They already ask that sites check “adult site” if there is adult content. I do not believe that they would be able to divide between work which is artistic and work which is pornographic, because that would require some kind of checklist of standards to use when doing it. That can not be automated. How much money could they put behind human censors for this, and how could they possibly do this accurately? What would the rules be? That the art be strange and so not to be confused with porn? That it be a minor portion of the site, hidden away (as sex tends to be)? Are they art experts?
Anyway, blogger is out of date, and everyone has moved to other platforms. I use it, but realize this. This move is not a forward thinking move for Google as a company, but guess they can afford to not be Tumblr. A series of directions large companies often tend to make out of arrogance and hurts them in the long run.
For one thing, if no one finds you on the most popular search engine, the voice gets a bit quieter. Also, there are only so many free blogging platforms similar to blogger that are easily accessible to average consumers.
For something relatively easy for average consumers there’s Wordpress, but it’s not very secure for novices.
Tumblr? It’s censored.
Quora? They censor.
TypePad? Not free.
Weebly? Not free.
SquareSpace? Not free.
Livejournal? You have to pay for basic things like privacy and they censor – more on this.
Ghost? Not easy for average consumers, requires hosting (usually not free).
xanga? Not free.
You might find some flash in the pan stuff that takes all your blogging content with it when it disappears, but I would hope that you wouldn’t count that kind of stuff as a valid contender and comparable alternative to Blogger.
[quote=“Chesterfield, post:20, topic:52453”]
If you want Google to pay for your speech
[/quote]If you want to utilize hyperbole and straw man arguments, go chat with a mirror.
No, I’m certainly not. Look at what your options were 50 years ago. 100 years ago. 300 years ago. 500 years ago. 1000 years ago. Never in human history has it been easier to publish and to be found and heard.
All those options you list as not free seems like you don’t understand the difference between free and libre. If you want freedom, then you pay for your own hosting and get total control.
It’s very inexpensive and easy at this point. Most hosting companies have a point and click interface to install just about any blogging platform you want and you own everything you create. You don’t have to give up any rights or make creative sacrifices. It’s the only way to go. Plus, if you work at it long enough, you can probably get the best of both worlds and sell advertising on your own site. Why let Google have all that money?
Firstly, I hate the use of the term “adult” as a euphemism for “erotic” or “sexual”. This usage is 100% pure ideological bias.
Secondly, I look forward to when people can finally stop being schizoid about nudity and sex. Nudity =/= sex, it is even possible to have sex with one’s clothes on. If sex gets really, really private - we wouldn’t have anyone to do it with, because it would (for no practical reason) be a secret. For the prudes of the world, a reality where people are free to have sex with anybody consenting, anywhere they happen to be are not subjecting outsiders to anything. Quite the opposite, free sexuality will cause sex crime to practically disappear.
Not sure if there’s actually any legal adult content you can’t post on tumblr. If it’s flagged as NSFW it might not show up for people who aren’t logged in or don’t turn safe search off. I don’t actively seek out hardcore content on tumblr, but I’ve…seen some things…
I’d like to see someone suggest “net neutrality” as a solution to this one. Because having the FCC decide what is and is not obscenity has worked so well for decades.
Still, not a surprising decision in a climate of increasing worrying about triggering people with content that disturbs them, and laws (proposed and enacted) targeted at revenge porn in several states and at the federal level that aim to weaken the safe harbor provisions of CDA Section 230. Understandable reactions, to be sure, but ones that give Google a strong incentive to police its site.
Read his comment again. He didn’t say what you thought he said.
Also, Title II does have provisions that give the FCC the power to enforce decency standards. It’s why they were able to collect massive fines when Janet Jackson’s nipple was shown during the Superbowl. The FCC says they will forbear those parts when they apply it to the internet, but they haven’t done so yet. There are politicians who actually do want the FCC to police online decency, so we just have to wait and see what powers the FCC decides to grant themselves.
Why is the FCC even being brought up? We’re talking about the actions of a single company making policies about their own products, not a service provider selectively granting services.
Perhaps he is implying that a moronic reference to Net Neutrality would be moronic?
It still does not come off that way to me, even reading again in this light.
