1. 6
  1. 6

    Did I miss something? How do we know that the best search results for “celebrity threesome injunction” are pages about particular people? I just performed this search and got back lots of articles about the injunction (mostly in UK press, who naturally seem to care more than I ever would). I wasn’t expecting Google to decipher my request and return links to the blocked articles. Were you?

    In any case, both Google and DDG include results with names. So answer to the question seems no.

    1. 4

      The final addendum recognizes that this is a Yahoo! censorship, and suggest ddg uncensor, seamingly by hand, future attempts at censorship…

      I’m usually in agreement with RMS philosophically, and agree here that it’d be better to unmask censorship, etc. Practically speaking though, how could ddg even do that at scale? Monitor all public govt proceedings for injunctions like this? Commit “treason” by paying dark members of the intelligence community? Host an anonymous censorship reporting site? Crawl and index the Internet fully by itself, and diff BOSS Results? (If I am not mistaken they do already index some things, so maybe not too much of a stretch)

      Maybe they should do one of those things, or likely something else, but I don’t know… Seems likely to cause problems for them.

      1. 2

        My first thought was that NewsDiffs might have captured it. But it appears Yahoo domains aren’t among the news sites it monitors, so oh well. http://newsdiffs.org/browse/

        Of course, NewsDiffs could also be subject to legal action. That’s a risk with every such service. It’s more oriented at documenting when papers change their own articles, far less at protecting against censorship.

    2. 2

      It seems like RMS is barking up the wrong tree here. The real issue is that the injunction itself is a stupid waste of time.

      Realistically, every search engine needs to be hosted somewhere, and whatever country they pick, there’s going to be some things that they’ll be required to censor or not make available.