Google Image Index Just Not Updated

We ran a story earlier today about the lack of Abu Ghraib photos in Google's image index. We now have a response from Google stating that the image index simply hasn't been updated recently, as well as a fairly convincing demonstration from a Slashdot reader: Rahga writes "I put together a page that counters the 'Google Censors Abu Ghraib Images' story. It is the tale of a Morgan Webb picture on images.google.com that's been driving a ton of traffic to my webserver 7 months after it was removed." The Abu Ghraib story broke in April 2004 (and officially became a non-story on November 2, 2004), so Google's index is indeed quite far behind.

Comments

Just because Slashdot says it doesn't make it true

[LostCluster]

This just goes to show that /. groupthink isn't always on target, and Google isn't the all-spidering oracle we think it is either.

Google's image search is not to be confused with Google's news search. If you search for Lyndie England against the news search, one of the pictures in question comes up in a thumbnail next to the first set of results. Google had plently of coverage of the Abu Ghraib story on its news pages, and its web search also has plenty of coverage of the topic. If Google was intentionally censoring, you think they woulda tagged all their search engines in the process.

For Google to be 6-months or more behind on reindexing their image storage to me seems about right. The link rot on the image search is starting to get annoying, but we've seen worse from the likes of Alta Vista in the past. Webcrawling seems simple but it's a very bandwidth intense process, and that means it costs money. Image spidering is even more expensive because pictures take up a whole lot more bitspace than HTML docs.

So, move that Slashdot story from earlier today from the Censorship category to the Almighty Buck category. That's the real reason why the pictures weren't there.

Re:Can you say dupe?

[LostCluster]

Seriously why does this need a new story? What was wrong with the update posted to the previous article summary?

Because in journalism there's a tradition of printing retractions for mistakes made on page A1 on a future page A1 in order to give the takeback as much exposure as the mistake. Slashdot leveled a rather serious charge of censorship against Google that quickly was proven not to be true.

Furthermore, there's a new piece of news coming out of this mess: Google's being quite slow on the refresh of the image search database.

Re:non-story?

[mitchus]

Slashdot is slowly turning into a left-wing version of Fox.
Yes, excellent comparison. Fox also allows critical discussion of the news in situ. Fox also updates erroneus news with immediate apologies. Last but not least, Fox viewers are also of above-average intellect and critical judgment.

the original story was just a ploy by Taco to bash US policy
Who had the tendency towards conspiracy theories again? :)

Huh what?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

The Abu Ghraib story broke in April 2004 (and officially became a non-story on November 2, 2004)

To simpletons in the American electorate, that might be true. But, if anything, Nov 2nd made the story much more relevant to about a billion muslims who view it as proof positive that the current US government may talk a good story, but where it counts, in real life, their actions are a whole lot different.

Re:Huh what?

[Trailer Trash]

You (and many others) may have missed the fact that Lynddie and her fuck buddy are rotting in a military prison awaiting trial, and some of their accomplices have already been sentenced.

Compare this country to anywhere on earth. Go ahead. Some Israeli soldier put 20 bullets through the head of a 13-year-old girl (who had already been shot in the leg and was struggling to get away) last month and he got a reprimand for losing the confidence of his subordinates. That's par for the course.

When was the last time you heard of any other country that disciplined its military people for war crimes? Seriously.

I'm not saying the US Army is perfect, and I think that too many innocent people have died that could have been avoided. But you people act like it was a fucking frat party with Saddam in power until we came and messed it all up.

Making men do fake sex acts is disgusting, but compared to Saddam's meat grinder, electrocution rooms, chemical baths, Uday's iron maiden, and the rest of it, this seems a bit tame. And our soldiers are still facing charges over it. Which is how it should be.

But get a grip, people.

Re:Huh what?

[hyfe]

When was the last time you heard of any other country that disciplined its military people for war crimes? Seriously.

During WWII, under the german occupation of Norway, a girl was raped by a german soldier in my hometown Horten.

Some citizens complain to the Commander of the garrison there. Within days he had tracked down the guilty soldier. The following day the soldier was promptly executed publically in the town square.

Re:Huh what?

[shking]

When was the last time you heard of any other country that disciplined its military people for war crimes? Seriously.

You mean like in 1995, when Canada disbanded an entire regiment and put soldiers on trial?

Your bluster just demonstrates that, like many Americans, you are profoundly ignorant about what goes on in the the rest of the world... or for that matter, right next door. Next you'll be telling us that europeans are lucky not to have experienced terrorism first hand. In fact, they've been living with it for more than 30 years. Ever hear of the IRA or Bader-Meinhof?

Re:Just because Slashdot says it doesn't make it t

[Anonymous Coward]

This just goes to show that /. groupthink isn't always on target,

Actually, just the opposite. An inaccurate story was posted, and it was torn apart by the comments. The hive-mind that is slashdot preformed quite well, IMHO.

Re:Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

[VistaBoy]

Someone mod this guy up. Probably the most insightful thing I've read in the past week.

There are two problems with our current state of politics:

1. Constant attempts to one-dimensionalize views so people can be labelled easier.
2. Extreme, uncompromising views on these fake one-dimensional issues. You either want to dump mercury into seawater, or you're a tree hugging hippie. You're either a fundamentalist religious zealot, or a godless heathen. Et cetera.

I think someone needs to start a "Compromise" party so sensible people can vote. For instance, if we

Re:where does it say this?

[LiquidCoooled]

Search for "litigious bastards".

The top result is SCO. Do you REALLY think they would have that in text anywhere on their site?