8 years ago
20
Google Will Honor Requests To Remove “Revenge Porn” From Search Results
In a brief blog post released today, Google said that it will soon introduce a formal process that will allow web users to request removal of “revenge porn” images from Google’s search engine.
Continue Reading
http://techcrunch.com
Join the Discussion
Been thinking about these kinds of issues a lot recently. Unlike a lot of clueless politicians that believe all activity should not be anonymous I believe people should have the right to protect their identity online. This includes removing pictures on request as well as protecting the publication of home addresses without the resident's consent.
I use to be a big fan of operations that expose doxing information like this with the Scientology protests, but I feel this kind if behavior has no place in civil discourse. Doesn't matter the motive. Political, revenge, or even if you have good intentions.
I don't get how revenge porn works. Does the disgruntled revenge porner submit the nude vids and pics to porn sites? Is there some other medium I don't know about for hosting revenge porn? How does the revenge pornee find out about the porn? I assume that in many of the cases the revenge pornee is blackmailed by the revenge porner but there has to be times where the revenge pornee just stumbles upon themselves appearing on one of those "hot, local, singles in your area looking to fuck" advertisement that are littered all over porn sites. When I am on a porn site and want to watch some hardcore amateur action, is there a good chance that I am unknowingly watching revenge porn? So many questions. Would love to hear from someone that has been involved in some revenge porn shenanigans.
Not myself, but have had it happen to a couple friends of mine. Basically, in their situations anyway, they sent nude or partially-nude suggestive photos to their boyfriends during their relationship. There was consent between two adults, and the understanding that the photos would be deleted. Well, the guys never deleted them and just lied and said they did. When the relationship turned sour they put the photos out for the public to see. This is where is got different for different people; one of my friends had her photos submitted to a "meet local singles" porn site, where it was used in several banner ads, another friend they sent it to all of her friends and family that they could (she ended up getting the police involved), and another had her photos posted to facebook and tagged (which were taken down within 24 hours by facebook admins, but the damage had been done).
I don't think it's right to blame the victims at all in this situation. They were manipulated and lied to by someone that they trusted. The blame falls on the person who did this to them, not them for "letting it happen by taking the photos in the first place".
Thanks for response. That would would really suck to see yourself pop up on a porn banner ad. Seems like it would be hard to get the banner ads wiped from all porn sites. The blackmailing by sending to the persons family I have actually heard of before - a guy (who is a piece of shit) threatened to send nude pics to his girlfriend's dad if she didn't get back together with him, she didn't so he sent the pics to the dad and it got ugly. Posting the pics on facebook just seems stupid because it is just social suicide for both people. I agree with you though, nude pics are one of those things that should be off limit regardless of how bad the breakup is. That stuff if provided in confidentiality, people are going to have to start signing non-disclosure agreements when they break up!
I just had to explain to someone voat why google blocking these kinds of sites is not an affront to free speech. Kind of thinking it's time to get off the internet for the day.
How did you even survive over there for that long? Every time I check out the site it feels like someone threw acid on my brain.
Honestly it's because I like the concept of it, just not necessarily the people there right now. Also a lot of the obscure subreddits that satisfied my dark sense of humor are starting to show up there....
The concept of it is the exact concept of reddit, hence why its tauted as nothing more than a clone. All the worst people left reddit for it. Im scared to even wander in there.
It's the open speech concept that I like, the one which reddit was sort of founded on. That does mean you have to tolerate shitty people though, and the community does less to regulate itself.
It wouldn't be so bad if there weren't so many shitty people occupying it right now. I'm kind of bouncing back and forth on it.
Voat is still running? I thought their host stopped because of political correctness or something like that.
No they had transferred to a different server right before that happened. That was more of a "principal of the thing" kinda deal.
Or maybe just don't take nude photos of yourself or make sex videos and you will be fine and not have to jump through these hoops.
People have been taking candid photos and videos since the technology to do so became available. It's only been recently that the risk of getting exposed to the entire world was introduced. I don't think it's reasonable to blame the victims here.
Exactly. It's kind of a stupid thing to do because of the potential consequences, but at the same time if people want to explore their sexuality through exhibitionism their privacy should be respected.
That being said, it's still probably not a good idea. But it sucks that people who might want to experiment with that should be so scared to. I don't see anything inherently wrong with that.
There's always been a risk of sensitive materials being shared with unauthorized parties, the only difference now is how many. I'm also not sure that "warning people of very obvious risks" constitutes victim blaming. If you can do something to easily avoid a problem and you didn't do it, well, that should be a lesson for your ass. There's a difference between "it's your fault" and "you unwisely accepted risk."
Don't loan money you can't afford to lose, don't say things you don't want remembered and don't share photos you don't want loose.
Photos taken during intimacy are taken with the reasonable expectation of privacy. It is not the fault of the victim that the person they initially trusted betrayed that trust. How about instead of teaching people to be afraid to trust we teach people not to betray that trust?
" It is not the fault of the victim that the person they initially trusted betrayed that trust. "
You're not listening. Again, there's a difference between saying "this was your fault" and saying "you exposed yourself to risk, and the dice didn't go your way."
"How about instead of teaching people to be afraid to trust we teach people not to betray that trust?"
For the same reason that we teach people not to run into traffic AND teach drivers to look out for random pedestrians running out into traffic: Because there are TWO points of failure in the equation. Pretending there's only one is not going to help anyone. Why do you insist on a false dichotomy of "either/or" when, clearly, both approaches are called for?
"Teach people not to betray each other." Human society and psychology are not remotely as black and white or as simple as you're suggesting.
There are certain things we learn not to do. Don't kill people. Don't hurt people. Don't steal. When people follow their impulse to do these things anyway we focus on their behavior as the primary fault. Sure we can teach people how to minimize the threat from getting hurt or stolen from but we don't shame the victims for what was done to them. Chiding people who take candid shots of themselves is blaming the victim.
[This comment was removed]