Send this to David Pogue ,Technology editor of the New York Times. This is the knid of item David will run with in a very humorous way. No harm in trying.
WTF indeed. Unfortunately child pr0n is not very humourous a topic these days. ...And here I thought Google was slipping a bit, it seems to have degenerated in accuracy these past several months. But dear lawd... let's all stay away from MSN.
I think you're overeacting (which is unusual on Appleinsider). It wasn't links to child porn, it was people who had typed a phrase related to child porn who were then referred to a site that had words common to the phrase.
So, this person puts up a site with keywords thai and children and someone who types in thai children f*cking or whatever were referred to the site based on the 2 of the 3 words matching. If anything you should say MSN works better because it doesn't return real links to child porn.
The objection was simply that the person didn't want those kind of people visiting the site, which is a bit naive. For one thing, they probably didn't want to visit the site in the first place.
Comments
http://trevortravels.com/28/dear-bil...h-engine-sucks
Send this to David Pogue ,Technology editor of the New York Times. This is the knid of item David will run with in a very humorous way. No harm in trying.
So, this person puts up a site with keywords thai and children and someone who types in thai children f*cking or whatever were referred to the site based on the 2 of the 3 words matching. If anything you should say MSN works better because it doesn't return real links to child porn.
The objection was simply that the person didn't want those kind of people visiting the site, which is a bit naive. For one thing, they probably didn't want to visit the site in the first place.