So if someone types "child por" in, should Google autocomplete if a common request is "child porn"?
Also, don't call the guy's argument lame, just answer it. Be civil.
Also, don't call the guy's argument lame, just answer it. Be civil.
There's a balance between being afraid of your own shadow and being reasonably careful/safe. Think about that.
You used the words "reasonably careful/safe", which I assume means you're not subscribing to an extremist position. Similarly, I don't hold an extremist position on this and am simply highlighting that there are grey areas that Google has to deal with. If it were easy, they'd have made an obvious decision years ago and wouldn't need to change it.
Similarly, the argument to legalise drugs. Personally, I agree with the argument, but a similar demand-supply problem exists in human trafficking (e.g. child sex slavery), but there I think the laws should continue to keep the latter illegal even while it supports the high profits that human traffickers can make. What do you think?
In general I dont think that consumption of child pornography is much of a crime, the harm has been done by then, and some poor sad git masturbating over a 3 year old isn't going to make it any worse.
Personally I would rather they put significant resources into catching those people who create it, than into changing search engines and blocking dns addresses so that everyone can pretend it doesn't exist.
Given the threat our lawmakers believe piracy poses to content-producers, and that they wish to suppress the production of child porn, perhaps they should actually encourage the piracy of child porn...
(I jest, of course, but the law itself is none too rational here.)
I am unsure what problem you actually believe is being solved by google?
What google appears to be doing now is attempting to pretend that neither supply nor demand exist at all.
The insanity of that must be fairly obvious?