Challenge: search "white couple" in jewgle images and

>>133937511
Challenge: try and critically understand how Google algorithms work and why searching "white couple" primes the system to show you couples with one white and one non-white.

It's not a conspiracy, it's down to how Google ranks its search results.

File: 43qg3g.png (3MB, 1920x1042px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1042px

wtf?

When u search "black couple" it's the opposite. Only black people and no white babies, e.t.c, compared to "white couple"

>>133937704
it doesn't prime anything because google usually prefers to promote results that match the search phrase verbatim to the top of your search results

not in this case!

File: Untitled.jpg (303KB, 1344x645px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1344x645px

>>133937511
oh heck 2nd picture is two white faggots with a black baby that they are obviously going to take turns raping

>>133937781
>>133937908
Right wing retards don't understand how Google search algorithm works.

Hint: Pages with the most links from other pages are ranked higher. Pictures of completely white couples are very rarely labelled with "white". Why bother pointing out their race when people can see it?

On the other hand, there are lots of web pages and blogs dedicated to showing pictures of mixed and black couples.

So when you search "white couple", Google finds a picture with the label "WHITE black mixed COUPLE" or "interracial WHITE Asian COUPLE" and shows you those pictures.

>>133938163
stock photos are always labelled with the bleeding obvious, so the results should be littered with stock photos of white couples

>>133937511
>2017
>using google
Enjoy your botnet

>>133938044
Now here comes the critical thinking bit Mr right wind retard.

How often do you see pictures of white couples on blogs or news stories LABELLED as specifically white? When pictures of white couples show up it's usually in blogs or articles that don't have a racial component to the discussion, so your phrase "white couple" isn't going to find anything.

On the other hand, when pictures are used of mixed couples, it's nearly always in blogs and articles where the accompanying text has a racial component, so your search phrase "white couple" is going to find a lot more matches.

That's what I mean by priming the system to show you mixed couples.

>>133937511
>not using Bing

File: test3.png (4KB, 180x215px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 180x215px

>>133938044
>>133937781
>>133937511
>>133937704

It does this because it assumed that because you specified race, you wanted to see results related to race.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-17_04-43-08.png (1MB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x800px

>>133937511
Oy vey! Delet this now! It's pure coincidence, goy!

>>133938163
Your theory doesn't hold, as pointed by others. "Black couple", "asian couple", "jewish couple" all show only the correct results. Google has shown multiple times to "fix" results to further jewish zionist agenda, this just strengthens the proof. And your defense is so weak the other jews must be ashamed of you.

>>133938214
Yeah, and for most white people who aren't /pol/acks, when labelling a picture of a white couple, the race won't occur to them, so it will be labelled "happy couple" or "smiling couple" or "playful couple".

When those same regular non-/pol/ people label a picture of a mixed couple, they will pick up on the racial component and include those terms, once again increasing the image's ranking on a search for "white couple".

Go ahead, try searching "smiling couple" and "happy couple".

If you only search couple, you will get more white ppl
>>133938044
>Google algorithms work
I'd say this is a very weird "error"

>>133938332
>not using startpage

please read the /g/ wiki

File: Screenshot_20170717-094349.png (2MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x1920px

Specifying "white" introduces some sort of racial element to the article the image is attached to.

Here's the results for "couple".

You're an idiot.

>>133938415
ok fuck everything I'm out

>>133938443
Startmail is good too. I have four accounts.

Well? Prove it. Do it with "Black couple" and see if you're bullshit is consistent.

>>133938420
Right wing retard still can't think critically.

Hey, I searched for "black tuxedo" on google images and all the results showed WHITE guys! This is a conspiracy against BROTHERS. Fuck racist google!

File: european history.png (3MB, 1785x857px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1785x857px

>>133938163
Oh look, it's the "algorithm" shill, shows up in every thread like this.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-17_04-48-36.png (877KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

877KB, 1280x800px

>>133938525

>>133938415
Same explanation.
Including "people" include all the shitty afrocentrist blogs obsessed with every black person in every European painting ever.

Try searching "European art" or "renaissance art" or "baroque art".

>>133937511

Lol, you should try Googling "European People's History".

I thought it was a /pol/ raid fucking with the algorithms at first, but nope, apparently it's just (((Google))).

Google American inventors

>>133938163
You dumb nigger. You can just google "white couple" for the exact phrase and get mostly the same result. It's some jew trick, as usual.

File: Screenshot_19.jpg (179KB, 1062x591px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1062x591px

>>133937511
>white couple

File: Screenshot from 2017-07-17 10-50-09.png (256KB, 424x519px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 424x519px

>>133937511
Even duckduckgo

File: history.jpg (411KB, 1336x697px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 1336x697px

>>133938583
Funny how when you remove "people" from the search shows the expected results.

It's almost as if you're aware that including "people" makes those shitty afrocentric history blogs appear higher in the search results because of all the instances of "black PEOPLE have been hidden from EUROPEAN HISTORY".

You're the shill.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-17_04-51-22.png (1MB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x800px

>>133938641
Challenge accepted.

File: BLACKED.png (662KB, 610x798px) Image search: [Google]

662KB, 610x798px

Oh fuck.
This is shit lol

File: fuckingkikes.jpg (94KB, 1412x676px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1412x676px

>>133937511
im so god damn sick of these motherfucking kikes on this motherfucking planet

one day lads, just imagine, it may be decades from now but we'll get to participate in the real and complete genocide of every kike on planet earth. just gotta keep the dream alive

File: 1499654604654.png (411KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 400x400px

>>133938783
Oh god.
> one is even a gay white couple with a black child

HAHAHAHA oh god.

>>133938163
He's right. If you type in just 'couple' you get mostly white people.

File: Screenshot_20170717-095247.png (1MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1080x1920px

Happy American couple. Lol literally a gorilla and a white woman. Based jewgle

>>133938844
They're also tearing down monuments to white history here in the states

In 10 generations nobody will know what we did.

File: european-people-in-art-google-response.png (22KB, 719x299px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 719x299px

>>133938415

Google's position on this very question: SHUT UP you are BANNED.

>>133938765
>Europeans in art

>"the secret history about how EUROPEANS have hidden the black people IN their ART"

search just "European art" or "Italian art" or "French art"

>>133938429
>>133938453
So the only racially loaded term is white ? All the other races seem to be unaffected by this bug. How weird...

File: 2071bf2273767752d82c2582de2ff1db--african-artwork-history-facts.jpg (50KB, 497x600px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 497x600px

>>133938415
>Mfw

>>133938563
>> getting destroyed in argument
>> throw insult at opponent
>> ???
>> profit

Typical leftie absorbed in his naive worldview where things like these are coincidences, just the way algorithm works, just how labeling works etc.

To even further destroy the last dignity of your sore liberal ass: search "white couple" on bing images. Somehow big algorithm is consistent, yet google is an exception.

People with critical thinking would think, but this can't be expected from leftie, who, when presented with contrary argument, instead of rethinking his claim, will only strengthen his belief in his theory, while at the same time thinking and behaving as he is smarter and above everyone else.

>>133938934
>HAPPY African AMERICAN couple
>African AMERICAN COUPLE looking HAPPY
etc

not a conspiracy, just the way the algorithm works with the type of material that is published on the web

File: Screenshot_2017-07-17_04-57-07.png (979KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

979KB, 1280x800px

>>133938946
SHUT IT DOWN! THEY'RE ONTO US, SHMULEY!

>>133939003
Ok. Same shit. Now what do I Google? Art? Your argument is invalid, cuck.

>>133939052 Incorrect see below.

>>133938934

>>133937511
Type: "caucasian couple" and it will work!

Going to have to side with the algorithm shills on this one. A vast majority of the nigger couples that come up are wearing some kind of white clothing, or the background is white, or something. If you search for caucasian couple, you get mostly whites, with the occasional asian.

File: bing.jpg (328KB, 1362x685px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1362x685px

>>133939065
>To even further destroy the last dignity of your sore liberal ass: search "white couple" on bing images. Somehow big algorithm is consistent, yet google is an exception.

wow, so consistent
>>133939052
Because white is the default race. People complain about white being the default in television, film and art, and this is the consequence: When things are all white, the race isn't usually mentioned, so it wont show up in results.
When the pictures are of non-whites, it's normally from sources that are interested in race and use the relevant terms often in their pages.

It's really not a difficult concept to wrap your head around.

>>133938934
It has jewspiracy in there tho.

>>133938938
in one generation theres going to be global war to remove kebab, we can take the opputunity to remove shekelstein at the same time

>>133939141
You're still doing it. "Europeans art" is not the same as "European art".

Drop the S and see the results you get.

>blacks were the original EUROPEANS
>blacks have been systematically hidden from art by EUROPEANS
etc

Your inability to grasp this is really embarassing

>>133939142
Yeah, maybe Caucasian will work . Maybe because it's not a relatively used term.
Still, this doesn't answer my question. Why is white the only racially loaded search term ? Who / what is pushing this shit up the rank ?

>>133939383
>Why is white the only racially loaded search term ? Who / what is pushing this shit up the rank ?

>>133938429

>>133939333
Now it's all spread out down the page. What's your point?

>the kikes are really going too far this time...day of the furnace is coming.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-17_05-04-36.png (1MB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x800px

>>133939457
forgot pic

File: Screenshot_20170717-110510.png (972KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

972KB, 1024x768px

>>133939141
Thats also a retarded search. Just write european art.

File: Sonnenrad.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>133937511

Now try searching "Swedish Couple"

>>133939503
Do you know how to scroll?

File: America-Argentina couple.jpg (101KB, 507x337px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 507x337px

>>133937511
Hey I found one!

>>133939457
That the most popular pages that include your specific terms the most frequently are the same small set of shitty blogs that are obsessed with a few paintings of black people form European history and convinced that this proves that blacks were the original Europeans.

Most pages dealing with European art are way too specific to come up from your terms.
Maybe a page will specialise in one artist, or region, or time period, and hence the terms "European" and "people" aren't going to be popping up a lot in a page about the 16th century painters of Normandy, and these individual, smaller websites aren't going to be getting a lot of hits and referrals.

But that afrocentric blog about how da evil whitey Europeans have been hiding the noble black people from their art that gets shared 10,000 times on Facebook afrocentric groups? Different story.

File: British_People_LOL.jpg (129KB, 994x640px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 994x640px

Googles British people
Does even need to go to images to WTF

File: Screenshot_20170717-110834.png (1MB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x768px

>>133939457
There are a few blackies, but generally just lots of European fucking art. So what if they painted curiosities. They are in the lourve too.

File: white-couple.jpg (2MB, 2121x1414px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2121x1414px

>>133937511
I dont have a problem. Perhaps you should stop letting google track your history. They they would stop streaming PC in to your face.

>>133939567
Op said white man, not german man.

File: normal couple.jpg (192KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1366x768px

>>133937511
Everything is fine.

File: i-smell-niggers-6007950.png (111KB, 500x397px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 500x397px

>>133939653
>>133939742
So you're telling me that a multi-billion dollar company that makes everything from the world number one most used mobile OS to the most used search engine/email service can't write an algorithm to filter out fake news written by asshurt niggers?

>>133939424
>Swedish Couple
>>133939653
The only conclusion I can get is that the Afro centrist and (((their))) mixed couple agenda are getting more hits than any normal page.
It does explain why Asian are not affected for example, BUT IT'S NOT FUCKING OK !!!

>>133937511
The results are probably just confounded with white+couple or {x}+and+white+couple, search for "white couple" in quotes and you're more likely to find what you're looking for. Very few people are going to host an image of a white man and woman and label it "white couple", but pretty much every mixed-race couple will have some attention drawn to the fact that they're mix race.

>>133939819
Looks like normal is a term to be used instead of white to find what we are looking for. Lol.

File: 1459920430961.png (765KB, 1001x1001px) Image search: [Google]

765KB, 1001x1001px

>>133939777

File: Screenshot_20170717-111145.png (634KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

634KB, 1024x768px

>>133939833

Ummmmmmmmmmmm.... sources.

File: good couple.jpg (202KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1366x768px

>>133939819

>>133939833
The algorithm is working as intended.
It is designed to show the results that have the most referrals to them and also include your search terms.
It just so happens that the material the is most often referred to with those terms is fucking retarded bix nood shit. The problem here isn't google, its the dumb bix nood WE WUZ EUROPEANS shit.

Right wing retards can't figure this out so they call it a google conspiracy to show you niggers on their search engine.

File: ss.png (164KB, 514x289px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 514x289px

>>133939819
This is problematic. Can someone please report this to Google? Thanks!

File: honest couple.jpg (186KB, 1366x765px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1366x765px

>>133939951

File: Load.jpg (12KB, 200x219px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 200x219px

>>133939970
(((working as intended)))
Yeah, their intentions are to erase white dominance both socially and historically.

>>133939819
oh my fucking g-d my blood is boiling

File: gorgeous couple.jpg (190KB, 1366x767px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1366x767px

>>133940074

File: 1491942880580.jpg (39KB, 722x349px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 722x349px

>>133938415
>it's real

File: google could face 9bn EU fine for rigging.jpg (94KB, 1024x642px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1024x642px

"GOOGLE

>>133939933
Sources for what? This thread is about how Google indexes content, not the actual websites that it's indexing, faggot.

>>133939970
This is a matter of Google not properly filtering this shit, which is why it's a joke of a search engine that nobody should take seriously. Fuck off.

File: google - hillary clinton is.png (182KB, 861x393px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 861x393px

>>133940220

DID

History is being rewritten whether you like it or not.
People are just making excuses now.
I feel a peak coming.

File: google censores ``men`` in searches.jpg (110KB, 706x909px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 706x909px

>>133940220
>>133940253

NOTHING

File: google censores ``men`` in searches, but not women.jpg (103KB, 674x923px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 674x923px

>>133940220
>>133940253
>>133940285

WRONG

>>133940253
That's still seems fine since we don't know anything about their respective userbase demographics.

File: friendly couple.jpg (195KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1366x768px

>>133940181

File: google diversifies juno team with shitskins and femmes.jpg (59KB, 960x560px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 960x560px

>>133940220
>>133940253
>>133940285
>>133940301

EVER"

>>133940181
is it possible to get SJWs to complain about this? all of these women are under 200lbs

File: Screenshot_1.png (1MB, 1192x569px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1192x569px

>>133938155
kek

>>133940354
If people of color were given a fair shot, there would be more of them up there. Give them another 50 years anon.

>>133940360
Maybe if it were >healthy couple

>>133940242
>This is a matter of Google not properly filtering this shit, which is why it's a joke of a search engine that nobody should take seriously. Fuck off.

I am more comfortable with an objective algorithm that has sometimes imperfect results as opposed to Google altering their results to suit a political agenda, even if I happen to agree with that agenda.

Who is Google to say that the WE WUZ EUROPEANS results don't deserve to rank as high as they do? By artificially lowering those results they would open themselves up to all kinds of lawsuits.

>>133940285
same shit as before. specifying "white" matches your search to pages where the white and non-white couplings are specified.

>>133940391
omfg

File: Jews are admitted to harvard at 15 times the ratio of equal or better qualified European Americans.jpg (41KB, 529x620px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 529x620px

>>133940400

"ok"

>>133937511
You do know Google comes up with different search results depending on your country and your own search history, right?
The fact that you see what you see is probably because you searched for interracial porn too many times.

File: Screenshot_20170717-112545.png (1005KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

1005KB, 1024x768px

>>133940242
Just shows that google doesn't exactly censor results/sources, but rather selects posts that are heavily tagged with stuff like "white art" "europeans art" and other rather nonsensical terms.

Only people debating race IN art, lefties and rightwingers, tag it like that.

Normies google for certain periods of art... like this...

File: The Diversity Lie - Jewish Over-representation at Harvard.gif (428KB, 988x1383px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 988x1383px

>>133940479

v2

>>133940418
Google needs to alter it to reflect reality. It's showing content that pushes a political agenda as it is now. All I want is reasonable, sane content and I've learned that I can't rely on Google to give that to me. That is my argument, you stupid islander.

>>133940563
I didn't think the Swiss were a retarded people.

>>133938227

and you think other search engines are better and have more sites indexed than google? lol! retard! hide in the noise, not in the open field

>>133940568
See >>133940583

>>133938605
I got the same results. Algorithms my ass. PASS THE JUICE

File: white couple.jpg (31KB, 750x578px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 750x578px

Found it!

>>133940583
>All I want is reasonable, sane content and I've learned that I can't rely on Google to give that to me.

If people produced and shared that content amongst themselves it would rise higher in the results of Google's searches.

If you can't figure out how to find the content you want using Google, and instead use search terms that you know will give you results the opposite of what you want, even though you now understand why it is happening, you are the one at fault, not Google.

It's not their responsibility to give you an internet safe space that doesn't offend you, it's their job to show the results that are the most popular.

>>133940559
is that.... the ultimate fetish?

File: google censores ``men`` in searches.png (121KB, 659x1554px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 659x1554px

>>133940418

Nope, that's not true. "Men" are censored.

File: google censores ``men`` in searches (2).png (254KB, 954x951px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 954x951px

>>133940418
>>133940719

and not just in english either.

File: Screenshot_20170717-111852.png (656KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

656KB, 1024x768px

>>133940583
Now see that's censorship from Google! Right now we the people decide what gets tagged!

You want them to control tags that offend you.

You should be happy to see stormfront being a source of several of these black couples.

Face the facts, when you take race out of your searches and focus on history, you get the results you want.

File: Google changes definition of fascism.png (1MB, 2008x1458px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2008x1458px

>>133940719
>>133940745

Oh, and they changed the definition of facism right after the election.

File: google.jpg (153KB, 886x684px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 886x684px

>>133940719
Don't blame me because you can't search Google properly.
Once again, the sites with the most referrals that specify a deviation from the norm are ranked highest.

>>133940704
>google should show the wrong information because it's popular instead of showing the factually correct information regardless of popularity
This isn't 1998, faggot. I refuse to believe that Google is this dumb, so they have to be doing it on purpose.

>>133940559
Lies, most of those are just apples

>>133940817
see >>133940925

What is google ??

>>133940858
race war now?

>>133940925
>I want google to start deciding what people are allowed to see on their search results

this is literally what you were complaining about when you started posting in this thread. Right wing retard loves censorship as long as it conforms to his bias.

File: Screenshot_20170717-113803.png (860KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

860KB, 1024x768px

>>133940925
Who decides what is correct? You seriously want Google to decide reality for you?

Or do you just want to search relevant tags that are sure to not feature posts debating race? Like this....

This!

File: 8345843583.jpg (1MB, 2604x886px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2604x886px

>>133940873

You lie.

>no autocomplete
>no relevant searches

>>133941196
Truth is important

Looks like taking out the race does fix the problem, but the fact that other search engines gives good results with the term like "white couple" shows something is wrong with the google algorithm.

My suspicion is that while bing and others treat all sites as any other sites with any other search terms, google specifically adds more weight to sites that support the white genocide agenda, and since they didn't hardcode the sites themselves, just the traits, some right wing sites that use terms like "multi cultural" or "race mixing" also get their rank boosted as a collateral damage from boosting political agenda.

There's a possibility that all other engines are somehow "whitewashing" those specific terms, but I think it's much more likely, given the evidence of google's inclination to promote zionist ideas, that it is boosting the weights behind search terms instead of editing the specific result pages.

It's pretty clever, since, as the brit leftie argued, the results do appear organic, while they are actually not. And this also gives google plausible deniability, which is exactly what they would do in situation like that.

>>133941196
You're a moron, famalam. If you want to search for men in computer science, just search for "computer scientists."

File: 1491346586195.jpg (163KB, 700x609px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 700x609px

>>133940873
>>133941196


Thanks for painting yourself into a corner by the way. Imbesile.

>>133941196
because there aren't nearly as many articles specifically about men doing xyz shit compared to women.
why?
because it's accepted that men do just about nearly everything anyway. the only pages and referrals that are popular about these gender issues are feminist ones obsessing about women in xyz careers.

get your head out your ass and really try to think.

>>133941165
>>133941191
Would you both agree that 2+2=4? Then why the fuck is Google showing me niggers when I search for European art? It's the same as if Google were to tell you that 2+2=5. It's simply incorrect information. Why are you defending it?

>>133941357
This.

>>133941441
I think if you made some blogs where you write 2 + 2 = 5, and if it was in best (((google))) interest to make people believe it, you would eventually see it in top result, because nobody would write "2 + 2 = 4" since it's obvious. Tell a lie 100 times and it becomes truth.

File: 1486155436692.jpg (18KB, 329x668px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 329x668px

>>133941426

whooops, you forgot to explain the autocomplete conundrum

File: Screenshot_20170717-114648.png (468KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

468KB, 1024x768px

>>133941441
Ok.. let's try a differt search. Lets not involve tags like "white" or "people"... we avoid race debating websites.. rightwing or left wing..


Lets just see what we get when we google "man"

>>133937511
I'll just leave this here..
http://fravia.2113.ch/words.htm

File: Screenshot_20170717-114413.png (589KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

589KB, 1024x768px

>>133941441
How about guy?

>>133940301

>Famous White Women

>Picture of Michael Jackson

Kek!

>>133941165
Explain this,
Google "British People", don't even go to the images, see the paki's head staring back you with the description of native Brits? Yeah thought so.
Is it muh algorithm? You know the same written algorithm that puts SJW/PC & YouTube political opinion on the trending page?? Why are you even defending Google, I don't fucking get it.

>>133941601
It's search, not logical truth. If people typed 2+2 and wanted to get to 5 far more often than to 4, google would show 5.

File: Screenshot_20170717-114427.png (846KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

846KB, 1024x768px

>>133941441
Or girl.... now tell me.., where is white genocide hiding?

Dont make us look bad because you dont understand algorithms and tags..

File: French google.png (2MB, 1893x882px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1893x882px

>>133937511
No fucking way man.
What the fuck is happening?

File: european art.jpg (417KB, 1366x684px) Image search: [Google]

417KB, 1366x684px

>>133941441
>Then why the fuck is Google showing me niggers when I search for European art?

But it isn't.

>>133941694
How about "female"?

>>133941656
>>133941694
>>133941755
I'm not sure if you're playing dumb to avoid the actual argument that I've presented over and over or if you're actually retarded. The flag suggests the latter.

See >>133941601 because he gets it.

>>133941797
>2nd picture
slav baby

File: Capture.png (3MB, 1906x975px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1906x975px

>>133937511
What do I win?

>>133941816
see >>133939556

google white son
See white women with a black and a white son
>google white family
A black or two as the members family

>google black family
ALL blacks and happy

>google muslim family

ALL muslims and happy

>google white couple

Black man and white woman

>google black couple
Black couple but some white woman too

File: Screenshot_20170717-115156.png (340KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1024x768px

>>133941832
Symbols? The fact is, the less of an agenda your tags have, the less agenda you see. I'm honestly surpriced how white all the tags mentioned are.

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-17 at 12.49.22.png (1MB, 1082x747px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1082x747px

>>133938415
>implying that someone searching specifically for "european people in art" is not a retard, nigger, or anon trying to see how "muh google censorship" works

>>133941645
autocomplete suggests searches that are popular

lots of feminist cunts search for "women in xyz"
normal people just search for "xyz".
as another anon pointed out, if you want to find male engineers and scientists, you just search for the profession, you don't need to include the gender, because 99% of them are men anyway so its pointless to specify

wow such a conspiracy

File: 1490610378889.jpg (58KB, 722x349px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 722x349px

>>133938415

File: 1368296999697.jpg (45KB, 500x617px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 500x617px

who the fuck is this fuckin jew living in pomland shilling for google how about fuck off and die ya cunt

File: Screenshot_2017-07-17_05-56-03.png (17KB, 307x84px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 307x84px

>>133942045
Do you have any way to back up your claim? Even the captcha tells me I'm dealing with slow manchildren.

File: Europeans in art (2).png (2MB, 1724x882px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1724x882px

>>133942045
>>133941816

oh, so this logic does not apply here?
>>133940873

You lose shills.

>>133938748
>second option
>attacked by blacks
lol

File: Screenshot_20170717-115914.png (796KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

796KB, 1024x768px

>>133941852
No he doesn't, and talk about avoiding answering questions... do you REALLY want Google to censor searches?

"White supremacist want to remove black people from race related searches"

Reminds me of sjw tactics, especially since all you have to do is search without a race agenda yourself..

"Couple" searched couple... removed race tags...

File: 4538458345.png (697KB, 2224x1665px) Image search: [Google]

697KB, 2224x1665px

"We would never lie to you" - The Press
God damn retards in this thread.

File: euroart.png (3MB, 1891x865px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1891x865px

>>133942259
That's amazing.

>>133941724
>he doesn't know who Sayeeda Warsi is

File: main-qimg-770c847d87ec865029f29e6c0bd680a3-c.jpg (28KB, 279x390px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 279x390px

>>133937511
Found this. What. The. Fuck.
I think I am starting to turn "redpilled"

>>133942259
europeans = european people = fucking "people of color" everywhere

File: 13843432847.jpg (5KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 225x225px

>>133942358
Do you understand the difference between censorship and truth? Of course you don't, pea brain. You're the one arguing for fake news and against objectivity in favor of popularity like the ape that you are. You simply can't comprehend anything else.

File: european art.jpg (416KB, 1366x684px) Image search: [Google]

416KB, 1366x684px

>>133942438
Explain this.
If it's a conspiracy to show you nothing but niggers, it looks like Google fucked up with the most basic version, "European art".

>>133942159
Because it's fun to try and explain basic ideas to right wing retards.

>>133937704
>all this mental gymnastics

Everybody google "european couple".

One day the kikes and cucks will hang for this.

>>133942816
>b-but there are two nigs there

File: 1 Attempting to reason with demoralised people.png (366KB, 1036x778px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 1036x778px

>>133942795

I worry for these people. Some of them genuinely seem incapable of understanding, without acting as blatant shills.

>>133942817
Google "happy couple", "smiling couple", "normal couple", "couple", "honest couple", "wealthy couple", "laughing couple".

If there is an agenda at work, the people behind it are pretty incompetent because all these searches show nothing but white people.

>>133942885
>I s-searched for "white people" and I saw black people instead I bet the jews did this

File: 30m0391.jpg (16KB, 471x463px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 471x463px

>>133942795
The truth? Does than mean when i Google "man" from now on Google has to make 70% of them asian to reflect the real world?

You must be really old or really young to be this confused about the internet.

File: 1488461482388.png (24KB, 657x425px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 657x425px

>>133942816

Still waiting for you to explain the autocomplete.
Also, your logic is shit-tier, typical leftist drivel.

"HEY LOOK A THIS ONE EXAMPLE EVERYTHING SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON THIS ONE EXAMPLE I DISPROVED EVERYTHING RIGHT GUYS"

>>133942940
>because all these searches show nothing but white people.
>blm nig reads this on 4chan
>passes a message to blm nig blog
>they again start a campaign against "muh raycis google" like they did with "3 kids"
>google doesn't give a shit again
>fast forward 1 month
>your "happy couples" are filled with niggers from blm nig blogs

don't do that

>>133943070
>>133942052
You haven't refuted a single one of my explanations, and every counterpoint you have given has completely ignored my explanation of why the things you are searching are bringing up the results you are seeing.

You are either wilfully ignorant, a moron or a shill.

>yo searched for black tuxedo and it showed a buncha witebois baka they keepin us down on tha googles as well
This is you.

File: Untitled.png (169KB, 655x321px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 655x321px

>>133939718
I don't get this result. It just shows me white people.

>>133943063
>Does than mean when i Google "man" from now on Google has to make 70% of them asian to reflect the real world?
Yeah, I'm ok with that. But when I search for Europeans I don't want to see a bunch of niggers because I'm not interested in someone else's bullshit take on history, you fucking mouth breather. Especially not when the results are accurate for most other races.

>You must be really old or really young to be this confused about the internet.
You're such a hypocrite. Eat shit.

>>133943070
Also this
>>133942940

File: Angry.png (112KB, 386x396px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 386x396px

WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON, THEY'RE BREAKING THE CONDITIONING.

>>133943238
Don't use "European" then because as a collective term, it's going to bias results towards afrocentric historical revisionism pages.

Search "French" or "Italian" or "german" or "greek" or "polish" or "Spanish" or "portugese"

File: 1482592265443.gif (3MB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x320px

>>133943201

You haven't made a point. Your whole arguement is to give examples where google does not promote genocide, and use those to disprove completely different cases where they do.

And you fail to comment on why the censure the autocomplete, yet again.

File: rs_1024x759-160422141422-1024-american-psycho-christian-bale-teeth.jpg (109KB, 1024x759px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1024x759px

>try jewgling "white man white woman"
This is fucking ridiculous.

>>133943063
>Does than mean when i Google "man" from now on Google has to make 70% of them asian to reflect the real world?

That actually sounds like something a SJW would propose...

File: 167383475483.png (634KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

634KB, 1280x1280px

>>133943376
>it's going to bias results towards afrocentric historical revisionism pages
That is the exact fucking problem I described 20 or so posts ago, jackass. Looks like we've come full circle; one infinite loop of me trying to explain things to people without brains.

Don't use Google.
Do you enjoy being datamined or something?
Use StartPage/DuckDuckGo/Searx

File: Screenshot_20170717-122141.png (1MB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x768px

>>133943238
Ehehe, it got its feelings hurt, dawwwww...

Ok, let me make it SUPER clear for you.. when you add tags like " white" "people" "race" you search with an agenda in mind... most people without an agenda do not tag their photos "white"...

So here.. "white "swedes".. look coloured people!
Look at those diversity slogans.

But look at my next post in which i just google swedes...


Swedes... the immigration meme nation of the world.. stay tuned!

File: White American couple.png (769KB, 1556x652px) Image search: [Google]

769KB, 1556x652px

I always knew Amercans were niggers and fags.

>>133943464
>And you fail to comment on why the censure the autocomplete, yet again.

They don't your picture comparing autocompletes is different because there are hardly any searches using the "men in.." format.

See my explanations here since you're apparently incapable of seeing them
>>133938163
>>133938317
>>133938429
>>133938759
>>133939003
>>133939079
>>133939266
>>133939333
>>133939653
>>133939970
>>133940418
>>133940704
>>133941426

>>133943471
yet when you search "man woman" it's nearly all white couples! what a conspiracy!

File: Screenshot_20170717-122537.png (150KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1080x1920px

>>133937511
The images don't fare better either.

For fucks sake.

>>133943201
I'm not saying you're wrong, but google should give a better explanation themselves instead of >>133938946

File: Screenshot_20170717-122113.png (1MB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x768px

>>133943238
Now just swedes....

File: how to uninstall chromosome.jpg (57KB, 552x529px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 552x529px

>>133943529

Wow, what an amazing idea, I would never have thought of this myself.
Now how do we spread that message to the billions who do use jewgle, and are subverted by it daily.

>>133943506
But you how to avoid those results by modifying your search terms.

>use google maps to get route to nearest KFC
>nearest KFC is in nigtown
>get robbed
>next week do the same thing, instead of finding a KFC that isn't in nigtown

This is you.

>>133943627
>swedes
Clinton and Trump.
>google failing this bad kek

File: 188722002.jpg (16KB, 360x203px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 360x203px

>>133943464
>censure the autocomplete
Really? So you want to tell me that thousands of users frequently search for "men in combat" instead of "soldiers in combat"? Or for "men in computer science" instead of "computer scientists"?

>>133943627
I learned that theres also root vegetables called swedes.

It must be some jewish scheme to make us think swedes are pod people.

File: ihand.jpg (57KB, 600x572px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x572px

>>133943579
>>133943728
You sound like Apple who accused customers of holding their phones wrong when they got shit reception. No, it's never the giant company's fault. Always blame the user, good goy! Defend daddy Jewgle.

>>133943728
>comparing maps to pictures
Vastly different.

>>133943750
You are 100% blind to all the swedish people there aren't you.. well point made.

>>133943686
I converted few people myself.
Laugh all you want, I'm just giving you a friendly advice.
Even converting people from Chrome to Firefox is a huge step.

>>133943627
spotted 1 nig

>>133943833
>comparing google pictures to google maps is very different

>but comparing explanations of how google's search algorithm works is exactly like Apple's phones losing reception when held in the normal way and short-circuiting

>>133943833
Can't believe we have to explain hashtags to a 4chan user...

Wth happened to this place...

>>133943891
I was just pointing that out. But I agree that it's hard to find an 'agenda' behind the search algorithm, it has more to do with how people label their photos.

>>133943958
if you think there is agenda, you must also think the people behind it are very incompetent for not nigging up normal search terms that normal people will see like these
>>133942940

File: 6343463463.png (421KB, 1250x774px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 1250x774px

Good thread everyone! I added a few google-bits to my collection.

Now, in an atttempt to sum up it all up:
>those who think jewgle are not owned by kikes are not pol
>pol is always right
>picrelated

www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com

File: mother and father.png (3MB, 1895x898px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1895x898px

Father is present.

>>133937511
>he uses Google to search images in 2017
Without exaggerating, Google filters 90% of content.
Good luck finding similar pictures with Google images, there's no similarity.

>>133944011
That obviously went over your head.

>>133944043
>hashtags
Get the fuck out, normie shithead.

>>133938227
I switched to bing about a month ago and it's frustrating to say the least, still....done with joogle

>>133944112
Good example.
I bet the SJW could have a major rant about this...

>>133937704
I try to explain this every time there's a thread like this but the average pol user is too dumb to understand it

File: pareja blanca.png (1MB, 1344x692px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1344x692px

>only 2 nigger photos and it's the same couple
>most of the photos are spanish actors and actresses couples

Am I safe from the kikes? I thought Spain wasnt white.

File: 14319763215330.jpg (88KB, 490x443px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 490x443px

>>133944106
>lose an argument
>bring up unrelated topic where it actually was jews

File: 8984961.png (27KB, 977x561px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 977x561px

>>133943806

uh huh. No searches for
>men in russia
>men in america
>men in germany
Ever.

seems likely

>>133944553
>rompers
>rubber masks

God damn Faggot BDSM Feminists at Jewgle.

File: google_vs_bing.png (2MB, 1347x1314px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1347x1314px

To all the "muh algorithm" people - explain this.

Surely there is no agenda involved here, that would just be preposterous.

>>133944553
Normal people would just search "Russians", "Americans" and "Germans", because the vast majority of people who are worth reading about anyway are men.

>>133945123
Explained in depth already.
>>133943612
>>133942940

File: bing.jpg (329KB, 1362x685px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 1362x685px

>>133945123
Forgot my pic.

>>133945199
You didn't explain difference. Explain why bind shows correctly white couples and google doesn't. Your theory is because of tags on according pages. If that would be true, both bing and google would show interracial couples, but now it's only google. Why, if not deliberately?

Don't bother answering though, you are just repeating yourself. Whoever gave you the instructions how to deflect this, you can ask for better instructions, cause your ones are already discussed and they don't add up.

>>133937511
What are you talkiing ab-

>>133938163
stopped reading your post after the first reddit spacing but KYS FAGGOT

File: Asian couple.jpg (511KB, 1191x2637px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 1191x2637px

>>133945123
You know what's interesting, for Asian couple you get only Asians, but those non-Asian American type of Asians. Asia is a continent and doesn't just includes South Korean Americanized Asians. So Google is basically feeding you with corporate American sites. Doesn't gives you any results from actual Asian sites from China, Japan, North Korea, India..etc., all results are American sites, corporate sites, those Google always puts on top.

>>133945405
But Bing doesn't show "correct" results, didn't you see the picture I posted in the next post?

>>133945607
I've literally never browsed or posted Reddit but OK.

File: bing2.jpg (360KB, 1366x644px) Image search: [Google]

360KB, 1366x644px

>>133945405
Woops! Looks like Bing is part of the conspiracy too!

>>133937511
To get white people just google "couple"
Pretty racist that mostly white people show up, probably a conspiracy!!1!

>>133945923
Conspiracy is that all high ranking American sites are corporate sites pushing this with their tags, Google, Bing, whatever just put them into database, since they pay most money and are non-racist children-political friendly. Those sites simply have the most power, so they always end up top of results.

Hypothesis: Google is changing search results from whatever their algorithm should naturally show to artificially show non-white people

Evidence: Searching for "white couples" shows non-white and mixed race couples (ignore that they are in white clothes or white backgrounds, that obviously has nothing to do with it).

Problems with the theory: Every normal search term that doesn't include a racial component shows almost nothing but white people

File: white couple baidu.jpg (582KB, 1197x2988px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 1197x2988px

>>133946138
If you search for white couple in Chinese search Baidu you will get whiter people result since China filters out niggers.

File: europeanpeoplehistoryart.png (935KB, 957x605px) Image search: [Google]

935KB, 957x605px

>>133945923
Can confirm.

>>133937511
>>133937781
I want to puke

File: germans.jpg (211KB, 1900x602px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1900x602px

>>133943214
> not knowing about Free Democratic Republic of Germany

File: 678956745634.jpg (79KB, 750x600px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 750x600px

>>133937511
second picture. ez

>>133947407
LOL, Google's typical bullshit of placing most viewed images first and the most viewed are those who are made most viewed, kind of like how American elections work, who gets more air time and more ratings that's who is placed on top.

File: european-art-i.jpg (254KB, 1318x702px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 1318x702px

>>133946604
In all seriousness.
The "trigger" keywords here are "people" and "white".
Type "couple" and you will find white people, but type "white couple" and you'll have a shitton of interracial couples somehow.
>>133947668
You're most likely right.
You have to admit it's pretty funny nonetheless.

File: owo.jpg (62KB, 680x629px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 680x629px

>google search

>christians are
>no autocomplete

>jews are
>no autocomplete

>buddhists are
>no autocomplete

>hindus are
>no autocomplete

>muslims are
>muslims are the true feminists

>>133946241
Serious Q:
Why doesn't it show a "random" selection of couples? Why only White?

File: white.jpg (372KB, 1280x917px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 1280x917px

>>133937511
There's a few.

>>133944230

duckduckgo is what I use. Probably not much better but, seems better at least.

File: plenty of results.jpg (520KB, 1191x2216px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 1191x2216px

>>133948537

File: 6756.jpg (174KB, 550x379px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 550x379px

>>133937511
Guess which ones post on /pol/

>>133946241
So I can see how the SJW crowd has a fit: search 'couples' and get 98.5% White. Must be White Supremacy.

>>133937781
i expected this and im still upset

File: 1.png (1MB, 1129x665px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1129x665px

>>133937511
They fixed it.

>>133940616
duckduckgo

Am i gay, blind or both because i got whites for the majority of them.
Had my barf bucket ready and everything

Good lord so many idiots out here. You're all like SJW's who'd get triggered if you search 'couple' or 'european art' and you get only white people in it. Just the opposite in your case, because you don't understand how to use Google properly.

>>133950433
It must be because math is both racist and sexist, obviously. It's been dominated by White men for so long.

File: racial_couple_search.jpg (368KB, 1890x1070px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1890x1070px

>>133937704
>>133937511

Shalom fellow chosen one. I'm going to tell these goys to type in "Black Couple" or "Muslim Couple" to sow decent, chaos and mistrust.

Because we always profit the most as individuals in times of complete turmoil.

check it out goys!

File: 071722017 google search images of black couple.jpg (263KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1024x576px

>>133949598

I DID THE SEARCH AND GOT THE SAME RESULTS FOR WHITE COUPLE.

THEN I PUT IN BLACK COUPLE GOT THE FOLLOWING IMAGES RETURNED IN THE SEARCH.

VERY INTERESTING...

LOOKS LIKE THEIR A.I. IS RACISTS. OR THE PROGRAMMER

File: whitecoupl.jpg (233KB, 1901x865px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 1901x865px

my result

>>133952255
>>133952436
>>133952557
Spread the word Goys, use my info-graphic there.

Jewgoole needs to be taken down!

File: witcpl2.jpg (255KB, 1902x881px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 1902x881px

>>133952557
On Duckduckgo

>>133938946
>M-MUH ALGORITHM!!

File: 1482979044217.jpg (23KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 250x250px

>>133946241
>39 posts by this ID
What did he mean by this?

>>133953314
Trying to explain the Al-Gore-Rhythm.
It's obvious that Jewgle assumes White Supremacy when searching.

>>133944011
>39 posts by this ID
Antifa pls leave

>>133937781
is that applemilk on the left?

File: white_couple.png (1MB, 1366x600px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1366x600px

>>133937511
holy fuck, this shit is real

File: 164168465465.jpg (307KB, 1884x742px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 1884x742px

>>133938420
>Jewish couple
Why is this so funny.

>>133937511
looks like tumblr has fucked around with tagging photos on jewgle again....

>>133937511
kek

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mcf9CLMQuRQ

>>133937511
Google. The same company that hid Hillary Clintons investigation in their search engine.
Are you really surprised?

>>133937704
Jewgle and Jewtube force their agenda through results now.

Twitter also.

File: danish couple.png (3MB, 1894x962px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1894x962px

>>133937511
We should try this for each country

File: FsDrg0BoZ3ZnJTZbVTKF6JdEovJ-zSva1A3mmYdc9_4.png (413KB, 811x767px) Image search: [Google]

413KB, 811x767px

>>133938748
>killed in Tennessee

File: Swedish Couple.png (4MB, 1897x971px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1897x971px

>>133956720
Hmmm

File: 1472174495169.jpg (26KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 480x360px

>>133937511
>clearly everyone in this thread with any suspicion of a multi-billion dollar company pushing a possible agenda is a bat shit crazy conspiracy theorist.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-17-10-00-12.png (519KB, 480x800px) Image search: [Google]

519KB, 480x800px

>>133937511
This is what i found, kek

>mobile results
Someone at Google is having a giggle at us.

File: Whitemenwithwhitewomen.jpg (497KB, 1921x872px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 1921x872px

lol what is this shit?
Wouldn't (((they))) lose if ppl find out they are deliberately pushing this?

>>133957010
>saving in png
Fucking illiterate

File: Captura.png (3MB, 1897x844px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1897x844px

>>133937511
I got more matches than misses.
Google takes into account your search history, so if you spend time loking at blacks crime rate then Googlethinks you're interested in blacks.

>>133937511
Try Google women

/Thread

>>133938420
Just Google couple then

>>133937704
>Search for "dogs"
>Every pic for the first 3 pages is a pic of a cat with a few rabbits and hamsters thrown in there
>Muh Google algorithm shows only the most relevant results duuuuuhhhhh

>>133940999
Nice proxy, Kim.

File: bi.jpg (70KB, 1196x538px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1196x538px

>>133937511
Uhhhh, this is strange.

File: IMG_5024.jpg (135KB, 750x885px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 750x885px

>>133937511
Ahahahahaha holy fucking shit it's real

>>133937511

top kek getting the same here