What's wrong with Google? Can a new search engine that's

Google's success is built on people's laziness. Laziness online is one of the biggest killers of diversity of content, and it's unavoidable.

>>128966271
guys he stole this pic from another thread don't fucking google it

>>128966425
Well...damn

File: 1496891737665.jpg (36KB, 500x364px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x364px

>>128966681

>>128966780
You know some dumbass will still google it just give it time

Do not search this. It's CP

>not using bing
retards

>>128966970
I've heard people say "it's legal"
I have literally no idea if it's true

File: 1496742775201.jpg (97KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 600x900px

>>128966942
I myself haven't looked it up, so I technically have no clue what it entails

>>128967108
like it's not even fucking sexual it's just nudist colony shit
Why wouldn't it be legal?

>>128967148
My advice would be wait a couple days then post the pic in PTG or something and then enjoy

>>128966271
Aww hell no! I ain't clicking that shit again. Okay, maybe just once more.

>>128966681
I was there

>implying I'm not on a watchlist already

who fucking cares

>>128967761
So was I. We were discussing a shit stool and my loose movements. The consensus seemed to be I had super AIDS

i reall dont get the whole pedophile thing, all these little girls have pretty similar bodies to the boys what even makes them more attractive? Nothing.

>>128968039
It's a mental illness for a reason.

>>128967210
Why the fuck does google even allow it?

>>128967210
Heard a really interesting programme on the radio about this. Two indentical images can be legal and illegal at the same time. It's the context and the use of the material.
>cherub painted next to God - legal
>cherub painted next to naked man in a sexual manner - illegal
It gets even more confusing in the photographic art world where pictures displayed in an art gallery would be considered child pornography if found on your hard drive.

It was very interesting in a "the law is mad" sort of way

File: smugdoggo.jpg (49KB, 494x378px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 494x378px

>>128966271
>people listened to that pic

say hi to the FBI guys

>>128966271
>or will we ironically fall to free market competition?
>ironically
That's a feature of capitalism, not a bug.

>>128966271
Stop posting this here u cp loving fagot go post it on ur leftest shill twitter where u got it from!

>>128968867
Context. They're nudists so it's fine
If same pictures were sent to you on Snapchat then you've just received child pornography from a minor.

I'm not defending the images but it shows how odd the law is in this sort of thing.

If you fap to a legal picture of a minor is that an offence? If so, what law did you break?

>>128969294
The law of being a decent human being.

>>128968867
Anything inside your cache can't be held against you, since a cache can contain automatically generated/retrieved or user-generated content that you weren't necessarily explicitly seeking out.
If you actively saved and stored the illegal content then you're open season.

There was a court case where a dude got off for pics found in his cache.
Obviously there's a lot armchair lawyer here.

>>128967108
its technically legal cause parents taking photos of kids in a bath isnt illegal. being naked isnt illegal but we are all on more watchlists now

>>128966681
I actually did and holy shit.
How the fuck can people get in picked up by the alphabet agencies when all they have to do is google this shit.
I demand google taken down amd sued for 10000000000000000000 dollars because they are enabling this fucking filth. Im so mad, they deserve the rope

>>128968637
ahh that makes sense

>>128967907
I'm just waiting to be arrested at this point

>>128968637
Not for long, some people have been trying to push LGBTP (P is for "Pedosexual")

>>128966271

some open source stuff, google is a zionist tool now

>>128968867
This image has been floating around for years, I highly doubt anyone who googles that shit is on a watchlist or it would number in the hundreds of millions by now.

>>128966271
why weren't there any nude beauty pageants around when I was 13

>>128966271
I have no idea why I fell for your pic related fuck you

>>128969405
That's a moral stance not a law. Google is putting up naked pictures of children. It must have deemed them legal. So if someone faps to them what law have they broken?

Have they broken the law? You could argue by sexualising the image (you fapped to it) it is now an offence of child pornography but someone would have to witness you fapping I think?

>>128971091
Is it pedo-related like anons itt have implied?

>>128971191
Only if you are a pedo.
It's just nudist pictures with some kids. There isn't anything inherently wrong with it... nor is it illegal

>>128971191
when they v& me tell my family I hate the jews

>>128970948
Good. The more ridiculous it gets, the sooner it implodes.

>>128966271
>will we ironically fall to free market competition

Free market competition is exactly what will save us from Google, if they fuck up too hard and drive away to many people, demand for an alternative will skyrocket, in which someone will provide.

>>128971515
I hope you're right. However, my experience has been that with every new thing being pushed there are always people who say that the system will implode on itself and, disgustingly, it doesn't and people end up following yet another kike scheme. It's worrisome how devoted people are to absolute degeneracy.

>>128970872
>getting arrested
>for browsing google image

how new are you ?

It's going to be hard since website block most of the indexing. They allow Google to do it for "indexing". But it's not really indexing. It's data scrapping. Try to scrap Google and see what happens. You get blocked.

>>128971902
Even if it doesn't, at the very least it will give decent people a clear target. Everyone under that banner of degeneracy will get the rope when the time comes.