[NSFW] Google No Longer Allows You to Disable SafeSearch, and That Makes Google Search Worse

[tezza]

Google has just made their Image search worse in an effort to protect your virgin eyes.

If you’re in the U.S. and trying to search for boobs on Google Images right now, you’re going to have a tougher time. That’s because Google has prevented U.S. users from disabling SafeSearch. And if you want to find NSFW images, you’re going to have to be more specific with your searches.

Google users should be familiar with the SafeSearch toolbar at the top right of Image searches. Until recently, that bar allowed users to select MODERATE, STRICT, or OFF. As of right now, those options have been removed from the drop-down menu – but only in the U.S.

Here’s what it currently looks like

And here’s what it looks like on Google.co.uk (and other countries). This is what it looked like in the U.S. before today:

Note that “SafeSearch” is the only option for U.S. users. For a search for “boobs” for instance, this means that the results will not feature any “explicit” images (nipples showing). The only other option is the “filter results,” which in our boobs search filters out all results. “The word ‘boobs’ has been filtered from the search because Google SafeSearch is active,” reads the results.

It would appear that the only two options Google is giving U.S. users are STRICT and MODERATE. Or in other words, you can’t turn off SafeSearch.

The default “SafeSearch” results for U.S. users are the exact same results for a MODERATE SafeSearch results for U.K. users:

U.S. default:

U.K. MODERATE

If you go to Google’s SafeSearch help page, they tell you how to disable SafeSearch from your settings:

Here’s how to disable SafeSearch:

• Visit the Google Preferences page.
• In the “SafeSearch Filtering” section, select Do not filter my search results.
• Click Save Preferences.

But when U.S. users visit their search settings, they are only given the option to filter explicit results:

But moderate SafeSearch is already on by default.

If you go to another country’s Google, say Google.com.bz, the search settings provide the option to turn on “no filtering.”

So, what gives? Is Google guilty of some seriously awful censorship? The quick answer is no, but it’s a little more complicated than that.

You see, you have to be specific if you want NSFW results. Searching for “boobs porn” does give you plenty of nudity. But for searches on words without specific qualifiers, you still don’t see any of these results. In essence, Google has changed their search settings to only display adult results when queries are specifically adult-oriented.

That means for all intents and purposes, users in the U.S. now only have two options – default SafeSearch and filter explicit results. The default SafeSearch is akin to MODERATE. The option to turn off SafeSearch completely for all results is gone in the U.S. And the big question is why? What was wrong with the old Google image search format (and the one seen in the rest of the world)? Why did Google feel the need to change it?

Let’s look at two different responses we received from Google. First, Google Webmaster Trends Analyst John Mueller had this to say:

“The default should continue to behave similarly to what most users have had as the default so far (“moderate”). Our algorithms are designed to downgrade explicit content when you’re not specifically looking for it. If a search term is very explicit, relevant adult content may show up, but we’ll err on the conservative side. So if you want to see adult content in Image Search, just make it clear with the query — we’ll show the most relevant content for each search.”

Now from another Google spokesperson:

“We are not censoring any adult content, and want to show users exactly what they are looking for — but we aim not to show sexually-explicit results unless a user is specifically searching for them. We use algorithms to select the most relevant results for a given query. If you’re looking for adult content, you can find it without having to change the default setting — you just may need to be more explicit in your query if your search terms are potentially ambiguous. The image search settings work the same way as in web search.”

Ok, so the point here is that users need to be specific with their searches. Got it. Apologies for the frankness, but if I want to find blowjob images, I now have to search “blowjob porn.” There is now no way that I can edit my own personal settings to make a search for just “blowjob” yield all results, both NSFW and otherwise.

In essence, Google is fragmenting their image search. A “no filter” search is a true search of the most popular images across the web. U.S. users no longer have this option. We’re now only given the choice between filtered results for “blowjob” or the most popular results for “blowjob porn.” That smattering of all results, both NSFW and SFW for the query “blowjob,” cannot be achieved anymore.

Plus, is there really a question about what I’m looking for when I search “blowjob?” Do I really need to provide any more detail?

It seems like a big gripe about a small change, and it is in a way. But one could make the argument that this actually is a form of censorship. If I go to Google images and search “blowjob,” I want to see the best of what the web has to offer – all of it. Not what Google thinks I should see based on their desire to prevent adult results unless users are super specific.

Go ahead and try a search for “blowjob” on Google Images right now. Those aren’t really very relevant results, are they? Users should see the most relevant results for their searches, no matter what. And they should have the option to simply turn off the SafeSearch filter, which they all had just a couple of days ago.

http://www.webpronew...esearch-2012-12

[alaindc]

if this is for real, this is insane.

Maybe Google feel some more pressure to censor nudity\sexuality in the prude US, and finally give in?

safesearch can still be deactived in Canada.

so...

US people surely can just use Google canada or UK search engine.

it seem google stop more and more defending the liberty and freedom on the web.

[Shadowx]

More after this

[sanjoa]

:wtf: google defends internet freedom, but they make censorship :omg: :doh:

[rudrax]

Go DuckDuckGo and

[ande]

My freedom is also not to be abused by unwanted and inappropriate images.

[nIGHT]

before censorship...

fap! fap! fap! This is normal human behavior! :)

After censorship...

fap! fap! fap! Your sick man! :s

[Marik]

a?

i don't see a problem here...mine is already disabled and I can search for porn as much as i want

my safesearch looks the same, it doesn't have the off switch anymore because google made it clear that it gives you results BASED on what you want to find

so if I were to say, enter "riley reid" without the quotes, it gives me pics from her twitter or pics from other sites

sure, a few indecent pics are included as well cause google missed them

BUT, if I enter the same words AND include the word "porn" within (porn riley reid) it gives me the results I want to see

so you can still use the fap gauntlet gents

but duckduckgo is good, especially if you're looking for the dvdrips :uhoh:

[Ambrocious]

Connect the dots. Censorship is disguesed as "protection mesures". It was slower but now it's a much faster pace of censorship. I made another post asking people to download what you can now and save it...SAVE IT ALL. Not just porn, thats silly. I'm talking about ALL things you hold value. Grab them while you still can. It's all about to change.

[emerglines]

Good no more porns :)

[bwop]

My freedom is also not to be abused by unwanted and inappropriate images.

Join a monastery?

[clubhouse]

I hope someone at userscripts writes something that defeats this.

[Ambrocious]

It is true that porn demoralizes a person. Although it is normal to "please yourself", pornography for face value does a couple of things to a person that should be considered.

* Porn presents the watcher with unrealistic expectations of how sex should be engaged in.

* Porn makes the watcher feel underequipped to engage in actual sex.

* Porn makes the watcher feel "less than" he should and therefor causing disruptions in normal sexual activity.

* Porn presents a form of propaganda as well in the sense that it shows you how it's suppose to be done, even though most often, that is not the most "appropriate" way to have sex.

* Porn causes people to seek relationsships less and when one does finally get one, he or she feels awkward and ill equipped to perform.

Although this is true, I do not think that censorship is the way to go completely but I strongly believe that Google (even though I am guilty of sometimes "liking" the wrong thing) is doing the right thing.

Why? Because Google is faced right now with a few choices: become morally corrected or face being responsible for the moral degenration of nations. A moral degenration starts simple but ends in anarchy every time. I understand why Google did this but it doesn't have to make me happy per se.

In the end of it all, porn doesn't mean shit and we should all seek healthier relationships with each other. Dam....I'm growing up.....this sucks kind of but I like it.

This is my honest opinion on porn. I disagree with the act of censorship but I agree with the act of moral correction. Go find porn elsewhere people, let Google do what they think benifits them, even if it may not benifit them in the end, we shall see.

[clubhouse]

Perhaps they should also censor anything that promotes a gun culture too!

[emerglines]

Perhaps they should also censor anything that promotes a gun culture too!

Im with you on that , movies either ...

[Ambrocious]

[mostwanted]

WHAT IS IT!! I need to KNOW!!!!! :please: :protest: :beg:

:hehe:

[myidisbb]

a?

i don't see a problem here...mine is already disabled and I can search for porn as much as i want

my safesearch looks the same, it doesn't have the off switch anymore because google made it clear that it gives you results BASED on what you want to find

so if I were to say, enter "riley reid" without the quotes, it gives me pics from her twitter or pics from other sites

sure, a few indecent pics are included as well cause google missed them

BUT, if I enter the same words AND include the word "porn" within (porn riley reid) it gives me the results I want to see

so you can still use the fap gauntlet gents

but duckduckgo is good, especially if you're looking for the dvdrips :tehe:

the problem is it wasnt that way before. and google images for most of the world is still the same. way should i be force to have a moderate filter when i am an adult tobegin with? this is what happens when you allow every fckng democrat little fringe group to have power in the usa. never had a problem with the relgion right of the gop.