploitation and they do block access to certain sites/networks. Guess removing them from the search engine is part of the job.
[citation][nom]K2N hater[/nom]Further details would be nice. I have a feeling most of the requests are related to illegal content rather than politically offensive. In Brazil there's a Commission in Senate against child exploitation and they do block access to certain sites/networks. Guess removing them from the search engine is part of the job.[/citation]
WikiLEAK: OMFG, WTF
Child exploitation and other stuff: Meh
Which situation do you think a typical government would sweat more?
@K2N hater: I did my homework and went and looked at the google report.
If you look at the report, you will see that in every case where children or hate speech is involved, google complied with the request.
Now, this one was funny:
"Canada - We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet. We did not comply with this request."
As a Canadian expatriate, I am glad to see that google is defending the right of my countrymen to protest in this naturalistic way.
I don't agree, you censor one thing and it just creeks the door closed more and more. People don't have to do anything on the net, they chooooose to do it. These take downs are nefarious and a stain on the internet.
It's a difficult balance - I agree with freedom of speech and how people should be able to do or say as they want, BUT who says that Google isn't becoming a law unto itself - who monitors what Google does.
After the 'we didn't intentionally capture peoples data' crap they gave over Google maps, does Google have the credibility to say what should and shouldn't be done.
You never know - has Google given you the full details?
[citation][nom]raven2510[/nom]Not surprised. They don't want us to know whats really going on.[/citation]
As a statement of the bleedin' obvious, that is, of course, true. By definition, someone who asks for something to be made less available is not wanting people to see it.
As a statement of the conspiratorial it's a big fail.
"Second on Google's government request list is the United States. Google received 117 court orders"
"They" - that nebulous conglomerate made up of many individual entities which, and who, are far more likely to be acting in their own interests than as one - issued fewer than one court order every day. Is that really sufficient repression for anyone who "doesn't want us to know what's really going on"? I think not.
I have a feeling that the Internet will soon loose the last bits of the freedom it has. We might have to wave farewell to Internet privacy and anonymity all because we have abused our freedom and ran irresponsibly wild. The government and its cronies might take away piracy, commercialize the Internet, or worse. I still will dearly fight for three things on the Internet: 1. UNHINDERED FLOW OF INFORMATION, 2. PRIVACY, 3. PORN