Slashdot Mirror
Google Scours 1.2 Million URLs To Conform With EU's "Right To Be Forgotten" Law (engadget.com)
An anonymous reader writes: According to a Google report the company has evaluated 1,234,092 URLs from 348,085 requests since the EU's May 2014 "right to be forgotten" ruling, and has removed 42% of those URLs. Engadget reports: "To show how it comes to its decisions, the company shared some of the requests it received and its decisions. For example: a private citizen that was convicted of a serious crime, but had that conviction overturned during appeal, had search results about the crime removed. Meanwhile a high ranking public official in Hungary failed to get the results squelched of a decades-old criminal conviction. Of course, that doesn't mean the system is perfect and the company has already been accused of making mistakes."
It could be said that at least they're trying. I doubt any system that has to make such judgement calls will ever be perfect.
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
spirit of creation a lost puppy presents as much value as all the tea in china etc...? the gratitude edition of ask edward snowden your questions here on /.....
One of the Tolkien's core beliefs, and a central pillar of his LotRs trilogy, is he abhorrence of tyranny. But one thing he maintained, and showed off a little with the struggle of the good guys from harassing the power of the Ring, is that Tyranny is always bad, but it is worse if the all powerful ruler actually cares about their subjects. A uncaring, self obsessed, ruler will at least give you enough lease to pursue your life as you see fit when it does not interferer with their ambitions. While a caring omnipotent ruler would control every aspect of their citizens lives out of love of them. Gandelf could of took up the ring at anytime and destroyed Sauron, but that use of power would of corrupted him. Leading him to ever greater and greater uses of power to protect the denizens of Middle Earth; Until unerringly, he enslaved their wills to protect them from themselves.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
The entire process involves human evaluation and a subjective analysis. There are no mistakes, only disagreements with the decisions made.
(I am not talking about "oops, wrong button!" kind of mistakes, and I assume the article isn't either.)
If Google keeps trying to make a joke out of it, then how can this ever succeed? This system needs to be perfected, not laughed at!
Why should we allow any foreign laws to have effects upon people in the US? If I wish to hire or associate with another person why should I not be able to dredge up their life history? Recently a nursing home was pushed by an advocate to hire a woman from a halfway house. I know that she may not have been a criminal, but she did have addictions to alcohol or some other substances. Her motive for taking the job was very likely to steal medications from the elderly. She only worked two nights before she neglected a patient so badly that the woman staggered into a kitchen area and bled to death over a period of at least one hour. That second chance and giving a hand up business has to be combined with common sense. Without being able to get a detailed history of the applicant just how does an employer make sound judgements? I would assume that the death will cost the nursing home a king's ransom.
You really shouldn't reveal so much about yourself on forums like this
Google, share those requests with a 3rd party
so that they can keep them available and searchable.
Only criminals and politicians want to be forgotten.
Or more like have their crimes forgotten.
It is a citizen right to access information and to share it.
I think that in the long run international search engines can not last.
In common English usage the words your and you are increasingly used to refer to oneself in a broader manner than the egotistical use of I and my. What does your comment say about you?
Please add scare quotes to "law" too, because there is no such law, and never has been. It was a ruling, a ruling stating local national laws also apply to Google evne if the local laws are stupid, but it there was never any EU laws involved.
Do newspapers also need to censor their old microfiche and archived paper copies, and also go door to door destroying any old copies that people or businesses may have laying around, and to the dump as well? If not, then why just pick on google, and not all other forms of media? Also, they should probably destroy the memories of human beings that remember the accusations coming out on the news.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
It says that you don't know what you're talking about. You assert that "you" now means the generic group "you", yet you use "you" in the identified specific.Either that or you mean to include you in that conclusion you came to from what you wanted to be drawn by others.
And we know what that says about YOU.
I have a question. Does anyone know of a good search engine that isn't censored? Not that I want to dig up dirt on anyone. I would just like to get results that haven't been tampered with by governments. Because, you know, I don't believe that they know what is best for me.
WEb indexing/search is too important to leave to a government or corporation... Right to be forgotten is too dangerous, and will be abused... If someones conviction was overturned, the nature of the search and date should show as much.
Everyone has to have democracy. No other law allowed. Everyone has to have YOUR version of freedom. No other allowed. YOUR laws are to be accepted, but you refuse international law yourself.
Why should the rest of the world be tied up by US law because some of the biggest multinationals have a HQ in the USA and you insist that US law therefore binds the subsidiaries when they're in different lands?
Why is it only YOUR Version of freedom of speech (which excludes the freedom from harassment by your employer) must be right, and only that version? WHY do private individuals and industries get to abridge your freedom of speech? It's not freedom if you can get fired or have the company get GOVERNMENT forces to prosecute you for speech they don't like?
Why is it 18 for an adult and not 16 or 14 as it is in some other countries?
Why is it you want YOUR laws universal but refuse to accept that companies wanting to work in another country have to accept the laws there?
Not while I have a robots.txt on my website!
Do these guys know that Google indexes the content that others are making available? And that the 'offending' content is still publicly available?
And it took 2.0146 seconds.
In other news "NSA reports adding 1.2 millions URL to their watchlist"
I am from the EU, and I have severe problems accepting a "right to be forgotten". It basically forces Google (and other search engines) to lie, to knowingly hand out false information. There is a major difference between forgetting things and keeping silent about them. Everyone who scours old information should be aware that with time, the relevance of information often fades. And that is the problem: it *OFTEN* fades, but not always. Some information remains relevant over long periods of time.
Once the infrastructure is in place for the 'right to be forgotten', it will become much easier to create 'Unpersons'. Orwellianisms bathed in faux Human Rights?
Listen to my music.
Yes, but the ones making the content available are liable for any potential libel and illegal publishing of private data. Google is not, despite signal boosting the info beyond anything the original offenders could have hoped to accomplish.
So now, they are forced to take those links down upon request. This seems fair enough, considering they do the same for large media corporations' DMCA complaints.
Pepperidge Farm rememebers.
Multitasking: Just Say No
Moo cows moo. And then be forgotten.
A big step for few rich european powerful people, a big step back of rationalism/ transparency/ equality/ progress in Europe/ for Europeans.