Sign in / up

back to article Google: Help us! Our search engine is STUFFED FULL of your 'revenge smut' pics

Google has promised it will yank from its web search results links to "revenge porn" pics – which are typically sexy snaps leaked online by jilted exes – if the subjects of the images ask nicely. The ad giant said people whose nude photos have been published without their consent will be able to file requests via an online …

COMMENTS

Post your comment
House rules Send corrections
Add to 'My topics' unstar *
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Silly question

    How do you prove you're the target in the photo?

    Suppose there was a photo of a consenting model on a website and I wanted to get at that person, what stops me pretending to be that person asking Google to take down the image? How do they prove I am (or am not) that person in the photo?

    Or what if it's a case of mistaken identity?

    3 2 Reply
    1. x 7
      Reply Icon

      Re: Silly question

      what a stupid question.

      What you do is submit another nude photo showing the same details to prove its you

      i.e. make sure the same birthmarks, caesarean scars, stretchmarks are all there for comparison

      Of course Google would have to keep copies of those in case the take-down was challenged

      11 2 Reply
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Silly question

        "i.e. make sure the same birthmarks, caesarean scars, stretchmarks are all there for comparison"

        I have birthmarks but the rest ...

        Your choice of determinants leads me to believe that you haven't considered that men could be affected by this issue.

        It's unlikely anyone is going to post pics of me in the altogether: I have a small EMP device setup for deployment should the need arise.

        2 3 Reply

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Silly question

            > That is a problem with society in general.

            Please define which society you're talking about, because when I used to live in Southern Europe, these things you mention were well known by police, courts, judges, and (where applicable) juries, and were controlled for.

            Amongst other things, that's why if you allege to be the victim of mistreatment, you can expect one or more extensive interviews with a forensic psychologist, whose job is to assess the credibility of your allegations and report to the judge. Forensic physicians are also involved if any form of physical violence is said to have occurred. It does happen that people (particularly women, granted) think it may be a good idea to spice up their divorce proceeding with a claim of mistreatment or two, until they are reminded of the penalties for perjury, at which point most reassess their strategy. Similarly, it is known that men are also vulnerable, and old people especially, and in those cases the same specialists mentioned above will add weight to the victim's claims (more often, it is social workers who first discover and report mistreatment of old and vulnerable people outside of conjugal cases).

            So, careful with those disinformed opinions of yours.

            4 3 Reply

            1. This post has been deleted by its author

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Reply Icon
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Silly question

              So, careful with those disinformed opinions of yours.

              A few years back I had a friend in NZ who was in an altercation with his wife. Police were called.

              The first things the police did were 1 officer call paramedics while the other started CPR on him. It was stated later in court that had the police arrived even a minute later he would've died from his injuries.

              He spent several days in a coma in hospital, and recieved further charges for failing to appear in court. They were thankfully dropped.

              He got life-threatening injuries, and a prison sentence.

              She got the house, and to spend some time in government-funded "victim counselling".

              It should've been clear from the lack of any injuries on her and the extent of injuries on him, especially defensive-type wounds to the arms, that she was the aggressor. But she's a woman, he's a guy, so he must've assaulted her or somehow been entirely at fault.

              Not all men are automatically abusers, and women aren't automatically victims. Quite often (some stats suggest most often) women are the more violent. And some countries are still backwards enough/under the grip of feminism and won't recognise this.

              5 0 Reply
              1. Anonymous Coward
                Reply Icon
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Silly question

                > A few years back I had a friend in NZ who was in an altercation with his wife. Police were called.

                That's an example of why I mentioned in another post that generalising statements should be qualified. Things in NZ may or may not be the same as in other parts of the world.

                I draw my experience from my time in the emergency services, where we attended to many cases like the one you describe and the follow-up (e.g., as witnesses in court). You have subjective knowledge of one event; we've been involved in hundreds of those in a professional capacity, hence my comment that, at least where I worked, the system was generally fair and even-handed.

                4 1 Reply
            3. Anonymous Coward
              Reply Icon
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Silly question

              Well you live in a ratively civilized place. Many of us live in North America. A mixed and substandard bag when it's not completely barbaric.

              3 1 Reply
        2. x 7
          Reply Icon

          Re: Silly question

          "Your choice of determinants leads me to believe that you haven't considered that men could be affected by this issue."

          No - just that most men won't be bothered by nude photos of themselves (unless shown in action with a sheep or choirboy), while most women will be. I think most men would secretly be quite pleased to have photos on the internet showing their todger hanging out, its just that most - while wanting it - haven't got the nerve to do it.

          0 0 Reply
      2. Allan George Dyer
        Reply Icon
        Joke

        Re: Silly question

        "Of course Google would have to keep copies of those"

        And employ people to look at the photos and verify the match. Google's HR department could become a very lucrative revenue stream.

        2 2 Reply
        1. Sleep deprived
          Reply Icon
          Happy

          Re: Silly question

          I just applied for a photo-comparing job at Google.

          0 0 Reply
  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    That's nice, but

    Sounds like a slippery slope. Why is it OK to have nude or sexually explicit links removed, but not other stuff? Let's say you were pranked in the prom and elected queen and had a bucket of blood dropped on you and someone filmed it. That would be pretty humiliating, many would consider it worse than having naked pictures of you on the internet.

    So if they remove those, what about something a little less, and a little less, and eventually I'm asking Google to remove this post because I feel bad that it received a few downvotes.

    8 2 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Pint

      Re: That's nice, but

      I UVd your post because I think you are making a good point but invoking the "slippery slope" mantra can lead to a dangerous fallacy eventually. I think you managed to stumble into that fallacy because the slippery slope needs to be a continuous, smooth slope with clear links between each component . However you manage to jump from nudie pics on t'tubes to Carrie - there's a pretty large disconnect there. I see where you are coming from but the article is about one and not the other.

      Nice use of the slippery mountain argument structure in the second para though. That makes a pleasant counterpoint to para one.

      4 2 Reply
    2. Doctor_Wibble
      Reply Icon

      Re: That's nice, but

      > and eventually I'm asking Google to remove this post because I feel bad that it received a few downvotes.

      Unfortunately your request for comment removal has been denied because the single downvote recorded to date may simply have been in error. A request is not considered valid unless the 'trauma threshold' of 50 has been reached, after adjustments to take into account any clickbait potential. Public removal requests such as this are rated '10' on the Streisand Scale, giving you a current VBITDA* of -9, 'be grateful for the compliment'.

      *VBITDA : Votes By Internet Tards Dissing Articles

      4 1 Reply
    3. big_D Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: That's nice, but

      Last year Google were claiming the right to be forgotten in Europe was wrong, now they are starting to offer it in other regions (for specific offences). Well, it is a start.

      2 0 Reply
    4. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: That's nice, but

      Something Europe's wrestled with for years. It should all be on the table. Examine the stated case, err on the side of the complatant. Not too tough.

      1 0 Reply
    5. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: That's nice, but

      As in why should YOU be able to publish a photo of ME when I am not in the PUBLIC DOMAIN if I OBJECT. Excuse the caps.

      1 1 Reply
      1. big_D Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: That's nice, but

        @DHorse over here, unless you are a celebrity out in public, they can't publish a photo of you without your consent.

        0 0 Reply
    6. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: That's nice, but

      Don't try it on a girl with telekinetic powers

      0 0 Reply
  3. Mitoo Bobsworth

    Correction

    "The advertising giant monster..."

    There, FTFY.

    2 2 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Correction

      Google: The Global Advertising and Data Slurping MegaCorp.

      They are well on the way to becoming the real life Omni Consumer Products (robocop)

      IMHO naturally.

      2 0 Reply
  4. tkioz

    I have very little sympathy for people who knowingly posed for a nude or sexually explicate photo or video. Yes the people posting the data and those making money off are sleazy as hell, but simple common sense should tell you that relationships end, and people will act in a spiteful manner.

    Don't want your naughty bits to show up online for people to frap too? DON'T LET PEOPLE TAKE THE PHOTO IN THE FIRST PLACE MORON.

    3 10 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      > I have very little sympathy for people who knowingly posed for a nude or sexually explicate photo or video

      Firstly, the word you want is "explicit", not "explicate". Elsewhere, you also misspelled "to".

      Secondly, people have different expectations as to how others, and particularly those who are emotionally close to them, would behave. It would be a very sad world indeed one in which everyone distrusted everyone else, even their friends and partners. I'd much rather take being fucked over by a friend or girlfriend than being a Billy no mates.

      Thirdly, even if someone would be a "moron" as you put it, they still need to have some sort of recourse to help them out of whatever predicament they might have got themselves in.

      It doesn't cost that much to show some sympathy to others, even if you do not agree with them. You may even be rewarded in kind, instead of being thought of as an arrogant idiot.

      7 0 Reply
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      @tkios

      What a narrow minded person you appear to be. Have you ever had an intense sexual relationship? People do things that they wouldn't otherwise.

      Perhaps you are to be pitied rather than censured.

      4 1 Reply
      1. tkioz
        Reply Icon

        Re: @tkios

        >>People do things that they wouldn't otherwise.

        Sure do. Should we feel pity for idiots who get drunk and sleep with someone they otherwise would? Hell no. No-one forced them to drink, just like no-one forced them to pose for nudes.

        I don't care how high on endorphins you are, if you think that your nudes are secure you're a fool. Don't do stupid shit and it wont come back to haunt you.

        1 7 Reply
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: @tkios

          > Don't do stupid shit and it wont come back to haunt you.

          Don't do stupid shit and live a sad, lonely, empty, uninteresting, and unrewarding life.

          Do some stupid shit and, to the extent that none else is seriously injured or inconvenienced, hope you'll be forgiven for it.

          1 0 Reply
    3. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Though your post is sound advice private, intimate activities between consenting adults are just that.

      0 0 Reply
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        "Though your post is sound advice private, intimate activities between consenting adults are just thatoften what makes life worth living."

        ftfy

        0 0 Reply
  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    My life is so dull, I've actually had to make up a bunch of stuff and apply to Google to have it included in search results. Google doesn't make this process easy; just try finding the form...

    4 0 Reply
    1. Old Handle
      Reply Icon

      What? It's right here: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/submit-url

      And it wasn't hard to find at all, I just googled it.

      2 0 Reply
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Well before the Internet we all wrote leters to Playboy. A sad venue for sad people. ;)

      0 0 Reply
      1. AegisPrime
        Reply Icon
        Paris Hilton

        Some great articles in there though *cough*

        0 0 Reply
  6. Mr Dogshit

    There's something I still don't get

    If you don't let someone take pictures of you in the buff, said pictures can't end up on line.

    Am I missing something?

    0 1 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: There's something I still don't get

      You missed the hidden camera.

      0 0 Reply
  7. Rick Brasche

    so how about politicians pecadillos?

    so if a politician is "caught out" can he (or she) get the "offensive" material removed simply because it contains nudity? How about "revenge email" or "revenge text"? or anything else once sent consentually but now potentially damaging to one's reputation or career?

    1 0 Reply

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

Forgotten password ?

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like