SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the is-a-cherub-also-child-pornography? dept.
Google has announced their new Adult Content Policy for Blogger...
Starting March 23, 2015, you won't be able to publicly share images and video that are sexually explicit or show graphic nudity on Blogger.
Note: We’ll still allow nudity if the content offers a substantial public benefit, for example in artistic, educational, documentary, or scientific contexts.
Changes you’ll see to your existing blogs:
If your existing blog doesn’t have any sexually explicit or graphic nude images or video on it, you won’t notice any changes.
If your existing blog does have sexually explicit or graphic nude images or video, your blog will be made private after March 23, 2015. No content will be deleted, but private content can only be seen by the owner or admins of the blog and the people who the owner has shared the blog with.
They also explain how a blog can be exported, presumably for use should you wish to change hosts.
https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/6170671?p=policy_update&hl=en&rd=1
Unfortunately, one man's art is another man's porn - so if you run a photography blog or just have images taken on the beach during your holidays you might want to back-up your data or recheck its contents.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Wednesday February 25 2015, @09:18PM
Well, sure. That's pretty clearly their goal. Get people to go elsewhere with those blogs.
But the questionable element is why. Why has Google decided that certain things are unfit for people to talk about on their blogs?
In general, I'm not a misunderstanding-free-speech-then-chastising-platforms-for-limiting-it zealot, but nominally, blogger is a platform and technology, and Google assumes no editorial oversight over anything else. I feel they have an obligation to justify their changes.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Jeremiah Cornelius on Wednesday February 25 2015, @09:25PM
Google is about to charge for Pr0n - it is in the 5-year plan, and the first stage is banning/blocking/filtering the freebies.
You're betting on the pantomime horse...
(Score: 3, Informative) by Jeremiah Cornelius on Wednesday February 25 2015, @09:26PM
Wraith Babes! 15 Million Merits!
You're betting on the pantomime horse...
(Score: 5, Funny) by VLM on Wednesday February 25 2015, @09:33PM
The problem with google taking over pr0n isn't the product itself, or even the name of the product which will probably have the oo in google replaced with a nice pair of (or maybe two goatse who knows)
The problem with google is it'll take over the biz, push all the competition out, then "pull a reader" three years later discontinuing it, and then generations of teen boys will have to grow up with no idea what the fun parts look like.
(Score: 5, Funny) by fadrian on Wednesday February 25 2015, @10:00PM
The problem with google is it'll take over the biz, push all the competition out, then "pull a reader" three years later discontinuing it, and then generations of teen boys will have to grow up with no idea what the fun parts look like.
It doesn't matter in the long run... porn routes around damage.
That is all.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 26 2015, @02:16AM
Oh, they will find out all right what the fun parts look like, and it won't be in a virtual system, either!
The parents of teenage girls will soon be doing whatever it takes to get the distractors back online.
How many gallons per minute of human sperm does the porn industry divert from its "natural" course, anyway? Anyone hazard a guess?
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Thursday February 26 2015, @07:57PM
The problem with google is it'll take over the biz, push all the competition out, then "pull a reader" three years later discontinuing it, and then generations of teen boys will have to grow up with no idea what the fun parts look like.
They'll have to start over again with ANSI & ASCII porn.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by frojack on Wednesday February 25 2015, @10:03PM
I suspect they did it to just automate the detection of certain things like child porn, revenge port, etc, without having to have even marginally sophisticated image filters. Probably getting too many take down demands to handle. Easier to just have their skin detectors running at ban everything mode.
Any thing that makes them need to spend human resources checking out complaints is ripe for the chopping block. Too many non-paying customers and too few employees.
With today's litigious society, even assigning an employee to undertake the task of checking out complaints can get you sued for workplace sexual harassment/misconduct.
And who knows what country will impose multi-billion dollar fines, or what extreme sect will start taking hostages, for violating their local version of religiously forbidden topics.
I wouldn't want to be in their shoes, trying to cow tau to every censorship demand from every corner of the world.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Thursday February 26 2015, @08:31PM
2015, the year bare human skin was made illegal. Truly, such a Brave New World. (Although ironically, in the novel, sex is used to appease the citizenry as entertainment.)
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Hairyfeet on Thursday February 26 2015, @02:24AM
I'll take "What is Google being Wall Street's bitch" for $400 Alex? Wall street has never liked "unsavory" businesses or anything sexual and since the IPO Google has cared more about the stock price than their actual users by a country mile.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.