Slashdot Mirror


Yahoo Censors Tumblr Porn

coolnumbr12 writes "When Yahoo purchased Tumblr in May, Tumblr founder David Karp said Tumblr wouldn't be changing, and Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer said, 'Part of our strategy here is to let Tumblr be Tumblr.' But a new search policy went into effect Thursday that excludes all adult blogs from Google, Bing, Yahoo and other search engines by disabling indexing of anything it tags as 'adult.' The policy effectively makes the content and 10 percent of Tumblr users completely invisible."

216 comments

  1. Unsearchable != Censored by SQLGuru · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    They didn't censor the content.....the just made it harder to find. Sensational headline.

    1. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's like if I took something of yours that I didn't like, and welded into a box, then buried it in concrete. It's not as if I was censoring or stealing from you, right?

    2. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Isn't the result the same? Whether you take it down or hide it, people who want it can't find it.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      They didn't censor the content.....the just made it harder to find. Sensational headline.

      yea.. so now you have to find some other blog that indexes them!

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Three words:

      Free speech zone

    5. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speak for yourself. I got 'em bookmarked.

    6. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by interval1066 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Mayer can run Yahoo how ever she wants, its not like the first time a huge coporate entity made untrue statements about how they'd be moving forward. Plus, its porn. Waste of web space in my opinion. This is hardly big news.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    7. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Host $5 website. Post redirect to tumblr. Let google index your $5 website.

    8. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by interval1066 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your three words are meaningless. Coprorations can't censor speach (at least in this context, what actually goes on in Washington is another matter). Claiming free speach rights within the context of a private enterprise is like claiming that your free speach rights are being infringed if I throw you out of my house after you've broken in holding a megaphone. Its astounding to me how few people understand that the 1st amendment is a contraint on GOVERNMENT, not a general use wrench you can hit anyone over the head with.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    9. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 0

      You're not too good at that whole "analogy" thing, huh?

    10. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by diamondmagic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Free speech is the right that no coercive force will be used to stop speech. It mostly applies to government, but could apply to anyone being physically threatened for what they say.

      Censorship, as is commonly used, isn't limited to free speech, but also in instances where there was an implied liberty to speak one's mind. If a television show bleeps someone out, that's called "censorship". If a library removes a book over interest group pressure, that's "censorship". If a newspaper fires a columnist for something they wrote, that's "censorship" (if said newspaper refuses to print someone's letter to the editor, though, that's distinctly not censorship).

      And if Tumblr is changing their policy to restrict more forms of speech, that would be censorship.

    11. Re: Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Try doing your research using "speech" rather than "speach" next time. You'll get better information about how things in the Constitution apply to everyone, not just the government.

    12. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by hazah · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Plus, it's porn.

      To be classified as porn, two opinions have to be met: provokes a sexual response, and has no artistic merit.

      Given that people have rather elaborate sexual fetishes, the first part can be (and is) used to classify practically any type of content as porn by at least someone. Not to mention that some people get a hardon from leather boots -- ergo leather boots are pornography? The second aspect is grossly subjective as well, as some people find art in the arrangement of trashcan contents.

      Because of this, what get's classified as porn by one individual may not be classified as such by another. Strictly speaking, it becomes a scenario of "you can't look for this because I said so". Well, excuse me, but... I've outgrown the need for parenting on that level. We're basically all adults (or on the way of becoming one), and the world is ran by adults for adults. Subjecting all of us to childlike treatment is an insult.

    13. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      To be classified as porn, two opinions have to be met: provokes a sexual response, and has no artistic merit.

      Who says? Because that really sounds like the legal definition of obscenity according to the ruling in Miller v California:

      The Miller test for obscenity includes the following criteria: (1) whether âthe average person, applying contemporary community standardsâ(TM) would find that the work, âtaken as a whole,â(TM) appeals to âprurient interestâ(TM) (2) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (3) whether the work, âtaken as a whole,â(TM) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/obscenity

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    14. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your three words are meaningless.

      No they aren't. OP claimed (or rather, implied) that it is only censorship if access is completely blocked. I provided an example of censorship that did not involve complete blocking of access. It doesn't matter that in my example, it is the government doing the action, because who is doing the action was never a part of OP's claim for what qualifies as censorship.

      Its astounding to me how few people understand that the 1st amendment is a contraint on GOVERNMENT

      Likewise it is astounding to me how many people fail to understand that just because someone talks about the concept of free speech, doesn't mean they're talking about the 1st amendment.

    15. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Be fair - it's hard to think up cogent analogies for other situations when you're inside a welded box that's been encased in concrete.

      I'm surprised he's got any Internet access in there at all, frankly. I'll have to figure out how that happened before the next time.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    16. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would a hyperlink suffice? Do search engine spiders parse robots.txt when they arrive at a page from an external link?

    17. Re: Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you expect from someone who's been listening to the same Julio "Iglecias" track since 2002?

    18. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're basically all adults (or on the way of becoming one), and the world is ran by adults for adults. Subjecting all of us to childlike treatment is an insult.

      Looks like somebody hasn't been living in the real world for very long.

    19. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "To be classified as porn, two opinions have to be met: provokes a sexual response, and has no artistic merit."

      No, that's the legal test for obscenity (not porn).

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    20. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Anachragnome · · Score: 2

      "...just made it harder to find"

      Imagine trying to find information at the Public Library if the librarians suddenly got rid of the catalog. Sure, you could find the information, but at serious cost to the amount of time you have available to you, and thereby preventing you from spending that time looking up other information. What Yahoo! has done is worse--they essentially took books off the shelves and put them in the fucking basement. Define it as you may, this is censorship.

      Corporate Mass-Media is doing this with the Snowden/PRISM articles--they're there, just buried amongst all the Trayvon/Zimmerman articles. It's all Jedi mind tricks...

    21. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to say, I get all flustered when I see someone resisting a company acting like their parent.

      Slashdot, please make his comment unsearchable.

      And if that wasn't your intention...well...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGrQTRcxdTo (youtube)

    22. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

      Well, making it so the results don' show up when they could... that';s still textbook censorship. It may be ACCEPTABLE censorship, but too many people seem too oblivious lately to what the term actually encompasses or not just IMO.

      --
      If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
    23. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by alostpacket · · Score: 2

      You misunderstood the analogy (I think). "Free Speech Zones" were nonsense created by the government intending to hide and push speech they didn't like to irrelevancy. The definition of censorship is not the point, but rather the act of pushing things off to a dark corner effectively stifling the content/speech is what is comparable here.

      --
      PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
    24. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like how no one could find anything on Megaupload because it didn't have a search function....

    25. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by John.Banister · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing, except a wiki instead of a blog, so that they could add themselves and their favorite keywords. Many times when I search for something, among the top results are these idiot pages that have no information on my topic of their own, just lists of links to other pages. Here's a case where a page like that could actually be useful. The Hidden Tumblr Wiki Index could be a route around the search stoppage.

    26. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Another everyone is a techie solution. I invite you to go visit some of the tumblr porn feeds. Go to the first 10 odd posts and see just how basic people's understandings of how even the idiot proof tumblr works.

      That site is not made up of techies.

    27. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by TWX · · Score: 1

      Must be some pretty cheap steel, not even good enough to be a faraday cage...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    28. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      Would a hyperlink suffice? Do search engine spiders parse robots.txt when they arrive at a page from an external link?

      Yes they do, so no, linking to a Tumblr page would not get the Tumblr page indexed.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    29. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Actually, corporations can censor speech.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    30. Re:Unsearchable != Censored by diamondmagic · · Score: 1

      I never mentioned the first amendment. You read that in yourself.

      If someone were to break into your house and demand you not say that ever again, that would be a violation of free speech, just not by the government, nor in violation of the first amendment (just numerous other crimes).

      Nor did I say public libraries. I really mean all libraries.

      You can't cite yourself as a source, that doesn't prove anything.

  2. Re:Not really... by Hatta · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think the point is that they're not allowing spiders to crawl pornographic tumblrs. That affects everyone who uses a search engine that respects robots.txt.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  3. Sympathy? by bhlowe · · Score: 0

    boo hoo?

    1. Re:Sympathy? by hazah · · Score: 1

      Hey, if you like being treated like a retarded child that cannot decide this for himself for no apparent reason, sure... no sympathy necessary for you.

  4. Re:Not really... by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 0

    "When Yahoo purchased Tumblr in May, Tumblr founder David Karp said Tumblr wouldn't be changing, and Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer said, 'Part of our strategy here is to let Tumblr be Tumblr.'

    And Tumblr hasn't changed.
    Yahoo's search index changed (if anyone actually uses it).

    Why is this story worth babbling about? It's not news for nerds, and certainly not stuff that matters.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  5. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    More like 95% of Tumblr. Not reason to use it anymore....

  6. whew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good thing I have already found my favorite Tumblr, Short Shorts Obsession.

    1. Re: whew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those shorts only look like short shorts because of the massive girth of the asses they are stretched around and wedged into.

  7. Re:Not really... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    it's sort of a half assed stance on the issue though.
    pretty stupid too.

    OOH NOW I GET IT! they're funding another search engine of their own that ignores robots.txt and will kill google off with that!

    (seriously, that could be the only way googles search dominance will be beat).

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  8. Re:Not really... by ron_ivi · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Someone should make a search engine that *only* indexes the stuff that robots.txt suggests against.

    I imagine a lot more interesting content is on that part of the network.

  9. Ten percent? My ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unintended consequence - "adult" tag gets dropped

  10. Bad Idea? by parallel_prankster · · Score: 0

    I dont think somehow this is such a bad idea. I mean, they could have just deleted all those pages really ( I know this is a not a good enough excuse). If you use Tumblr, you know most pages are inter-linked. So it is easy to go from one to next. Did they stop that as well? Also, I had noticed that most Tumblr pages did not have any warning for adult content.

    1. Re:Bad Idea? by DigitAl56K · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I dont think somehow this is such a bad idea. I mean, they could have just deleted all those pages really

      If nobody can find them what's the difference? Is this like getting out of a speeding ticket on a technicality?

      Nobody is going to publish content to places no visitors will go. That defeats the whole point of publishing.

    2. Re:Bad Idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone's idea of self-expressive "publishing" is copy-pasting the 10 billionth porn image to somewhere else on the internet, they really should re-evaluate whether they had a point worth making in the first place.

    3. Re:Bad Idea? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Also, I had noticed that most Tumblr pages did not have any warning for adult content.

      When are they going to start warning people about childish content?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:Bad Idea? by hazah · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Self expression need not be limited to original content. Self expression is completely satisfied by the following statement: "I like X" (or XXX, or whatever). Publishing is no longer a profession in of itself (types of publishing may be). Furthermore, you don't really get a say whether their point was worth making, it's subjective and irrelevant to the discussion.

    5. Re:Bad Idea? by hazah · · Score: 1

      No shit... and where's the same treatment for stupidity? At least sex is wired up through biology. Stupidity legacy is that it's often responsible for shorter lifespans.

    6. Re:Bad Idea? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      When are they going to start warning people about childish content?

      But this is the default. Why should any warning be needed?

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    7. Re:Bad Idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Furthermore, you don't really get a say whether their point was worth making, it's subjective and irrelevant to the discussion.

      If this is true, the you also don't get to say whether or not someone else can say whether or not a point was worth making.

      Now reduce.

      Anyone can say whether or not someone else's point was worth making.

  11. Google Still Showing my Tumblporn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My tumblporn is still turning up on google search...

  12. Re:Not really... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    That was really to stop two robots at either end fighting, forcing links to auto-generated pages to be instantiated, repeat ad infinitum. It wasn't really a censorship tool.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  13. Re:Not really... by Flozzin · · Score: 1

    The summary fails. Not a big surprise, FTFA.

    "Now, around 12 million Tumblr blogs marked "adult" have been removed from Tumblr's internal search; "

    --
    "Cowardice in a race, as in an individual, is the unpardonable sin." --Teddy Roosevelt
  14. Re:Not really... by Urban+Garlic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not only Yahoo's index, they're blocking indexing for Google and Bing also. Presumably via robots.txt or similar.

    --
    2*3*3*3*3*11*251
  15. 10% completely invisible... by gbjbaanb · · Score: 3, Funny

    Really? Erm, I think we should be given a list so that, you know, we can, err.., check their data-collating algorithms for accuracy. Yeah, that.

    1. Re:10% completely invisible... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here you go. Just don't try to Google it.

    2. Re:10% completely invisible... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FOR SCIENCE!

    3. Re:10% completely invisible... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? Erm, I think we should be given a list so that, you know, we can, err.., check their data-collating algorithms for accuracy. Yeah, that.

      We have a list of nearly 7000 porn subdomains off *.tumbler.com at squidblacklist.org

  16. I'm shocked! by SeaFox · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "When Yahoo purchased Tumblr in May, Tumblr founder David Karp said Tumblr wouldn't be changing, and Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer said, 'Part of our strategy here is to let Tumblr be Tumblr.'

    Yeah, and when an independent website gets purchased by a large corporation the executives never lie to the users of a new acquisition to keep them from doing a mass exodus. After all, the users themselves are a part of the deal.

    1. Re:I'm shocked! by Dracolytch · · Score: 0

      If you are not a paying client, you are the product.

      --
      This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
    2. Re:I'm shocked! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially when Yahoo buys them. Regardless of who is at the helm.

      Wasn't there a large 'groups' site out there once? I believe it has been over ten years since Yahoo bought them. Yahoo slowly got rid of a lot of the porn on there. I cannot remember the name of the old site at the moment. That site was molded into Yahoo Groups.

    3. Re:I'm shocked! by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Which is why a mass exodus is always the thing to do immediately.

    4. Re:I'm shocked! by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      I'm more shocked that only 10% of tumblr is porn.

  17. So just download wordpress by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1, Insightful

    and make your own blog. Or use Google blogger. Or any of a thousand different ways. Why is this even news?

    I like pr0n as much as the next guy but a Slashdot groupthink seems to be developing that any entity restricting porn is bad evil censorship. Even if that entity is not government and it's not telling anyone else what to do except on its own site.

    1. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >any entity restricting porn is bad evil censorship

      What differences does it make if it's Yahoo or a country's government? Censorship is censorship, it doesn't matter who's doing it. Especially when they suddenly decide to do it after saying they wouldn't.

      The moment you start saying that censorship isn't censorship just because it's taking place "on someone's property" is the moment you forget what censorship is and excuse the one who's doing it. Technically, they're the "government" in that case, if you MUST believe that only a government can censor.

    2. Re:So just download wordpress by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, first of all, there's the question of who determines whether or not it's 'Adult' or merely 'NSFW', since they're treated differently. Since the barrier for 'adult' appears to be that you post nudity often, there are some non-pornographic photographers that are being caught in the net.

      Secondly, as of right now, #gay is a verbatim search term. This affects not just porn, but posts about LGBT politics.

      Thirdly, lots of artists were migrating to tumblr BECAUSE it was a way to join a network where you could be discovered by fans. Painters and cartoon artists that post pornographic art also can't be found anymore. I know more than one artist that stopped hosting their own portfolio site because it was easier to post on tumblr and provide a DNS redirect. It was a good system, and now the rug has been pulled out from under them.

      This isn't just about hardcore porn; most (all?) of that stuff is discoverable through google, even if it's not packaged up as nicely. There's a lot of fandom and art going on that counts as 'adult' content, and it seems to me that it's being unfairly punished.

      Plus, honestly, it's nice for users like me to be able to follow some of these people and discover new things that I like and have it all mixed in with my goofy fandom gifs and gender politics and whatnot. I LIKE how tumblr works right now. To me, this is just the puritanical nature of North American culture and law rearing its ugly head.

    3. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they were hiding blogs about muslims or blacks, would it be news? I agree that Slashdot-groupthink is inane, but part of Slashdot's knee-jerk response whenever a corporation suppresses expression on their formely open forum is "ain't the goverment, go elsewhere, cry more".

      It's their choice to suppress, but that choice is always news, and there's usually room for debate.

    4. Re:So just download wordpress by Lendrick · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's still a dick move, and you know it.

      Some people use their blog as a source of income. That income depends on their blog having an established, searchable presence. Some of those blogs may have the kind of content (like porn) that you or other people may personally look down on.

      "Just make your own blog" is a terrible option when you already *have* an established blog, because it means moving and losing a lot of your traffic.

      I don't see anyone where arguing that what Yahoo is doing should be *illegal*. They're arguing that it's not a good thing to do, and I agree with them. Finally, I fail to see any good reason that they need to do it, since the major search engines all have adult content filtering already. It's unlikely that Google or Bing demanded that they de-index adult oriented blogs.

    5. Re:So just download wordpress by PhxBlue · · Score: 2

      I like pr0n as much as the next guy but a Slashdot groupthink seems to be developing that any entity restricting porn is bad evil censorship.

      That would be because it is censorship.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    6. Re:So just download wordpress by localman57 · · Score: 1

      Do we know for a fact that it is Yahoo that is in fact driving this change? Maybe it was a strategic decision that has been in the works for some time. Without transparency into the organization, we don't know for sure where it came from.

      The other thing to remember is that its fun to scream at corporations about censoring you, but most of the stuff we use is funded by advertising. If the place becomes a pornorific cesspool, their ability to get legitimate companies to advertise there will vanish, and then the thing will likely be gone. It's just like the old free press argument. It applies to YOUR press. If some other paper won't print your letter to the editor, buy a press and start your own paper. Or create your own Tumbler. If your proposed culture is really that much better, people will move.

    7. Re:So just download wordpress by Hatta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and make your own blog. Or use Google blogger. Or any of a thousand different ways. Why is this even news?

      If generic blogs were an acceptable substitute for what Tumblr does, they wouldn't have 100 million users.

      I like pr0n as much as the next guy but a Slashdot groupthink seems to be developing that any entity restricting porn is bad evil censorship.

      Why is it good when it's non-governmental? The loss of utility is the same whether it's done by a government or by a corporation. It may be less bad when it's not backed up by force, but it's still a shameful act by Yahoo, and they deserve to be shamed for it.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    8. Re:So just download wordpress by Princeofcups · · Score: 2

      and make your own blog. Or use Google blogger. Or any of a thousand different ways. Why is this even news?

      Because they didn't come out and say, "Starting in two months we will stop indexing any site that we think is questionable. This will give you time to move your adult material to a new site." Instead they do it without any warning whatsoever. That's a big fuck you to their customers. How many times will this do this kind of thing again in the future?

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    9. Re:So just download wordpress by pauljlucas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's a big fuck you to their customers.

      If you're using a service for free, chances are you're not the customer.

      --
      If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
    10. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On Tumbler, if I remember correctly, you can check a box saying your blog is NSFW and then another box saying it is Adult. Once you pick one of these boxes, you cannot revert it. You would have to make a new blog if you decided you did not want to be labeled as such anymore. They also state that they can check the box for you if they receive enough complaints or something like that. But I think you can arbitrate or just simply ask to be unchecked from the NSFW or Adult section.

    11. Re:So just download wordpress by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      I don't mean to be snarky, but do you know what "verbatim" means? Did you intend "verboten", perhaps?

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    12. Re:So just download wordpress by lgw · · Score: 1

      Secondly, as of right now, #gay is a verbatim search term. This affects not just porn, but posts about LGBT politics.

      Wait, what? Was that part of this change? That's going to cause a firestorm. Are similar terms banned? Did they really just hang a "straights only" sign on the front door of tumblr?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    13. Re:So just download wordpress by lgw · · Score: 2

      OK, so: "that's a big fuck you to their product". Still pretty stupid.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    14. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What differences does it make if it's Yahoo or a country's government? Censorship is censorship, it doesn't matter who's doing it. Especially when they suddenly decide to do it after saying they wouldn't.

      How about a simpler example? Let's say you come into my house and I tell you not to say the word "banana." It is not censorship. It is me exercising my own rights to not hear the word "banana" in my own house. You then proceed to say the word "banana." Now you're the one infringing on my rights (and also being forcibly removed from my non-banana supporting residence).

      Anyway, with the amount of porn freely accessible via the internet, why would you be trolling tumblr anyway?

    15. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people use their blog as a source of income. That income depends on their blog having an established, searchable presence. Some of those blogs may have the kind of content (like porn) that you or other people may personally look down on.

      "Just make your own blog" is a terrible option when you already *have* an established blog, because it means moving and losing a lot of your traffic.

      Establishing a business whereby your income comes from content over which you don't have full control is...well, quite simply, bad business. The risk these people have taken in building up a following using someone else's service is that their content can be deleted or obfuscated at will and they have no recourse for preventing it from happening. This is the primary reason why people should respond with "just make your own blog." You either lose a small amount of traffic in the short term or risk losing all traffic in the long run.

    16. Re:So just download wordpress by Solandri · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some people use their blog as a source of income. That income depends on their blog having an established, searchable presence.

      Some of my relatives use a booth at a weekly swap meet as a source of income. That income depends on their booth having an established, locatable presence. Yet the swap meet could change their policies and refuse to sell them booth space at any time.

      If you're going to base your livelihood on a business, it's best to put it entirely under your own control. In my relatives' case, buy/rent their own store location (or get together with other booths at the swap meet to co-own it). In a blogger's case, pay the $10/yr for your own domain and $5/mo for hosting.

      This is the same reason why captive marketplaces like iTunes or the App Store are a bad idea. No matter how successful you are, you're still at the complete mercy of the marketplace owner.

      "Just make your own blog" is a terrible option when you already *have* an established blog, because it means moving and losing a lot of your traffic.

      Well that's the risk you took when you decided not to put in the extra effort and money to start with your own blog, and instead took the easy way out and started with a hosted site which took care of most of the setup work for you. Do you have any idea how many businesses are locked into Quickbooks for their accounting because it was the quick and easy solution when they were first starting out, but now that they've grown beyond its capabilities they're finding it difficult to switch because Intuit makes it impossible to get your data out of their database?

      Look, there are two types of people in this situation. Those who complain about how unfair all this is and get nowhere because while it's dick move on Yahoo/Tumblr's part, there's nothing wrong nor illegal about it. And those who take the lesson learned to heart, pay the cost to transition over to the right way to do it, and get on with life. That's the best way to improve your odds of independent success. Running a business isn't about only picking the "good" choices. It's about picking the best choice you have available. Making your own blog may be a terrible option, but if it's less terrible than being put out of business at the whim of some Yahoo exec, then it's the right choice.

    17. Re:So just download wordpress by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I was just coming back and reading over the comment and I saw it there and thought to myself, "why did I type verbatim instead of verboten"? :P

    18. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What differences does it make if it's Yahoo or a country's government? Censorship is censorship, it doesn't matter who's doing it.

      Well, you can define censorship that way, but then it loses all its negative connotations.
      As in, censorship is an infringement of someone's rights.
      If the government isn't doing it, that's no longer true.
      Just someone who provides a free hosting service choosing not to advertise the raunchy stuff.

    19. Re:So just download wordpress by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      If generic blogs were an acceptable substitute for what Tumblr does, they wouldn't have 100 million users.

      A well-done generic blog is a perfectly acceptable substitute for what Tumblr. It's just that with a well-done generic blog, you have to do the work yourself, and pay a small monthly fee for a hosting service. Tumblr does all the work for you, for free. At least, until the time rolls around where you have to pay for it after all.

    20. Re:So just download wordpress by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      That's a big fuck you to their customers.

      Customers? The bloggers aren't customers. They don't pay anything. The bloggers are product, and Tumblr will do what they think is best to market that product.

      How many times will this do this kind of thing again in the future?

      When ever they want. Them what pays the bills, calls the shots.

    21. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zzzzzzz...
      We pay for it by ad-controlled mind share.

    22. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      #bisexual is 'banned', but #lgbt isn't. I doubt it was on purpose, but it will be hilarious to watch the backlash.

    23. Re:So just download wordpress by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Well that's the risk you took when you decided not to put in the extra effort and money to start with your own blog, and instead took the easy way out and started with a hosted site which took care of most of the setup work for you.

      Wait what? Hosted site? My dear friend tumblr is much more than a hosted site. What you're talking about is effectively the same difference as posting of flickr vs making your own photography website. Or maybe creating a website of your life vs signing up to facebook.

      Tumblr is for the large part also a social network. Users interact, friend, follow, reblog, and comment on each others stuff. You tag posts, tumblr offers a complete search engine for internal posts. This is not something you can replicate with a simple website. It's not just a case of hosting. It would not be possible or it would be incredibly difficult to reach even a tiny level of exposure that a simple tumblr blog can give you if you attempted to do it yourself.

      To that end it's like many businesses are locked in to Quickbooks because they didn't hire in-house coders and accounting gurus to build from the ground up a business accounting system. Because every small 5 person internet cafe can afford to do that too right?

    24. Re:So just download wordpress by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Some people use their blog as a source of income. That income depends on their blog having an established, searchable presence. Some of those blogs may have the kind of content (like porn) that you or other people may personally look down on.

      Don't most of these sites have TOS that pretty much state "you're not allowed to use this as a source of income" so they can't be used to host e-commerce sites and the like. It's usually in the same area where they say there's no warranty and the site is available on a best-effort basis, so they can't be held responsible fiscally for any downtime.

    25. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why Yahoo is quickly becoming a defunct company. This makes me laugh, first the defunct EFF claims Yahoo fights for you privacy, ( but the reality of it is, the NSA, and brother agencies can get the same info from the other big tech companies) but they are communist (like) when it comes to censorship. For all the BS talked about with FB, at least you can use the Dirty 7 words, and beyond (well you could, I do not go on the site).

      I say that because Yahoo quickly cuts out a comment without you using the Dirty 7, and now this.

    26. Re:So just download wordpress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still a dick move, and you know it.

      I thought it was an anti-dick move.

  18. Tumblr censors tumblr porn by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    Try to replicate this behavior which was in place before the Yahoo buyout:

    1. Place pornographic term in tumblr's own search engine
    2. Receive lolcats

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  19. Improvement. by Seumas · · Score: 5, Funny

    Rendering 10% of Tumblr invisible is an improvement and a great start. Please get to work on the other 90%, too.

    1. Re:Improvement. by H0p313ss · · Score: 0

      Rendering 10% of Tumblr invisible is an improvement and a great start. Please get to work on the other 90%, too.

      Exactly, I was going to say "And nothing of value was lost", but I think you captured it better.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    2. Re:Improvement. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Exactly, I was going to say "And nothing of value was lost", but I think you captured it better.

      Actually I think they gutted the only part of value. Can they offer an inverted filter for ... uha ... my friend.

  20. Why even buy Tumblr? by BLToday · · Score: 1

    Isn't this the equivalent of buying Slashdot and then censoring "Anonymous Cowards"?

    1. Re:Why even buy Tumblr? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We will never be censored! We will always be here! Anonymous Cowards forever and ever and

      oh wait, someone's knocking on the door....

    2. Re:Why even buy Tumblr? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Large pepperoni, that'll be $18.56."

    3. Re:Why even buy Tumblr? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it's more like buying Slashdot and setting AC to a lower default score, making it slightly more difficult to find posts from people who may have a vested interest in remaining anonymous....oh wait!

  21. How it Works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yahoo decides a tag should be filtered out.

    If you at some point in the several year history of your tumblr posted something with this tag enough times you account automatically becomes set to NSFW->Adult, you cannot change this once it has been set.

    From then on any post from your blog is filtered from tag search results and from search engines (via robots.txt).

    The site wholly functions on tags, you can't find anything without them. You might get lucky and see a reblog from another account you follow but much like twitter the only way you can follow topics and not individuals is by the tagging system.

    Given that Yahoo only recently purchased tumblr this is shaking up the user community.

    1. Re:How it Works by fluffy99 · · Score: 1

      Per Tumble at http://www.tumblr.com/docs/en/nsfw
              NSFW blogs contain occasional nudity or mature/adult-oriented content.
              Adult blogs contain substantial nudity or mature/adult-oriented content.

      So yes, if your blog is primarily focused on adult content, then Tumbler will not help you advertise it to the world. Yahoo is trying very hard to shake the notion that Tumbler it is a haven for porn.

      Personally, I don't use Tumbler and I don't care to waste my time reading the drivel. (Yes I get the irony that I'm posting on /.)

  22. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    my robots.txt contains one item which doesn't exist.
    If you try to access that item your IP is added to the firewall drop list. (until the next reboot)

    I don't even have much hosted, just some pictures I don't want to give to flikr.

  23. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not exactly hard to detect and bypass that. Just need 2 IPs.

  24. Corporate Half-Truths? by supertall · · Score: 1

    Say it ain't so!!

  25. Re: Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only did you not read TFA, you didn't read TFS.

  26. Re:Not really... by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    point is that they're not allowing spiders to crawl

    No, that's tangential. The point is people have made different types of information publicly available, using a private service, and now that information is being effectively taken offline with no recourse. The content is content tagged as "NSFW" or "Adult" which could affect educational content, or content not approrpriate for minors -- which isn't always porn.

    This is really falls into the broader category of censoring information which was previously publicly available. FTFA that's about 12 million sites apparently

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  27. Pay 1 billion for shit nobody will use anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone should just create a replacement and let tumblr die off. Wouldn't take long to write either.

  28. Re:Not really... by localman57 · · Score: 2

    Yeah, but how do you know it's a honeypot, and not just a normal 404 situation? If you start excluding every site on the internet that has missing pages in one of its indexes, you aren't going to have a very good data set.

  29. It's cute how people believed it by Tridus · · Score: 1

    When they said "tumblr won't be changing", it's cute how ANYBODY believed them. Acquiring companies always say that. It's always a lie. In this case, most people even predicted it was a lie.

    Don't worry, this is just step one. They'll totally wreck things later.

    --
    -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    1. Re:It's cute how people believed it by joe_frisch · · Score: 1

      Its not that anyone believed, them, its just fun to post "I told you so" posts.

    2. Re:It's cute how people believed it by intermodal · · Score: 1

      Nobody on Tumblr believed them. Why would anyone else?

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    3. Re:It's cute how people believed it by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

      Nah, it's not that we believed it, but it's a deep flaw in how "news" is presented - it's "vertical" - Today's Story is Today's Story, with comments, etc.

      Then X time later when a followup like this one comes along, it takes a bit of work to find the earlier story we knew felt bogus.

      I have no programming skills, so I can't do it, but I've long envisioned to have a "horizontal" news site where some original story goes on the left, in this case the news is specifically the portion of the sale news where the Yahoo execs claimed to leave it all alone, maybe with the addenda of the Colbert story three days ago etc.

      Then when the "real result" follows up, it goes on the right side, to directly compare two news stories at a point in time to make extra clear the mis-truths that we apparently have a blind spot for. (Let's put aside layout details where three stories combine etc.)

      You can have multi-part followups. This links back to the Snowden stuff too. On the left is the agencies claiming "we only look at directly implicated calls of non-citizens ...", and the right side says "NSA admits they do 3-hop deep taps past their initial target."

      It hits the national political side too. "I promise not to do X and Y and Z" and the right side of those promises links the direct course-reversals of those promises.

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    4. Re:It's cute how people believed it by jbolden · · Score: 1

      In the case of Tumblr the feeling that it was going to change was so strong that people suspected that Yahoo didn't understand what Tumblr was. In other words most people don't think in this case it was a lie but rather negligence or stupidity.

  30. Re:Ten percent? My ass by Dwarfgoat · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's not just blogs that feature posts tagged as "adult," it's the entirety of any blog tumblr has already flagged as NSFW or adult (the overall blog flag, not just posts). My personal photography blog has been branded as NSFW, as I sometimes post risque work. Basically, there will be no new discovery of my blog, since Tumblr's also blocked internal tag searches for such blogs as well (unless one is already following said blog). My rate of addition of new followers dropped precipitously after that. Bastards...like the occasional nipple is going to end the world.

    --
    That? That was a pigeon.
  31. Re:Not really... by Hatta · · Score: 1

    That could be interpreted as unauthorized access under the CFAA.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  32. Wait, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is porn on Tumblr?

  33. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If only. Tumblr is incredibly awful in its design and execution, and it would be a blessing if it caused its users to flock to a better services, ideally leaving behind the social 'justice' thugs.

  34. Re:Not really... by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 5, Informative

    And, they are stipping the tags from those sites as well so that in internal search will not show those sites either. You have to either see their content through a reblog or if you're following them.

    --
    I got here through a series of tubes
  35. Karp on Colbert by reve_etrange · · Score: 4, Informative

    David Karp insisted they weren't going to try and censor the adult blogs, while appearing on the Colbert Report just three days ago.

    --
    .: Semper Absurda :.
    1. Re:Karp on Colbert by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Welcome to corporate weasel speak. He can claim he hasn't censored anything. It's all still there, right?

    2. Re:Karp on Colbert by dcollins117 · · Score: 2

      David has spoken several times about his vision for Tumblr, and censorship isn't part of it. I find it mind-boggling that Yahoo would spend over a billion dollars in an effort to make it seem like a hip and cool company, and immediately fuck it up.

      Also, the kid has a lot of money right now, it wouldn't surprise me to see him leave and start another site more in line with his values. That is precisely what I would do.

  36. Google Penalizes most redirects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You need to be able to do a 301 redirect rather than a $5 website meta redirect. And when you redirect to tumblr, it's going to hit the same robots.txt you would normally.

    1. Re:Google Penalizes most redirects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can 301 redirect all requests with a few lines in a .htaccess file.

  37. MOD PARENT UP by citylivin · · Score: 1

    came here to say this as well. He just said that they would keep it pure when asked exactly this question! Hopefully colbert calls him out next week, or today.

    --
    As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
  38. Re: Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok maybe not to you, but Porn do matters. Specifically to nerds with poor social life skills. Regardless of sexual orientation.

  39. State-enforced curation and censorship by tepples · · Score: 1

    If a corporation with market power over a particular medium uses a government-granted power to curate speech, is that censorship? For example, Apple and the game console makers curate their devices' respective stores, and they enforce this through anticircumvention provisions of copyright law.

  40. Make your own red light district by tepples · · Score: 1

    Can you segregate your adult stuff into a separate blog, or is there a limit of one blog per account and one account per person?

    1. Re:Make your own red light district by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why should he? His art is his art.

      Far better response would be to move all of it together to a better place, and choose some better social medium.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Make your own red light district by Dwarfgoat · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, there isn't a limit to "side blogs" as they're called (I run another one for information on my band's tour schedule). Replying to messages and following other blogs is limited to your primary blog, however.

      As far as self-censoring the occasional photograph I take that might have boobs, the horse is already out of the barn. Someone at Tumblr made the call some time ago that my blog was NSFW (luckily, they recognized the difference between art and porn, and did not flag it as "adult." This NSFW flag can apparently never be changed (Tumblr has no mechanism for review or protestation of their classifications). I'd have to start completely over, and somehow convince my several thousand followers to go follow the new blog. At this point, I've got too much invested in "my brand" to deal with any of that.

      --
      That? That was a pigeon.
    3. Re:Make your own red light district by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points. As an artist, the only reason to use Tumblr is for discovery. If the site blocks searching because my art is sometimes risqué, they've just removed the sole reason for me to use the site. The awful design and often shitty community isn't going to keep me there, that's for sure.

    4. Re:Make your own red light district by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      luckily, they recognized the difference between art and porn, and did not flag it as "adult."

      Funny. Most people who are work are adults. Most responsible adults can look at art, like naked breasts, even at work. It sounds like your photographs were take as part of your work. Further, odds are good those naked breasts are on an adult. So, um, how exactly do "N[ot] S[afe] F[or] W[ork]" and "adult" fit in? They both seem like code words.

    5. Re:Make your own red light district by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think just about everyone is capable of looking at art. In fact, I think just about everyone is capable of looking at explicit pornography. It's not going to destroy anyone's minds, so this 'family friendly' nonsense is just that: absolute garbage.

  41. Yeha@ F#ckr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way to go yehaa, someone over there has f#cked up a beautiful picture sight for EVERYONE. Dick#eads. Greedy #ucknuts tearing the world apart for a database of peoples' pics that aren't even yours just because people loaded them onto flickr. Just like every other greedy corporation out there.

  42. Re:Not really... by slartibartfastatp · · Score: 1
    This

    Slashdot is unusable without noscript.

    is a really old signature, isn't it?

    --
    -- --
  43. Re:Not really... by Hatta · · Score: 1

    Yes, I don't change my sig often. I whitelisted slashdot in noscript, with the classic discussion system it's a lot better than it was when I wrote that. I will edit my sig, thanks.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  44. Yahoo, how about innovating on this issue? by slashkitty · · Score: 1

    Here are all these blogs that are tagging themselves NSFW. It doesn't mean they are all porn, it's just that it's more adult themed. I've seen quite a lot of "adult" tumblr blogs that are quite artistic. Instead of univiversally blocking them from search engines... They should innovate and start a robots tag that tags the site or certain sections NSFW. That could be carried through to search engines and "safesearch" options that the user selects. Just as much as I want information to be free... I want user choices to be respected.

    --
    -- these are only opinions and they might not be mine.
    1. Re:Yahoo, how about innovating on this issue? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Innovation? From Yahoo? You picked the wrong end of its lifetime for that.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  45. Re:The worst kind of censorship... by hazah · · Score: 1

    Is it satisfying to show the world your bigotry and then have it tell you, in response, that it wants you dead (preferably unborn, but we're past that bit)?

  46. Re:Not really... by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Someone should make a search engine that *only* indexes the stuff that robots.txt suggests against.

    I imagine a lot more interesting content is on that part of the network.

    Yep. I want "Unsafe search" as an option for my search results - filter out all the mundane crap.

    --
    No sig today...
  47. Re:Not really... by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    You have to either see their content through a reblog or if you're following them.

    A new use for magnet links, perhaps?

  48. More than 10% traffic by slashkitty · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While 10% of the blogs are estimated to be tagged adult.. It's actually closer to 25% of their traffic. I'm guessing internally they knew that tumblr's adult content was rising faster than the rest of the site, and they certainly don't want it to be primarily adult. It might be better for them long term, but there should be some brushback over this.

    --
    -- these are only opinions and they might not be mine.
  49. Re:Not really... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Someone should make a search engine that *only* indexes the stuff that robots.txt suggests against.

    Those entries aren't "suggestions" - they are instructions I want search engine spiders to unquestionably follow.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  50. The first thing Yahoo did... by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

    Despite their explicit promise "not to screw it up", the very first action Yahoo has taken as owner of Tumbler, is to ruin Tumblr. Major bummer! Looks like I'm going to have to remove all my - decidedly non-pornographic - content and find a new home for it. Any suggestions /. for a less prudish microblogging site?

    Can someone explain to me why Yahoo is still in business? Do they have actual users/customers??

  51. Re:Not really... by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    well said

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  52. Re:The worst kind of censorship... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For Yahoo (an extreme zionist organisation, by the way)

    Citation?

  53. I feel a great distubance in the Force by TheSpoom · · Score: 2

    ...as if millions of wankers suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

    Seriously though, Yahoo has a knack for turning acquisitions to shit. Nobody should be surprised here. Expect more "improvements".

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
  54. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've never used Tumblr, but it sounds like they are saying that people with blogs marked 'adult' should mark their blogs as 'unicorns and puppys' so that they get indexed again?

  55. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    We hate you back

  56. give duh people wut dey want! by Thud457 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Fine! I'm gonna go build my own image microblog, with blackjack and hookers!

    Probably should make it distributed and censorship-resistant by design.
    I propose this new site be named bendr!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:give duh people wut dey want! by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      I propose this new site be named bendr!

      This new site would also filter the results, but would only return things related to the lunar lander, blackjack and hookers.

    2. Re:give duh people wut dey want! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bendrover - even better.

    3. Re:give duh people wut dey want! by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

      Do people search for other things?

    4. Re:give duh people wut dey want! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bendr should not be allowed on the internet!

  57. obscenity != porn by ron_ivi · · Score: 1

    porn ... legal definition of obscenity

    obscenity != porn

    (or at least not necessarily)

    Sure would be nice if the search engines let you choose which of the two (if any) you wanted filtered.

    1. Re:obscenity != porn by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      > obscenity != porn

      That was my entire point. He was using the definition of one narrow thing to define something much more nebulous.

      Was I really that unclear?

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:obscenity != porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The standard legal definition of porn is 'anything that gives the judge a woody'.

    3. Re:obscenity != porn by TWX · · Score: 1

      You'll note that the vast majority of human subjects in paintings that weren't commissioned by a family member of the subject are of attractive nubile women, frequently in a state of undress. That's not an accident.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  58. Porn is not a waste of space because... by fallen1 · · Score: 2

    Pornography is one of the MAIN driving forces behind much of what shapes the web today. It may be a waste of space in your opinion, but there are hundreds of advancements in web design, storage, streaming, and so on that would not be where they are today without Pornography.

    If you don't like it, fine, but give it credit when it is due. Don't dismiss it.

    --

    Dream as if you'll live forever.
    Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
    ~Anonymous~

    1. Re:Porn is not a waste of space because... by chilvence · · Score: 1

      Feh, I like porn as much as the next guy, but porn didn't get mankind to the moon or bring about world peace, and I fucking hate hyperbole...

    2. Re:Porn is not a waste of space because... by jbolden · · Score: 1

      Yes but arguably porn did have a lot to do with:

      GIF as a standard pictorial format
      The ability of operating systems to display graphics / pictures
      Home users having ISP accounts and solving the last mile via. quality home modems
      HTTP winning over Gopher and thus the birth of the Web as the ubiquitous Internet service primarily because of GIFs
      Video played on computers
      Streaming video and all the associated technologies
      The rise of broadband as a mainstream technology

      etc...

  59. Re:Not really... by jakimfett · · Score: 1

    This is brilliant. I'm going to set this up immediately on my own system. Kudos to your hacker mindset.

    --
    Bits of code, random ramblings: jakimfett.com
  60. Re:That's what happens when you put a woman in cha by hazah · · Score: 2

    Most women can't stand porn? Are you a new kind of moron?

  61. More at Eros blog by Sara+Chan · · Score: 3, Informative

    For a good discussion of this, see the following post at Eros blog:
    http://www.erosblog.com/2013/07/19/tumblr-admits-then-denies-hiding-porn/
    Eros reported on this back in May, and here has a good discussion of the evasions and falsehoods from Yahoo!

    1. Re:More at Eros blog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evasions and falsehoods.

      You bronies take your fan-art-with-dicks-pasted-on rather seriously, don't you?

  62. Re:Not really... by jakimfett · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wait, the internet still has ads?

    ::turns off my adblocker::
    ::visits a couple of sites::

    Oh right...wow...this has gotten a lot worse since I last checked...

    ::turns adblocker back on::
    Aaaahhhh...that's better.

    --
    Bits of code, random ramblings: jakimfett.com
  63. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank God. Tumblr really didn't have much of a point to it otherwise.

  64. Re:Not really... by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

    More likely the company is trying to make itself more "family friendly" because they have seen that Ballmer is completely batshit insane and with the Yahoo Search deal going out soon are hoping to get daddy Ballmer to open that big fat wallet to either buy Tumblr or the whole thing.

    Personally if the sweaty one gets his mitts on yahoo some programmer here needs to set up a free email with the yahoo look and a similar chat as they'll slaughter, all that Skype bullshit has caused a LOT of folks to go running to Yahoo (seen that sudden bounce Yahoo had a few months back? Well there ya go) and if the ballmernator replaces Yahoo with "Windows Live Bing 3.0 powered by Skype" you are gonna have a HUGE audience that will be happy to come to you, just charge for a couple of extras and enjoy the money truck that backs up to your place every month.

    Oh and if you do this and make a mint? For a small fee you can have "help powered by Da Feet" which while not always helpful at the very least it'll be entertaining.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  65. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I googled one of the nsfw tumbers I follow and this is what I got for the metadescription;

    A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt – learn more.

    I have no idea what business strategy this is following other than a grey moral high ground. They are going to wreck tumblr by pissing on the user base.

  66. Tell that to the FCC by Jarmihi · · Score: 1

    Porn is, by definition, obscene. Also, as a radio DJ who must be familiar with such things, the FCC says that things that are sexually explicit and have no "literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" are obscene (just like the earlier commenter posted).

    I understand that the government isn't always right, and that the FCC theoretically only has jurisdiction over the United States, but the fact that a vague-but-menacing government agency also says that porn is obscene only helps to defend my (our?) point.

    --
    ~Jarmihi
  67. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't matter in this case, because we weren't interested in the non-blocked stuff anyway.

  68. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Out of curiosity, how many hits do you get for this item and from which crawlers?

  69. Re:That's what happens when you put a woman in cha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Also doesn't help that Mayer is a practicing Christian

  70. Same thing they did with egroups by noldrin · · Score: 2

    Not surprising, this is the same thing they did after they bought egroups back in 2000, they waited a few months, then made the adult groups disappear from the listings and search.

  71. The ISSUE is Not Porn, It Is CENSORSHIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Porn is just a word. The word refers to content some want to censor access to, not by themselves and any they have a legitimate right to control, but by Anyone and everyone (except themselves, who they imagine "able to judge"). This is censorship.

    It is censorship that is Constitutionally illegal in the United States.

    If "porn" can be censored, anything else can be also, based on the precedent that "porn" can and anything equally disagreed with, like other's politics, (e.g., communism), religion, criticism, etc.

    Permitting corporations to censor for the public, for "consumers and potential consumers", who they have no rights to control, is another next step to a corporation-controlled corporatist state.

    1. Re:The ISSUE is Not Porn, It Is CENSORSHIP by fluffy99 · · Score: 1

      It is censorship that is Constitutionally illegal in the United States.

      Please, don't let little things like facts get in your way. The 1st amendment makes it illegal for the US Govt to suppress free speach, it does NOT prevent private entities from controlling content they publish. Yahoo is not doing anything illegal. It's fundamentally no different than Blockbuster deciding they won't stock X-Rated movies, or when 7-11 decided to stop selling Penthouse magazines, or Craigslist deciding to drop certain adult categories.

      Don't like it? Then take your business elsewhere.

  72. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Me too

  73. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A DROP rule doesn't result in a 404, but a timeout.

  74. Re:Not really... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    Still wrong. The point is that yahoo has just killed the one use for Tumblr. Yahoo shutting down their search engine would be less surprising to me. Admittedly, I haven't looked at numbers on that, maybe people still haven't heard of this "google" thing, and maybe a lot of people love sharing cat photos on tumblr.

    The censorship thing isn't important. There are one or two other websites on the internet where you can get porn.

  75. Re:Not really... by Ingenium13 · · Score: 1

    Neat idea. How did you set that up? A custom fail2ban filter? Some other way?

  76. Mayer by rayhigh · · Score: 0

    Marissa is sure a cunning runt.

  77. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tumblr's userbase is used to it.

  78. I'll never understand Yahoo. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All of the opportunity they have after winning the right to publish their private fight against the NSA and the PRISM program...all of the good publicity they could be reaping in...and bang, another shot straight to the same lead-filled foot they've been firing at the past five...six years? It's as if they're trying to succeed at exiting a business and failing at -that- too. I have no idea what they sell or why they're even still solvent, except for that they've just fucked over Tumblr, the only asset they own that I -have- heard of.

  79. Third-party opportunity by PapayaSF · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The people with porn Tumblrs don't need to move, they just need an easy way to be found. Why not a retro, Yahoo-style directory? That's how lots of us found things before search engines got so good. Just start tumblrporn.com (lawyers permitting) and list all the blogs Yahoo doesn't want indexed, in categories. Sell ads. Profit!

    --
    Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
    1. Re:Third-party opportunity by InfoJunkie777 · · Score: 1

      The people with porn Tumblrs don't need to move, they just need an easy way to be found. Why not a retro, Yahoo-style directory? That's how lots of us found things before search engines got so good. Just start tumblrporn.com (lawyers permitting) and list all the blogs Yahoo doesn't want indexed, in categories. Sell ads. Profit!

      As a person who actually USED Yahoo's original search engine, I think this is a wonderful idea, the law permitting, as you so wisely stated. And that it could actually be PROFITABLE as well is intriguing. BTW, you sig is both awesome and sadly totally correct.

      --
      Don't explain computers to laymen. Simpler to explain sex to a virgin. -- Robert A. Heinlein
  80. Re:That's what happens when you put a woman in cha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In my experience, many women on Tumblr enjoy porn that makes the average /.'er's porn look like Zoobilee Zoo.

  81. fixed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Settings > Dashboard > uncheck "Browse tag pages in Safe Mode"

    You're welcome.

  82. Re:Not really... by tlambert · · Score: 1

    my robots.txt contains one item which doesn't exist.
    If you try to access that item your IP is added to the firewall drop list. (until the next reboot)

    I don't even have much hosted, just some pictures I don't want to give to flikr.

    On the other hand, you've just documented your disallowed content, so I actually don't need to access the content itself in order to index it -- I only need to know to download your robots.txt and shove it into my index.

    As the service grows (assuming it does), then I can have a fleet of non-contiguous IP addresses which I use as "content verifiers" for the robots.txt contents (e.g. directories vs. files), and I can "burn" them against your site for content verification.

    The arms race escalation is pretty obvious, and contains some interesting twists, but it's basically an arms race, and you will be as effective against it as the battle against SPAM has been so far (there are strategies there, too, but they involve forcing hosting of email bodies by the email sender and similar techniques).

    So using the same tripwire technique that the phone companies used to use against wardialers (like I used to be, before it was a criminal offense, and then still, before I turned 18) won't prevent the eventual success.

    Personally, I would never do this, since the stuff people think is very private, and then feed to robots in the robots.txt anyway, is generally not very interesting in the first place.

  83. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Taken offline" is alarmist. The content is still publicly available, it just won't show up in search. I can't remember the last time I found a tumblr by searching, particularly image based tumblrs.

  84. Re:Not really... by TWX · · Score: 1

    Especially now that Google has removed that math-undefined bug that basically acted as the opposite of safesearch, instead returning all porn...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  85. Re:Not really... by TWX · · Score: 1

    I'm a little surprised that it's only 10% that are blocked. I figured it'd be only 10% that weren't blocked...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  86. Re:Not really... by TWX · · Score: 1

    There had been a bug in Google that essentially was smutsearch. Basically some kind of irrational math bug that would bring up only porn. They seem to have fixed it though.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  87. Re:Wont work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It wont matter. Since, people *finding* your $5 website will be much harder than finding the real original tumlr site. sadly

  88. Re:Ten percent? My ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So a search engine company just opened up a huge ass search opportunity for a competitor? I would sell their stock if I owned it. Bet this also means not only does Yahoo! search get another competitor but so does Tumblr.

  89. Solution: Move the NSFW content from Tumblr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is enourmous work, but here goes,

    1. *Copy* your entire Tumblr site to another site. Keep it offline for now.

    2. Remove all NSFW content on your tumblr site to see if it can be accepted as non-NSFW...
          *Keep* the entire page structure when possible.

    3. Then start linking and rel=canonical from your tumblr to your new site.

    4. Now make your new site go online.

    (SEO sucks. But that is what makes it valuable, because so few does it right.)

  90. Re:Not really... by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    The firewall may redirect to an all-404 host instead of blocking.

  91. compromise by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

    it's a decent compromise between not wanting to appear as a smut hub but still allowing free speech for users.

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  92. Re:That's what happens when you put a woman in cha by chromas · · Score: 1

    That's why she's hiding the porn instead of removing it.

  93. Re:Not really... by Outtascope · · Score: 1

    Me three

  94. No sympathy for tumblr users. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Especially those who didn't migrate to something like Blogspot or Wordpress as soon as Yahoo grabbed Tumblr. Eight years ago I dumped Flickr when Yahoo took it.
    I knew they would fuck it up and they didn't disappoint me. Yahoo is a cancer on the internet, and should be cut out.

  95. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You think that people only use Tumblr for porn? I know a few Tumblr users that are now being marked NSFW for fairly ridiculous reasons such as partial nudity. So far, it hasn't reached levels of Facebook stupid (photos of breastfeeding bad, photos showing violence against women good). I never liked Yahoo. Yet, I've used a quite a few services that ultimately got bought by Yahoo and changed for the worst. It's like I'm constantly running for my life with Yahoo chasing me. Seriously, Yahoo, fuck off.

  96. Just general disappointment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow. I have no idea what Tumblr was supposed to be for primarily, but the only thing I ever visited it for was soft porn - i.e., tasteful photos of beautiful young naked women. RedTube and so on are really tedious. This Marissa Mayer is turning out to be a top-notch hypocrite and control freak. Everybody suddenly has to work on site, but only one person gets their own personal on-site crèche. Yahoo is a write-off, and she's just making it worse. For historical reasons relating to my ISP, I'm stuck with a Yahoo mail account, but I'm working on migrating away from it. Too bad, because Yahoo was ground-breaking at its inception back in the nineties.

  97. Re:Not really... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

    Porn doesn't matter? Heathen!

  98. Re:Not really... by Pseudonym · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I was thinking that too. I wasn't aware that there was anything on tumblr that wasn't porn.

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  99. @porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So now if there is a blog on Tumblr that I disagree with, I post a comment and tag the post as adult, and the blog goes away. Most users have auto post turned on. Great.

  100. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I kind of do that, except that I have the directory named in the robots.txt file handled by a CGI that generates a list of random email addresses along with a randomized "link" to follow that includes a depth count. If they follow the link, the CGI delays a little bit of time proportional to the depth, and gives them another page of bogus email addresses with yet another link. The idea is to tarpit their stupid bot, and if they happen to be crawling for email addresses, give them lots of those.

  101. It's not like it matters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It won't be long. Someone will just make another free-for-all porn host. The die has been cast. Yahoo will have spent a billion dollars for the privilege of watching some new site spring up and take back the golden goose. As for the concerns about moving to a new blog, I doubt seriously that it will be a difficult process. Word travels pretty fast round these parts.

  102. Re: Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait, there was a reverse safe search???

  103. Re:That's what happens when you put a woman in cha by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    That's why she's hiding the porn instead of removing it.

    Jokes on her; I fap to this.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  104. Re:Not really... by Maritz · · Score: 1

    Jesus saves etc.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  105. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you've posted from the wrong account, hairyfeet. You almost sound negative toward Microsoft. You should have used your billygates account... at least people expect it to be random and nonsensical with a hint of monkeys getting lucky at the ol typewriter feel.

  106. Re:Not really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe they should do a movie about censoring zombies. that'd be cool.

  107. Re:Not really... by Chrontius · · Score: 1

    That really only works when you can count on hosts to not abuse robots.txt - if I were Google, I'd start ignoring all robots.txt on Tumblr. You can more or less expect them to be malicious, so you make rules to limit the damage. Easy peasy. You abuse it? Well, that's why you can't have nice things.