
Permalink for comment 545009
RE[3]: About time
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 13th Dec 2012 11:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: About time"
Member since:


Yes, but my point was that you cannot get any more blunt and downright to the point than that. And the space? Come on--it's highly common to be spelled both ways, so no matter what at least a few pictures should pop up.


On the Google site for the United States, before this change, if you just typed in "pussy" with the censoring turned off, almost everything would be be nudity and sexual. Now... there's still no cats, and none of the "other" pussy, but the results are now loaded with pictures of fully-clothed women and other random crap--which doesn't make sense in either sense of the word. No, no clothed crotch shots that I could find in my 25 seconds testing their newly-neutered image search function either.


Tits, titties, boobs, boobies, hooters, jugs, melons, rack, breasts--whatever, there are countless slang words and they're all referring to the same thing. And unlike jugs, melons and rack, titties should be obvious enough to the point that something relevant shows up.


The intention was, if "titties" shows clothed ones with covered nipples, then surely "nipples" should result in actual, uncovered nipples. But even that didn't work. Plus, nipslips are not even porn; I was specifically using words that would normally be guaranteed to result in tons of nudity and actual porn. Searching for nipslips wouldn't be a very good way of putting the new engine to the test.

Ironically, if you add "naked" or "nude" to any single one of the search terms I've tried, you will in fact have struck the porn jackpot, and pictures that are expected (for the most part) will dominate the results. Additionally you will get a different set of images depending on the modifier you use, but it'll pretty much all porn. But is it really necessary to complicate things and make it seem to "not work" to anyone actually seeking this stuff? This new image search simply doesn't work as it's expected (put another way, it doesn't work how it should), no explanation why not, and again--no option to bring common sense functionality back.

Clearly the search terms I tested (potential exception: pussy, due to multiple meanings) are perfectly descriptive to be found with the "naked" and "nude" modifiers, which just confirms once again that Google is trying to censor the Web for their users. Yes, even "fellatio" with these modifiers works, though as expected don't expect to find much decent ("blowjob" returns poor results too, though).

Edited 2012-12-13 11:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3