Bing Gets Porn Domain To Filter Explicit Content

sopssa writes "Bing has set up a separate domain just for porn images and videos. '[The] general manager of Microsoft Bing said in a blog post that potentially explicit images and video content now will be coming from one separate domain — explicit.bing.net. 'This is invisible to the end customer, but allows for filtering of that content by domain which makes it much easier for customers at all levels to block this content regardless of what the SafeSearch settings might be.' When Bing was first launched, there was some online chatter about explicit images popping up when videos were 'previewed' in the search results. This means the thumbnails and videos are served from that domain, allowing easy filter of them in corporate and school networks. Users still normally use www.bing.com. Instead of heavily filtering the results, this is quite a good move."

Comments

Awesome!

[SupremoMan]

I'm tired of non-explicit images ruining my Google searches!

Re:Awesome!

[Jurily]

This is invisible to the end customer, but allows for filtering of that content by domain which makes it much easier for customers at all levels to block this content regardless of what the SafeSearch settings might be.

So I'm guessing one level of costumers is ISPs and governments.

Re:Awesome!

[machine321]

Most pornography contains people not wearing their costumes.

Re:Awesome!

[Anonymous Coward]

You replied out of context.

Re:Awesome!

[Anonymous Coward]

Most pornography contains people not wearing their costumes.

Tell that to the furries

Re:Awesome!

[Fulminata]

Why is the parent modded "Offtopic"?

Aside from the typo, that's exactly what I thought when reading the summary.

There are some other good points later in this discussion about the way bing works making this necessary for parental controls to work, but it would also make filtering out such results easier at the level of ISPs and governments as well.

Hrmmm

[Narkov]

Is the reverse possible? I.e. explicit content only??!! :)

Re:Hrmmm

[sam0737]

Use greasemonkey/AdBlock to remove all images from bing.com but whitelist explicit.bing.com? At least that would save you some bandwidth in downloading non-explicit content.

Re:Hrmmm

[asCii88]

Is the reverse possible? I.e. explicit content only??!! :)

I'm guessing from the summary it's explicit.bing.com

Re:Hrmmm

[_merlin]

Just tried it - explicit.bing.com gives you SFW and NSFW - using that domain is just like saying "switch off safe search". AFAICT, there's no "unsafe search" option.

Re:Hrmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, there is already PornTube, PornoTube, YouPorn, RedTube, XTube, etc etc...

(shamefully posting as AC)

Re:Hrmmm

[asCii88]

Just tried it - explicit.bing.com gives you SFW and NSFW - using that domain is just like saying "switch off safe search". AFAICT, there's no "unsafe search" option.

Then somebody has to come up with an algorithm that does the same search on both domains and displays the complement of the intersection of the results.

Re:Hrmmm

[_merlin]

There's one of those for Google here.

Re:Hrmmm

[Rude Turnip]

I've heard about MagicTeapot.com

Re:Hrmmm

[AvitarX]

Well I heard about your mom, so we're even.

probably should be AC here, but oh well.

Re:Hrmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Most recent searches: spanking kids spanking children spanking

I'd rather not know.

Re:Hrmmm

[CarpetShark]

Use AdBlock to completely disable *.bing.com

There, fixed that for you.

Re:Hrmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be funny if the following worked, but alas, it produces no results:

http://images.google.com/images?q=site:explicit.bing.net

Re:Hrmmm

[hcdejong]

Speaking of which: the results pages on the Google Image part of that site use a script to show full-size images when you click on a thumbnail. Unfortunately, the script also triggers when you Ctrl-click (in Firefox, to load the link into a new tab) and even when you right-click.
Is there a way to defeat this script?

Re:Hrmmm

[geminidomino]

Have to look deeper into it, but it looks like the gallery page is generated by the javascript itself, so an outright block won't do it.

It seems to be running lightbox

Re:Hrmmm

[geminidomino]

I was wrong. The lightbox script overlays the annoying-click gallery over the existing one, so adblocking lightbox.js makes it work as one might expect.

Re:Hrmmm

[CAIMLAS]

So much for the hopes that MS might actually implement a relevant and useful feature their clients want!

I wonder...

[qpawn]

What are the odds the explicit site is mirrored on Steve Ballmer's personal computer?

To be or not to be...

[pegdhcp]

... an explicit content provider. I guess soon Linux related content would be served by nasty.bing.net, just in case...

Re:To be or not to be...

[GreenTech11]

Didn't you hear? Slashdot is not coming to you from explicit.bing.net! We welcome our new filtering overlords.

Please sit down and discuss how great Windows Vista is, bonus points for mention the Mojave Experiment. Oh, and if you are running any variant of linux, our new super computer will overwrite it with a brand new copy of Vista for you almost free of charge. Microsoft, controlling your life since you were born.

Re:To be or not to be...

[TapeCutter]

"Microsoft, controlling your life since you were born."

Get off my lawn!

How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[JustinKSU]

How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

That would be an interesting job. Microsoft Smut Engineer. Wait, I think that's what they already call MS Office developers...

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[ILongForDarkness]

Well for example a slashdot post explaining in explicit detail why a MS product is crap will be automatically filtered as explicit content.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[l2718]

The easiest way is using the "keywords" META tag which I'm sure is used by most explicit sites to self-identify. The problem of determining the semantic content of a site (not to speak of interpreting images) is hard, but "Safe searches" of various kinds have been around for a long time so I'm sure there's been some progress on the text processing side. I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your answer explains "what" not "how"

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[mcfatboy93]

Anything without the words 'Microsoft', 'Windows', 'Vista', 'Office', 'insert any Microsoft product here'

way to go for marketing

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[asCii88]

Your answer explains "what" not "how"

Prolly much like Google SafeSearch does. Exept that with a bulkier, buggier and messier code.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft Smut Engineer. Wait, I think that's what they already call MS Office developers...

We need a certification program so people can call themselves Microsoft CERTIFIED Smut Engineer, or MCSE for short.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[Thinboy00]

The easiest way is using the "keywords" META tag which I'm sure is used by most explicit sites to self-identify.

Except that goatse won't do that.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[fotoguzzi]

Try "pile driver."

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[SolitaryMan]

Well, laugh all you want, but where I work (our company does search.... kinda...) we have this position :) At least some sort of it.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[Barny]

Oh yes, they have worked out a cross-certification deal with /b/ residents, please expect official papers to arrive via certified post any day now.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[Aqualung812]

I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.

I remember seeing a demo at COMDEX that was designed to do exactly that, in 2000. It did false on swimsuits, but not much else.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Good question... The poster says that this is quite a good move on Microsoft's part, because the domain can easily be blocked, but that ignores the simple fact that it all hinges on MS *identifying* explicit content and making it come from that domain. This is really not much different than having a safe-search option or anything else on their side. All it does differently is that it makes it possible for someone on the client side to prevent non-admin users from turning safe search off (such as in a school or library, etc).

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[Tribbin]

"I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude."

Or even more so; even a human can't sometimes tell the difference between a guy and a gal, until it's too late and your excitement is ruined.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[RegularFry]

Nudes? Please, have some ambition!

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[dodongo]

That would be an interesting job. Microsoft Smut Engineer.

Heh. I've actually done this; not for Microsoft, but another search company (for a _real_ search company, one might say to get in a cheap shot ;)

It's actually not nearly as much fun as it sounds. At some point, your soul just feels dirty -- it's not just porn; depending on the strength of the filter, you could also be looking for drugs, innuendo (OK, I really like the innuendo...), hate sites, etc. Hate sites are the worst.

While blocking the domain really does sound like a nice feature for anyone running a network they want to lock down, this of course doesn't block the explicit content from any other search engine. And it's relying on dolts like me (only they work for Microsoft) to make it happen. I hope they have a lot of dolts. There's a damn lot of explicit stuff out there!

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.

I think this is actually quite possible. iPhoto (and possibly Picasa, I'm not sure) can detect faces on photos and can identify them. This could be adapted to detect boobs instead of faces, and verify that it's a boob by matching against a database.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[gzipped_tar]

Easy. y = f(x) --> explicit. f(x, y) = 0 --> implicit.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[CarpetShark]

How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

I'm guessing their definition is something like "Well, no one's buying the whole bing thing, so put up whatever porn will get people there."

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[geminidomino]

For a geek website, we don't get nearly enough calculus jokes.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[soliptic]

I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.

I'm not an expert and can't even be bothered to google for confirmation of my vague memories, but I'm pretty sure it can easily identify a nude. What it can't do is distinguish between, say, this and, well... you probably have your own bookmarks.

As the saying goes, obscenity is whatever gives a judge an erection.

Re:How does Microsoft define what is 'explicit'?

[Plug]

Will Meat Loaf?

One hell of a statement

[jw3]

"Microsoft is never done when it comes to providing tools to help customers, whether they are large enterprises, local school districts or parents" - Mike Nichols, general manager of Microsoft Bing.

Never done.
Yep, sounds informative.

j.

Re:One hell of a statement

[kj_kabaje]

Never done or always in beta,... that is the question. Probably the answer, too, since continual improvement (or so it's said) is a good thing.

Re:One hell of a statement

[jonaskoelker]

Microsoft is never done when it comes to providing tools

Yeah, most of their products seem rather unfinished...

Re:One hell of a statement

[Anonymous Coward]

"Microsoft is never done trying to find new ways to screw their users and kill any competitors no matter how lsrge or small small they may be"

There, fixed the quote for ya!

Re:One hell of a statement

[Anonymous Coward]

sig in sig field, dippy. Who wants to read "j" after every one of your posts? No one.

Several uses

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone realise how easy this makes it for Governments/Institutions to protect you from thoughtcrime? I'd wager that is actually Microsofts main intended user, not individuals/concerned parents. Microsoft: the only halfway innovative technologies they ever come up with are tools of repression.

Re:Several uses

[HaZardman27]

Actually I don't see how this would make it any easier for said institutions and governments at all. Regardless of what Microsoft deems as explicit, bing is just one of many venues from which to obtain information and media on the internet. Also, big brother-ing people to protect them from thought-crime would only serve to further alienate users from the internet, and thus, their computers; how would this serve Microsoft's interests at all?

Re:Several uses

[westlake]

First, an observation:

It would surely have amused - but not surprised - Orwell to hear cries of "Thoughtcrime!" raised when a real crime is being prosecuted.

I'd wager that is actually Microsofts main intended user, not individuals/concerned parents. Microsoft: the only halfway innovative technologies they ever come up with are tools of repression.

This is just too much.

But you got it half right.

If you want to control the user, you don't begin with the client, you begin with the server.

The network. The backbone.

That is why the administrator is universally despised.

But on which side of the equation will you usually find the geek - and *NIX?

Fear of MS Bob Hope *grips* Google

[David Gerard]

Microsoft today heeded the lessons of technological history, taking the popular "preview porn videos in the search engine" feature and turning its Bob Hope search engine into a porn finder at the address explicit.bobhope.microsoft.com.

"It worked for VHS over Beta, porn sites were leading innovators in online payments. It's a natural synergy," said Steve Ballmer, looking somewhat sweaty and flushed.

Porn sites are some of the keenest users of Microsoft technologies, using the undocumented interfaces in Internet Explorer to install helpful toolbars and bulk email tools on users' systems. "It's all about tools. Developers, developers, developers, developers!"

Windows 7 final will include a "boot straight into porn" mode. "We found that was what users really wanted in an operating system." It will include the Storm, Conficker and FBI botnets as standard. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

Mr Ballmer promised that Microsoft will, as always, deliver. "Unlike porn sites, we don't just tease — we really will fuck you. Totally."

Re:Fear of MS Bob Hope *grips* Google

[Anonymous Coward]

said Steve Ballmer, looking somewhat sweaty and flushed.

ahahahahhaha

Re:Fear of MS Bob Hope *grips* Google

[NotBornYesterday]

Windows 7 final will include a "boot straight into porn" mode.

Finally! A new Windows feature that is actually useful.

good idea

[ILongForDarkness]

I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn. Okay when I'm at home but when I'm at work ... not so cool.

Re:good idea

[SpinyNorman]

This Bing change won't help with that.

I don't expect that the image or video results you get with Bing vs Google at any preferred level of "safe search" filtering are much different, and that's not going to change with this announcement.

All the Bing change does, rather belatedly, is stop overriding parental controls (Open DNS, Net Nanny, etc) that would block porn domains. What happens up until now is that Bing self-hosts all it's image/video thumbnails from it's own servers - porn included - and starts to play these thumbnail videos automatically - direct from Microsoft's servers - when you mouseover them. Since the videos are coming from a Microsoft domain rather than a porn domain, parental porn filters are bypassed.

All the Bing change does is to move Microsoft's porn video reviews from bing.com to microsofts-hard-core-porn-server.bing.com so that Open DNS, Net Nanny, etc can once again be used to block this stuff.

Re:good idea

[L4t3r4lu5]

Rule 34

That site now exists, and the content isn't half bad.

Re:good idea

[ILongForDarkness]

Interesting. I didn't know they hosted the content. When you maximize a video it seems to be a plugin from youtube or whatever. Is this only for the thumbnail view then?

Re:good idea

[SpinyNorman]

Yep - this is just the thumbnails on the Bing search results page.

Re:good idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Chances are that both your boss and your coworkers know that the internet is full of porn and you cannot always avoid it. Unless of course they are one of those "think of the children" hypocrites ...

Re:good idea

[pbhj]

[...] Bing self-hosts all it's image/video thumbnails from it's own servers - porn included - and starts to play these thumbnail videos automatically - direct from Microsoft's servers - when you mouseover them. Since the videos are coming from a Microsoft domain rather than a porn domain, parental porn filters are bypassed.

All the Bing change does is to move Microsoft's porn video reviews from bing.com to microsofts-hard-core-porn-server.bing.com so that Open DNS, Net Nanny, etc can once again be used to block this stuff.

When are they going to be sued for copyright infringement then?

It can't be long now surely. Everyone go and search bing for RIAA managed songs on video. Perhaps we can get these snakes to simultaneously eat each other??!

Re:good idea

[digitalchinky]

I'm not sure if this is a BOFH thing or just a plain old bastardly thing in general, but it is always worth a bit of a chuckle modifying the HR prudes search engine to display unfiltered content.

Re:good idea

[george929a]

I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn. Okay when I'm at home but when I'm at work ... not so cool.

....then stop searching for "Big hard disks"....

Re:good idea

[dna_(c)(tm)(r)]

I hate it when I type pretty much anything in for an image search in google and I end up with porn. Okay when I'm at home but when I'm at work ... not so cool.

My advice: spell check before you submit 'pretty much anal thing'. I've never had porn results whe searching for images on google yet...

Re:good idea

[Rockoon]

Microsoft isn't a poor old lady with no chance to defend herself, so no.. they would not go after Microsoft.

I am still suprised that Microsoft hasnt gotten into the p2p file sharing arena. Its the sort of thing they could dominate rather easily via simple bundling, and I dont even think the RIAA would consider going after them. Just make it gnutella-like with no central tracker and winning against it will be quite difficult because of the deep pocket effect.

Re:good idea

[nem75]

Probably stating the obvious, but Google's search has filter options for explicit content, too.

Re:good idea

[kid_oliva]

What exactly are you typing in that porn is popping up? Me thinks that you forget you are at work.

Re:good idea

[DaRanged]

I like how both Google and Bing are determined to make a fool out of you by showing you the error (and results!) of your ways...

<Bing>
Results are included for dicks. Show just the results for disks.
</Bing>

<Google>
Did you mean: dicks ..
Did you mean to search for: dicks
</Google>

Google also likes to rub it in.... ;-)

Re:good idea

[jonbryce]

http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/groove/FX100487641033.aspx

Re:good idea

[secondhand_Buddah]

Um, turn safe search on.

Re:good idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Never had porn results?

C'mon. The keywords aren't that hard to figure out. You can do it.

Re:good idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone go and search bing for RIAA managed songs on video. Perhaps we can get these snakes to simultaneously eat each other??!

First we have to get both RIAA and Microsoft on a plane.

Re:good idea

[HaZardman27]

I don't know what you're searching for, but when I search for images on google, unless I have SafeSearch off, I don't get the results you're describing. Even when the filter is off, I'm still very rarely bombarded with pornographic content.

Re:good idea

[pbhj]

lol

Re:good idea

[polle404]

I hate when i get pr0n off any search at home... at work, sure, but when I'm home
...i have better things to do.

Re:good idea

[againjj]

Turn on safe search: http://images.google.com/preferences You do not even have to be logged in.

Re:good idea

[wvmarle]

There have been similar law suits against Google's image search - at least I recall some porn magazines that saw their thumbnailed images appear on Google and were not happy with it. Sorry I'm too lazy to look them up, but the very existence of Google Image Search means that there is no big problem here. Storing/showing thumbnail images while linking to the original is probably considered fair use.

Re:good idea

[ILongForDarkness]

Really? Type in pretty much any celebrity and you'll end up with pages of look a likes photoshop or leaked sextapes. I get that crap occasionally at work because people will be telling me about a show I've never heard of and say you know that girl from ... is in it. Mhh, I get that even more because it is a new continent for me (so everything seems to be different oddly enough).

Re:good idea

[ILongForDarkness]

Not the same thing. One is a user level setting, the other exposes the type of content in an easy to block with the corporate firewall manner. I might not have control over the setting you use for google, but if I know that bad crap is coming from explicit.bing.com then I just need to add that site to my filter list.

Re:good idea

[ILongForDarkness]

My understanding though if you aren't logged in the settings go away with time (cookie expires?). I have this problem occasionally too, once a month or so I start getting redirected to google.de (I'm in Germany) until I switch it back to google.com and then it goes away. The safe search settings don't stick either.

Along with that my computer is a dual-use system, it is the laptop I use at work and home. I don't want filtered content at home but I do at work. It is a pain to remember to switch the settings back and forth.

Re:good idea

[ILongForDarkness]

Things people tell me to. Boss says oh this show is funny, this guy is in it or whatever. I ask him who that is and he tells me to google it. Blam goatsy'd.

Re:good idea

[kid_oliva]

Me thinks your boss thinks he's very funny

just use booble

[lecithin]

go to booble.com

Re:just use booble

[_merlin]

On your advice, I just tried booble. I have to say, it's complete rubbish. For each search I tried, all the hits on the first page were advertising, and none of them were even advertising anything remotely related to what I searched for. If you're using a search engine, you want relevant results - not just random advertising.

Re:just use booble

[nkcaump]

Maybe badda-bing.com???

Re:just use booble

[trollocks]

That's funny, it worked perfectly when I searched for "your mom"!

Re:just use booble

[Anonymous Coward]

How about bang.bing.com?

Re:just use booble

[Own3d-You]

No, it's badda-boom.com

A nuclear blaster can point both ways

[janwedekind]

I guess they found a much more lucrative application for parental controls.

I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[Starayo]

Isn't that technically a subdomain?

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[Opportunist]

Well, in this context, in my experience more a domsubain... I mean, or so I heard.

(ok, it's lame, but this asked for a BDSM joke and I coudn't come up with a better one)

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[n1hilist]

With jokes like that, you must really be strapped for cash ;)

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[Barny]

You think an MCSE could tell the difference?

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[H0p313ss]

I think you're just beating a dead horse.

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[Schadrach]

Oh, god, horrible mental images. My brain just kind of fused the parent, GP, and GGP into one *thing* and got a dominatrix with a strap on making her sub beat off a dead horse. I need to go bleach my brain now.

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[Remus Shepherd]

The question is, are any images like the ones in your brain available on Bing right now?

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[The Archon V2.0]

Oh, god, horrible mental images. My brain just kind of fused the parent, GP, and GGP into one *thing* and got a dominatrix with a strap on making her sub beat off a dead horse. I need to go bleach my brain now.

Don't knock it. If they ever invent a way to hook an inkjet printer right to your brain, you can make a lot of cash with those images!

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[Opportunist]

Do you know how many artists would lose their income from such an invention?

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[The Iso]

The ability to translate ideas on to paper is important, but the ability to compose an image in the first place is even more important. It's the difference between learning to play an instrument and learning to write a song.

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[rizole]

BDSM? Isn't that some kinda operating system...?

Re:I'm anal (and not in the fun way) so...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, but a subdomain is still a domain. Also if you closely RTFS, you'll note that the "porn mode" domain is a subdomain of bing.net, not bing.com.

PR Stroke of Genius!

[Necroloth]

What a way to get into the hearts and hands of millions of users worldwide! I think they'll be finding the usage of Bing shoot up dramatically but I'd like to see the comparison between normal Bing and xXx Bing!

Re:PR Stroke of Genius!

[Anonymous Coward]

Stroke? Into the hands? Shoot up? Did you mean to include so much innuendo in your post?

Re:PR Stroke of Genius!

[W33B]

Absolutely!

When I first read about this yesterday my gut reaction was to immediatly go to bing and search for porn (after turning off the filtering of course)...

...and seeing as the speed of this thread is relatively slow for slashdot, i'm betting geeks around the world are doing the exact same thing.

Marketing Genius....long live the porn providers!!!

Re:PR Stroke of Genius!

[L4t3r4lu5]

normal Bing and xXx Bing

Must be a Vin Diesel thing.

Re:PR Stroke of Genius!

[westlake]

What a way to get into the hearts and hands of millions of users worldwide!

An adolescent obsession with porn seems to be one of the defining qualities of the geek.

Playing against the stereotype can be very profitable. Case in point: The Wii and the hard-core gamer.

Google already came up with a better way

[tumbleweedsi]

Google just make sure they let the filtering people know how to categorise the pages based on if Safesearch is on or off. On my filter I can choose to block google images entirely or just when safesearch is off and that works just fine without needing another domain name.

Re:Google already came up with a better way

[Aladrin]

That works great for individual users. This is -not- meant for individuals. This is meant for companies, schools, etc. You can block that domain at your firewall/proxy/dns/whatever and make -sure- none of your users see it, no matter what settings they choose.

Re:Google already came up with a better way

[tumbleweedsi]

Sorry, I wasn't being clear. My network proxy which I run on the network of an enterprise storage company allows me to block pages when safesearch is off. That means that the users can do whatever they like in google images but as soon as they turn off the safe search the results pages are blocked until they turn it back on. I know there are a lot of the "mom's basement" sorts around on slashdot but please don't assume I am one of them.

Re:Google already came up with a better way

[dave420]

Wouldn't it just be easier to block access to a single hostname than all of that malarkey? It would fit in with every single web-filtering piece of software out of there.

Re:Google already came up with a better way

[Anonymous Coward]

You just happen to like it better.

I would bet a lot of money that the only factor that matters to him is the name of the company involved.

Re:Google already came up with a better way

[jaseuk]

Yes it would.. I quite agree with Microsoft's idea, it's a good one. Much better than analysing URLs / cookies etc. to detect the Safesearch status.

Re: Details on MS products

[TaoPhoenix]

Come on gang, forget the snark below his post, this guy has a piece of the puzzle right! MS can lever the threat to "accidentally" label polka spotted portions of the web as "explicit" while daring the global web community to figure it out!

While he's funny with the MS-product side, they can accept payments to label ANYTHING as explicit! Wheee!!

Re:BadAnalogyGuy

[Anonymous Coward]

BadAnalogyGuy has gone to ground after being outed as a Scientologist. But if he should contact you, offering a free personality test, firmly refuse him.

Thanks, but you don't have to worry. I have no personality.

Re: Details on MS products

[ILongForDarkness]

Or for example, they really want to do business in China so they label anything "free Tibet" explicit, etc etc.ÂIt is a good idea in the sense that it can give better control of what goes over your network. But it is very open to abuse.

Dingding, we have a winner

[Anonymous Coward]

For given content access pathway X, define owner of X as a winner if X leads most easily to the highest quality porn.

A SEPARATE domain for obscene content...

[Klistvud]

... coming from the corporation with the most obscene business model in the IT industry? Doesn't that come across as just a tiny bit redundant? *[For those still unaware of Microsoft's obscenities, you just have to hop over to boycottnovell.com or groklaw.com]

Re:A SEPARATE domain for obscene content...

[David Gerard]

You are obviously a sockpuppet of David Gerard.

Re:A SEPARATE domain for obscene content...

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew he was a fraud. I could tell because his wife looked like a woman, rather than a walrus with a red wig.

Surreal

[berpi]

Who's got the explicitometer to decide which domain to place content in? Censorship is getting increasingly surreal.

Re:Surreal

[ScentCone]

Censorship is getting increasingly surreal.

Maybe it is, or maybe it isn't. But this thread had nothing to do with censorship. We're talking about a private web site run by a business. They are under absolutely no obligation to show, index, or communicate anything in a particular way. Serving the thumbnails off of a separate domain doesn't censor anything. It changes nothing unless you take some extra step yourself to block traffic coming from that domain. Regardless, it's not the government, there's no force involved... it's not censorship. People who use that word in this context are just displaying their ongoing ignorance of what censorship actually is, and their ignorance of the difference between a business tailoring what it delivers on its own web site and, say, China or Iran - where actual censorship (with consquences) is routine.

Re:Surreal

[SpinyNorman]

I expect the "explicitometer" is just the same exact same none/moderate/strict classification that both Google and Bing's "Safe Search" preferences offer.

This change by Bing isn't some big brother restriction on your porn viewing... it's just coming closer** to honoring your wishes by not allowing you to view porn sites that you, yourself, have already chosen to block via Open DNS, Net Nanny or whatever!

** Of course, you can still see Microsoft hosted thumbnails (incl. videos) from sites that you've chosen to block but Microsoft hasn't classified as explicit, and Google does no better with their image thumbnails.

Re:Surreal

[Anonymous Coward]

Surreal -- I really wish people would stop using this over-used, nearly meaningless, word. I don't think it belongs in your post, as used.

That being said, I like the term "explicitometer". Now someone just needs to invent it!

Re:Vista & Mohave!

[TaoPhoenix]

I'll bite!

Ya see, my anthro class sponsored a field trip to the Mohave desert. You should have SEEN the Vista! I'm tellin' ya, you ain't seen nuthin' until you checked out a desert sunset headed into a full moon.

Then it was time to set up our water filtering equipment. Can kernels of corn grow in desert conditions...

Oh wait... you wanted an *exact phrase* search for Windows Vista? Oops, sorry.

No Wonder MS Failed Once Again

[Anonymous Coward]

After the week of the usual standard Microsoft product marketing tactics:

* Astroturfing by marketing companies hiring people to sit around all day posting "I'm a Google fan but gosh darn it! I've switched to Bing!" posts all over the Net

* TV and other media spots

* Getting all their MS friendly people in the computing media to hype the crap out of the rebranded old Microsft search product

Microsoft's search engine plummeted right back down into irrelvancy in marketshare and all people are left talking about is "LOL! Bing is great for porn type posts and stories"

Re:No Wonder MS Failed Once Again

[SalaSSin]

Well, porn is the thing that's searched for the most, so i'm guessing they did that alright...

Then again, if you get non-porn results polluting your search, we get back to Microsoft's usual quality of products..:

You didn't get what you asked for, but you certainly got more of what you didn't want...

Re:No Wonder MS Failed Once Again

[Elektroschock]

Of course, with Porn as a sales argument. Can't find my porn with Google, need to get Bing, the porn queen.

What surprises me is that "Porn" is an explicit sales argument for Microsoft. A pawn is a pawn, said Bobby Fisher. What is next? Buy your SS underwear at our nazi.shopping.bing.com? A special Bing for china without Tiananmen massacre plus a special BIng for the Chinese abroad WITH Tiananmen? Bing for you, bing for me?

MyBing, where you can censor your own web. YourBing, where you can watch what others bing.

Coming next: Windows Vista 7 launched at gay pride parade "My PCs bings the Mac"

Re:Vista & Mohave!

[Thinboy00]

I'll bite!

Ya see, my anthro class sponsored a field trip to the Mohave desert. You should have SEEN the Vista! I'm tellin' ya, you ain't seen nuthin' until you checked out a desert sunset headed into a full moon.

Then it was time to set up our water filtering equipment. Can kernels of corn grow in desert conditions...

[snip]

Were you looking out of a window? Or multiple Windoze?

As a net admin for a school....

[jimbo-nally]

I have to say that this is really nice. I just added explicit.bing.net to the list of filtered content in our SonicWall and then did an images search for breasts on bing.com with safe-search off and the images that displayed were not what I would consider porn. Many of the images, if not most, were not displayed. I will feel much better about allowing access to bing.com for our students now. Can't believe I'm saying this...but "Good job, Microsoft!"

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[GreatBunzinni]

So, why exactly do you believe that seeing a breast is somehow something to be avoided? And why exactly do you believe that you must enforce your belief on others in the form of censorship?

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[tjstork]

I will feel much better about allowing access to bing.com for our students now.

It's interesting that your post is modded "funny". Evidentally many on slashdot that have read your post do not understand the terrible parent that school administrators have to deal with. If porn did get through, I could see your mug on a bunch of news sites... "school lets kids look at porn..." You have to clamp down, in your case, or parents would just eat you alive!

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[Anonymous Coward]

Why on earth would you ever block porn or nudity to students? Any male and even female above 11-12 years will be and should be enjoying porn and their bodies daily, that's just healthy. Blocking it makes it seem like a taboo and bad which is ridiculous and sounds like some extremist puritan country like the US of Analretentive Virgins.

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[Barny]

Fact is, its not up to him, its just his job to enforce the restrictions passed down to him by his employer.

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[jimbo-nally]

It has nothing to do with my beliefs. Here's why I do it: 1) I like having a job. 2) Part of my job is making sure we comply with CIPA http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cipa.html 3) CIPA says we have to filter "obscene pictures" You, Janet Jackson and I may think breasts are not obscene, but I know there are people who do.

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[Anonymous Coward]

I love porn. I loved porn while I was still at school. But even so I would consider it fairly inappropriate if students used school computers to watch porn.

Now, a naked breast is not necessarily porn, but "jimbo-nally" did not say he didn't see any naked breasts, only that he didn't see anything he would consider porn. I haven't tried for myself, so I don't know how strict the filtering is, but unless you have and have found images you consider worthwhile to let students access while at school, I don't see the problem.

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[CodeBuster]

God forbid that impressionable young people in our schools should...gasp...actually see an exposed breast...

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[sopssa]

Enjoy porn and their bodies in a classroom?

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[Anonymous Coward]

he said "and the images that displayed were not what I would consider porn." so in other words, there were probably pics of breasts, just not porn. and who the hell said that he was enforcing HIS belief on others? he works as a net admin for a school, so he's more than likely got a few, if not many, bosses. not only that, but censorship does not include blocking porn AT SCHOOL where the students should be concentrating on their SCHOOLWORK instead of watching said porn. get off of your soapbox and at least try to understand why he does the things he does before screaming about the evils of censorship, please.

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[Anonymous Coward]

So, why exactly do you believe that seeing a breast is somehow something to be avoided? And why exactly do you believe that you must enforce your belief on others in the form of censorship?

A school board and parent teacher association that will roast you alive if you don't have something in place.

Not that you will be overly interested in preventing them from actively trying to circumvent your filter, but having some accidentally find something has a much higher risk profile for your IT staff (i.e. they are more likely to complain).

Re:As a net admin for a school....

[ekhben]

The real test for "is it porn" is to ejaculate, and then see if you still like it. If you're disinterested, it's porn. If you still like it, it's artistic or informative!

... maybe not the best test to use while on school grounds.

A better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

I think they should rename the domain boing.bing.com then let users search only that domain.

how to block adult web sites

[viralMeme]

how to block adult web sites, the non Microsoft way. Of course this doesn't deserve a whole article on slashdot .. :)

Hands Up (above the table)

[Necroloth]

So quick vote for how many clicked on the link in the summary thinking it was a link to xXx Bing? And I assume those that don't reply merely have sticky fingers... /hands up

Re:Hands Up (above the table)

[tedgyz]

Hand up. They have a goldmine of content that could feed a great pr0n site.

somebody

[kampangptlk]

please make a firefox search plugin for explicit bing please.

They gave it the wrong name!!

[ItaliaMatt]

Instead of explicit.bing.com it should have been bada.bing.com

Re:They gave it the wrong name!!

[achbed]

Oh, if I was quicker (or had mod points)....

Re:They gave it the wrong name!!

[StormReaver]

> Instead of explicit.bing.com it should have been bada.bing.com

Or shark.chandler.bing.com

Re:They gave it the wrong name!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I was half expecting www.dong.com

Re:They gave it the wrong name!!

[Anonymous Coward]

.........adding rimshot

There goes ....

[Sem_D_D]

an obligatory statement about the murky distinction between the "bing" for your "bang" coming in 3, 2, 1 ....

Re:There goes ....

[Vozmozno]

no, it doesn't.

Re: Details on MS products

[morgan_greywolf]

Exactly. There is no difference between "heavy filtering of results" and results that are explicit coming from a separate domain. All that means is that it makes it easier on your end to filter the explicit.bing.com. Who decides what is explicit? Microsoft. What if you don't agree with them? What if you are the owner of that content? Is there a resolution process? Do you have to sue them? Can you sue them?

da bing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Did anyone ask how Tony Soprano felt about this?

Schwing?

[Purity Of Essence]

Got nothin'

Re: Details on MS products

[houghi]

The same goes for Google where the default is to use moderate filtering.

What's that called? SNEP?

[jonaskoelker]

Sadonecroequinophilia?

Re:What's that called? SNEP?

[n1hilist]

That's quite a mouthful.

Re:What's that called? SNEP?

[The Archon V2.0]

That's quite a mouthful.

... aaaaannnnd we're right back to the strap-on.

Re:What's that called? SNEP?

[n1hilist]

http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/saturday.png

Re: Details on MS products

[jonbryce]

They could put that on taiwan.bing.cn, or www.bing.tw

Linux filter and interesting suggestions

[avn]

try typing linux into bing... after 'linu' it will give the following suggestions:
linux
linux windows
linux microsoft
linux vista
linux commands
...

while google suggests:
linuxtoday
linux
linux commands
linux mint
linux download
...

Already seems a little jaded.

Re:Linux filter and interesting suggestions

[Anonymous Coward]

The explanation for this that I found most plausible is as follows:

Bing's customer base is a higher percentage Microsoft fans than Google's is. Alternatively, internal testing means the majority of searches so far were by MS employees.

Microsofties are more likely to be searching for Windows-Linux comparisons, as an idea of what they're doing well and not-so-well on (for employees) and to see what this linux thing is and how hard it would be to try it out/if they should switch (others).

Additionally, what the fuck? "linux mint" is in the top five? I'd never even HEARD of mint before now (except for the plant, flavor, and financial management website)

Re:Linux filter and interesting suggestions

[Anonymous Coward]

Click through on "linux microsoft" option and the first article is how to remove linux and install windows

Microsoft blows it again

[Anonymous Coward]

explicit.bing.net?

They should have gone with bada.bing.net.

Re:Microsoft blows it again

[AustinSlacker]

How about bung.bing.net?

Re:Microsoft blows it again

[maverick41]

explicit.bing.net?

They should have gone with bada.bing.net.

Nah -- schwing.net

How is that better?

[Junta]

You can either filter on a sophisticated ruleset te detect what you describe, or you can block one host in one domain (the same domain of 'bing.com', just a different host record within it....)

It's good that google accommodated the need, but just because Google did it one way and MS did it another that Google's way must be better (by better, this would mean easier).

It would help to have the flaws in MS's approach actually described and how Google's overcomes it.

Re:How is that better?

[spitzak]

Have not tried this but I am guessing that if the porn images are blocked but not the results page itself, users at the company can still figure out how to click to get the porn itself by clicking on the broken image in the page. Blocking the entire resulting page if safe search is off will prevent this.

Still it does seem like Microsoft's solution is by far the easier one to handle, and there is no reason why both solutions can't be provided. You could also use domain filtering for the entire page so there would be a simple way to get the Google results by blocking a site, just have "safe search" change the target of the search button rather than setting a cookie or whatever it is doing.

same here :)

[viralMeme]

"linux windows, linux microsoft, linux vista"

Yet more Microsoft search innovation. It is patently obvious that 'search' is a weapon in directing people to websites that Microsoft want you to go to ..

Doesn't really solve the problem...

[chord.wav]

...if you search for "best loan insurance" and you get tons of broken images. Clever.

"explicit": what dumb word

[Cajun Hell]

"Explicit" is an even stupider way to describe porn than "graphic" is, because it always applies to way more than what you really mean. If you mean porn, then say "porn."

It always amused me when music albums used to come with an "parental advisory: explicit lyrics" warning; they might as well have just said, "look out, this album isn't all just instrumental" or "warning: not much abstract symbolism, the writer actually knows how to write."

Re:"explicit": what dumb word

[guyminuslife]

I don't understand. Could you be more explicit?

(Bow-chikka-wow-wow.)

Re: Details on MS products

[NotBornYesterday]

Next domains to be built:

democracy.bing.com

dissent.bing.com

... and so on ...

Kudos to MS

[Stan92057]

Anything that allows the users more choices is a good thing. Those who want to block porn may,those who don't want to block porn don't have to. And more tools for parents is a good thing also. Kudos to MS for this option!!

Executive Summary

[BurzumNazgul]

A few people seem to misunderstand why Microsoft did this. It's not to make it easier to search for porn. It's to make it easier to filter it out. All NSFW images/videos returned in search results will be hosted at explicit.bing.com. Network police at schools and businesses can filter the domain explicit.bing.com so that users cannot bypass their filters and access porn using bing.com. It is NOT a special site for you to find porn. Sorry :(

It's a lie; it doesn't work

[Anonymous Coward]

I put Bing to the test. First search term, "grossao". It found the Grossao stories (erotica), plus a whole lot more that's pornographic at best, illegal at worst. It found zoophilia, for goodness sake!

Bing certainly has to be my search engine of choice for when I'm feeling horny! lol.

Look out Google!

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it have an "I'm Feeling Lucky" button?

And the rest ?

[feufeu]

As a notoriously un-PC old-european me thinks that it's less natural to have kids (and whoever filters may concern) look at war, killing, dead people and the like than at people being naked or even copulating. So, may i hope that any violence depicting content (even if related to the holy "War On ***"(TM) itself) goes in this domain as well ?

And we care because ?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder ... How much did slashdot receive to publish every few days, under cover of news, advertissement for this new search site ?

I have to ask (I'm sure I'll regret it)

[Anonymous Coward]

With all this focus on pr0n, has Bing lost its cherry?

Re: Details on MS products

[Elektroschock]

They already have openstandards.microsoft.com
which is different from all other open standards sites.

democracy.bing.kp for the Democratic People of North Korea.

 

This is a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I know this is slashdot, where everyone hates microsoft, but honestly this is a great move. It really, really simplifies things for network administrators who need to block explicit content.

All an admin has to do is block explicit.bing.com. I challenge anyone out there to come up with an easier way of blocking google's explicit thumbnails for, say, 250 users on a network.

Saucisse

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.w3.org/2004/03/28-tld
Why Using TLDs for Filtering is Ineffective, Harmful, and Unnecessary
Ok this is not exactly the same... then again

Great choice.

[DaVince21]

You know what, this actually IS a good choice! And when properly used, content filtering software might actually make use of this domain to effectively filter any kind of explicit content.

Now I just wonder... Which one will be used more? Bing, or the explicit section?

Or

[Anonymous Coward]

How about a different 2nd level domain for each genre?
fanger.bing.com
ging.bing.com

Non-work-safe explanations for older folks:
Finger bang (definition 1)
Gang bang (definitions 1.2, 2.1, or 3)