Right To Be Forgotten: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ส.ค. 2024
- John Oliver covers the new European law that would allow people to erase themselves from internet search engines.
He also starts proposes the hashtag #MutuallyAssuredHumiliation to save us from our own pasts by posting phenomenally embarrassing photos of ourselves.
Connect with Last Week Tonight online...
Subscribe to the Last Week Tonight TH-cam channel for more almost news as it almost happens: / lastweektonight
Find Last Week Tonight on Facebook like your mom would:
/ lastweektonight
Follow us on Twitter for news about jokes and jokes about news:
/ lastweektonight
Visit our official site for all that other stuff at once:
www.hbo.com/las...
It's HBO.
![fellow fellow - PROUD feat. INK WARUNTORN [STRING QUARTET]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BQrVkMPTdHE/mqdefault.jpg)
The funniest thing about this episode is that Brian Sullivan's top Google image is now with him running a squirrel while drunken naked. Well done, John Oliver. Well done.
Twat.
tamsinthai Vagina.
+Double - N Nicholas Cage's face.
phi anh Exactly.
It's still one of the top images!
John Oliver's impression of Morrissey is DEAD ON!!! Bravo!
Bonnie Burton it's very Smiths-y, sounded like This Charming Man
Yep, I was quiet pleased with that :)
Yep, I'm a morrisey fan and I liked it 😂
Surprised he hasn’t brought it back honestly
im mad im only hearing it now
I searched "man naked drunk on a squirrel" and it is really his top result.
+Enkii Muto Great, now google images for Brian Sullivan
Foreseen G. It is the 4th result 8D
xD
+Enkii Muto
Five moths later. Fourth result for google search. First result for google images.
+Enkii Muto I searched his name and got this as the first result hahaha! Although i suppose he now has the right to delete it from google's servers.
The Streisand effect is the phenomenon whereby an attempt to hide, remove, or censor a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet.
ugh the internet is not an infallible entity it to has limits. servers are shredded after their service life. but this is important because e go back to the age old question of should your past determine your future in society. i would say no and that your historic profile for the public or with the government always need to have expiration dates.
@@jarrodyuki7081 I'd argur that we, as a society, have to accept that people are people who do shit, make mistakes and don't always look pretty. also, we have bodies and sex, nobody should be judged on that.
Lol
@@yoriex3577id argue some 'mistakes and misdeeds' shouldn't though.
Running over a squirrel whilst drunkenly riding a bike in the nude? Sure, but I'd argue it would be a great story to bring out at parties
Being caught making child porn, however? No, that s*** should be written in stone.
@@mechengr1731 gotta differentiate mistakes and crimes
This is one of the few perks of being "old" today. All of my really embarrassing moments happened long before the internet. Suck on that, everyone younger than me!
Oh no, now there's pictures of me sucking on that!
I wish I could go back in time b/c there were a lot of things that were better about life pre-Y2K. Privacy, more room, cheaper housing, free press with accurate reporting, kids learned social skills rather than playing video games all day, people got more exercise and we paid less for everything. The country wasn't run by corporations stealing money from the public. There is a lot that I miss! So glad I'm not a teen now in that regard. It's so expensive to have fun, when I was a kid, movies in the daytime cost a buck to go to!
i too loved racism, homophobia, and the need to conform to society or else i would be shunned by others :)))
People learn social skills from communicating through video games. As a matter of fact, you learn to communicate WELL because you are accomplishing goals.
www.uoc.edu/uocpapers/5/dt/eng/prensky.html
There is nothing in that abstract with which I disagree, but learning to communicate well means being able to communicate outside an insular community. I was in the military, and we had jargon that most people might not understand, but it allowed US to communicate well. But if you wish to venture outside such an isolated community, you need more. An Albanian might communicate well with another Albanian, but that does not help much in the wider world.
The right to be forgotten has some good sides actually. There was a case of a german woman who was a lot in the news in the 90s because she was accused of murdering her husband. It turned out to be false and she was freed but the tabloids had a field day with her and when you googled her you only found the archived articles about her being a murderer. In that case google was forced to atleast not show these articles everytime she applied for a job or a new home and people googled her but she had to go through court to get that order. I think applying this law in a handfull of cases with high hurdles can actually do a lot of good for some people.
I love that in 2021, John's "embarrassing" photo is still on my youtube feed with the quote "If there's hope for him, there's hope for all of us".
He is so real.
Plus, his old photo reminds me so much of my son during HIS awkward years...
Love Ya John Oliver and Number One Son Randy !!!
One hundred percent support this, if you are a private citizen
However, once you willfully become a public figure, your life should be an open book
Words can't describe how happy I am that I typed in "Spanish guy w" and the first suggested search was "Spanish guy with debts from 1998"
It even beats "Spanish guy who discovered America"
No, a nordic guy did.
No, an asian guy did.
No, some plants and animals discovered it while it was still Pangaea.
No, the aliens did.
No, I did
This show is hilarious. It needs to get more recognition.
Hilarious, but at the same time awakening.
Your wish came true!
It already has too much recognition.
Oh boy😎
Really?
Attention everyone: Brian Sullivan's top Google image is no longer him drunkenly running over a squirrel on a bicycle in the nude. His legacy has vanished with the sands of time.
Hahaha
Thank you for the much needed update! I'm going through old John Oliver Last Week Tonights and was very curious.
Nooooo
Wow
If you search "Brian Sullivan squirrel", the image is there but has been blurred by safesearch
2:52 He's mixing up 'erasing your self from the internet' with 'wearing Harry Potter's cloak of invisibility'!
Pretty damn good Morissey impression haha
"The only thing I know about him is the only thing he didn't want me to know."
I don't know why, but that line is my favorite thing ever.
Ok, having just finished watching every single clip on youtube I can find, I am confident that if HBO, Netflix, or any other company were to pick this show up full time I would watch it. Well done, John Oliver (and crew).
You're kidding right?
just in case he isn't: it's a show on HBO.....
I meant a full time regular hours show... Oliver has proven his worth .
Peter Ritchie Getting consistent material is tough; you'll notice the difference in quality between Oliver's Show, the Daily Show that airs 20 minutes 4 times a week, and the Late Show with Dave Letterman that airs 40 minutes 5 times a week. Setting aside which of those 3 guys you don't like, it's just grueling to put something out where you don't have a day with bad content which loses you viewers.
Late, but as Plowbeast points out, quality takes time. Many of his videos have him mentioning them investigating all week long for the details, and sometimes still missing some.
So I guess that knitting sweaters thing Molly weasley did is actually a real thing.
Always wanted a Weasley sweater
The worst pictures of me were polaroids that no longer exist. Sometimes I really love being old.
I too had polaroids accidetally and maliciously destroyed.
Jokes on you, Lee, because I photocopied them, Lee. I'm uploading them to the internet right now, Lee.
Why can't this show air every night?
and/or post up more videos from the show atleast
John and HBO have decided to wait until the show gets on its feet. Then they will start putting up more episodes
Cascadian Ranger
I love the show but don't think it will extend beyond a single episode per week given it's a full 30 minutes without commercials. Perhaps it could be extended to 45 minutes?
***** Most late night talk shows are an hour long, though, so I don't think that's the reason. A good compromise would be for it to keep its 30 minute time slot and air four days a week like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.
Pseudo Nym
While I would personally enjoy four episodes a week, I think HBO's model for these programs is once a week (Bill Maher) plus Oliver's staff likely isn't nearly as big as TDS or Colbert Report and those shows fill up 8 of 30 minutes with commercials.
However, I do think a 45-60 full minutes on Sunday could work and hope that's in the HBO plan. So far though, I'm very happy with what Oliver is producing in the 30 minute format.
Unpopular opinion: John in high school is actually adorable asf and the picture isn’t that bad
Hah! Image searched 'Brian Sullivan' and guess what came up :D
Wow
HAHAHAHAHA, THATS TOO FUNYY TO BE TRUE!
Lmao
it's now like the 10th picture but still hilarious!
It's back on top of the search :D
even baby John Oliver has dimples! so cute as a baby!
Catherine Regush sometimes dimples don't present till later because babies are pudgy. my son has a chin dimple that is prominent now that he is older
The thing that bothers me the most is that didn't come up as a problem of revenge pornography or any sort of similar "against my will serious problem" problems.
+MegaKaitouKID1412 yeah, that was what immediately came to my mind and i wonder if that had something to do with the ruling. I know the EU has been better than most about tackling that issue. I was kind of disappointed by the way the segment assumed this would only be used for silly embarrassing photos.
minisnape Exactly. I'm totally cool people using this for stupid crap and wanting it for stupid crap, because it affects wayyy much more than stupid crap.
It did in the context that it is a universal truth about deleting. You want me to only know about you from revenge porn? Since it was universal it couldn't be covered in it's entirety. I suspect more people are concerned about the stupid shit they did appearing on the internet than people worried about revenge porn
A little punctuation would work.
I have to disagree with John Oliver here. Having some accountability and protecting people from this kind of crap could be really hard indeed, but it needs to be done for many reasons. Today is clearer that is possible to destroy someone really fast with fake news and this kind of regulation could have helped a little bit.
Btw, the argument he uses against the legislation is exactly the same that the NRA guy in ine of his most famous segments in the Daily Show: gun legislation don't work, therefore we should not pass it. It won't stop it all, in both cases, but it could (and probably would) help more or less depending on the quality of the legislation approved.
One thing he didn't mention that I thought about while watching this is how would this apply to companies and governments? I mean if a company head or the president does something wrong, they would have the right to tell Google to delete it, and that could be important info to have in order to make an informed decision about whether to support said company or vote for said president.
Corporations are people according to the law.
***** Corporations are "people" in that the US constitution protects the rights of the people, and that some of those rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion, have been ruled by the US supreme court to also belong to corporations.
the thing is that this only affects search engines, likely only google really. You can still do research like back when google didn't exist, it's just a lot harder.
TheJerbol Since the military junta took over here in Thailand, I use Bing. Thais, like most people only heard of Google.
The entire point of the piece is the ruling, and the process involved, would be inherently self defeating. If youre still unsatisfied it was discussed in passing at 3:47
I think it does have a good point. what if your ex put nudes of you in the Internet without permission. I think that's good to get taken down because it was uploaded without you permission and it's an invasion of privacy
+Makeda Phillips you are right! But it has been taken out of hand by people. That's the down side to it :(
Huma Malik thanks and yeah that does suck
+Makeda Phillips One could always choose not to take nude photographs of themselves.... /shrug These are things we must consider in this day and age.
ptanyuh I think taking photos is a right. If you confide in someone photos of your body, they are supposed to keep that private. And if they break that trust it's wrong.
+Makeda Phillips +Makeda Phillips I also have a right to walk around in my house naked, but I'm not going to because of how invasive technology has become. We need to make smarter decisions about these things. Sure, it's MORALLY wrong to violate your trust, but it isn't LEGALLY wrong. It is your choice to take the photos and share them. If they get shared beyond your control, the mistake was made when the pictures were taken and you let your privacy be put in someone else's hands. Simply don't make that mistake again and don't take the pictures. It's a very simple thing.
The morrissey part killed me omfg
I love that his embarassing yearbook photo has basically just become the banner for his entire show.
It's 2016 now and if you google Brian Sullivan the picture still shows up
+Kate Jones Just searched it, it came up saying under data protection laws in europe, some photos may have been removed....
+Dominic Wells all it needs is somebody else uploading it somewhere else
+Dominic Wells It actually does show up. If you type Brian Sullivan and the go on to Google images, it shows - a German guy on Twitter posted it out
Oh, cool it's back!
+Dominic Wells change your DNS
No one can escape the Internet, the Internet is forever. I love the Internet. I love Big Brother.
You correctly said that the guy who fought google at court now is famous but for the rest of the Europeans we now just need to send an E-Mail to Google to delete our data. Btw crimes can't be deleted (public interest), it's rather personal data, like pictures or data Google collected about you.
NEVER FORGET RICK SANTORUM
***** Do you mean Sick RANTorum?
It's hard to forget it if you ever get santorum in your face...
TheEpicninja88 Touche sir.
Fred Norris Ne touche pas!
RagdollRalph Well, he's a former US senator, so not that unlucky...
This isn't removing from the internet. It's removing from an index.
The library analogy actually works.
I agree. I was pleased with the analogy. But it is still worth laughing at in 2019 🤣
He is such a wonderful man. He puts everything as it truly is, in a comical way. If you can't find the humor in everyday living, then you are doomed. Love this!
john oliver is secretly trying to promote his amazing voice. he secretly tries to become a singer and get away from his current lifestyle.
Well he is cast as Zazu now. It's is definitely working.
Eat shit Bob happened, this comment aged like a fine wine
You sir are a legend. You have captivated a 13 year old in Australia. A-bravo
The problem is when you are falsely accused. A lot of people assume any accusation is true. And that's the sort of shit that can cost you relationships and the career you've been working so long and hard for.
the card catalouge is a perfect analogy though
Oym
The more important arguments FOR the right to be forgotten are something like: "I am a rape survivor and I don't want the first link that comes up when someone searches my name to be the report that I was raped." or "My ex uploaded revenge porn of me" Even though this is the case-- I still feel the negatives outweigh the positives
I don't know about that first case scenario, reports are usually kept confidential by the police and courts.
A good argument would be something like: say you grew up in an extremist, fundamentalist, obnoxious and abusive family: neo-Nazis, Islamic fundamentalists, whatever. And you believed in their ideologies and spread whatever hateful rhetoric you were indoctrinated in online.
Then you moved out and away to college/uni, you grew up and changed, you're no longer this, but this information can be traced back to you by future employers, maybe even friends and potential romantic partners.
I'd argue here for the Right to Forget, as long as it meets a certain set of conditions (time limit since last negative post, proof of participation and again meeting certain requirements aside from just 'showing up', a 'good behaviour' certificate from the police, etc.)
Like I'd make it legal, but it'd be sort of like having to apply for a visa, depending on the thing.
yeah, I don't blame anyone who would want their history removed for those reasons. The internet is so big that I don't know how it could be done though.
@Tracy Nguyen True you can't change the past. But it would be nice if the first thing people find out about you when they are online would not be some dark past, without the information on the rest of your life that shows how you got or got out of there. Or frankly while my past is important for me, other people don't have to know a fucking shit about it, if I don't want them to.
@@MrJojux I think people assume that the right to be forgotten means immunity from freedom of speech laws when in reality the right to be forgotten has no impact on freedom of speech, just excessive data on someone.
A number of years ago I broke the law and got convicted of a crime but in the time that has passed my criminal record has been spent. In UK terms that means you no longer have to declare you have a criminal record in the vast majority of circumstances but more importantly, organisations and people are not legally entitled to know you have a criminal record unless they're a select few that deal with vulnerable people or high end finances. When the legislation was made in the 70s it clearly didn't envision, and as a result, legislate against the power of the internet bypassing the entire act and all the protections it affords. Now in the last 10 years especially, the sheer size of the internet has brought it into conflict with human rights laws which have been in place for many decades..
The articles made also featured medical information about me on them that I didn't really have much choice over keeping private.
I'm okay with the right to be forgotten by data harvesting companies and telemarketers.
The news is news, don't like being on it? Don't do news worthy things. (Though the privacy of victims should be protected independently)
Mario sacrificed his privacy and anonymity for our own. Hail Mario. HAIL MARIO. HAIL MARIO!
I love how when it's a drunken night in college all the men are on board, but when it's revenge porn their response is "don't take pictures of yourself naked" 🤔
All the men? Way to generalize there, woman who speaks for all the women
Only a hit dog hollers
@@lessgoofyone oh good god can you not ‘not all men’ this shit when that’s very true?
@@lessgoofyone lmao she said what she said. She's 100% right, so keep crying about it. All the men are on board when it's about men, but when it's about women, they don't give a shit. That's reality. The fact that you want to take her "all the men" comment literally, and pretend she means every single man in the world, it's your fault. Also, since THAT'S the only thing you reacted to, it just shows that kind of man you are lol gtfo.
Lol Brian Sullivan is wearing crocs in that photo of him, naked, drunkenly running over a squirrel on a bicycle.
This man is a gem
his outfit is adorable and that tie, ugh it's so nice. such a solid blue
Holy crap, he can sing! If he released an album, I would by it on the spot, it wouldn't matter what it is!
urcrazy24611 I will say that while he was doing the bugle he would regularly make random songs dealing with the topics they were talking about or just sing famous tunes. Just type in john oliver singing on Google I think it should be on sound cloud there used to be a TH-cam video but it has since been deleted. He's not trying to sing well in most of them but either way it's hilarious.
I just checked and the Brian Sullivan being drunk while riding a bike over a squirrel is still up on Google images 😂
John just became my hero. I'm doing it.
Oliver's hair is a lot darker now than when he was a kid.
Most stuff posted online is effectively forgotten. While lots of stuff does technically remain on a server somewhere, the odds of it ever being seen again by a single human being may be very low. Much more stuff has simply been deleted entirely. Because so much new information is being published every day, the average lifetime of shocking images and such is actually much shorter now than it used to be. However, for those people who are exceptions to the pattern and end up on the wrong end of some sort of raid or crusade, I guess that's little consolation.
+EebstertheGreat Yup. we are saved by the meh factor.
ah that really depends, as especially those things one would like to be forgotten usually dwell somewhere in the depths. The growth of the internets capacity has so far been exponential and will probably stay unless we stagnate in the technology sector too much.
As example i wouldn't bet on Facebook ever loosing anything you uploaded by accident.. if that happens i would doubt their professionality quite a bit. So anything that has been reposted there is also rather going to stay on their servers, even if not visible to the public directly. And today a lot of the stuff people want to be forgotten happens on FB :-X
+DiabloDBS Funny story about that - apparently there's a Facebook privacy technicality that allows them to farm your profile pics out to private businesses. A dating site got in a lot of trouble for using a photo of teenage girl Rehtaeh Parsons against her will (one of those "Meet Local Singles in Your Area" lies) - the real sticking point was that she had committed suicide three months earlier in a highly publicized Internet privacy ordeal.
For more info you can Google "Retaeh Parsons dating ad" - I'm just happy I will never be good looking enough to be randomly chosen to represent some dating site.
James Gardner It's not quite like that. For an app to get access to your pictures, it needs to ask, and you need to click the button. The thing is, you may be sharing your pictures with an app that legitimately uses them, or you may be using an app that uses other details and not notice that you are also sharing pictures with it. In either case, if the company is malevolent, once it has access to your pictures there is no way to stop them from doing whatever they want with them. Some use them for ads in the hopes that the people will never seem themselves or be powerless even if they did.
+James Gardner Well FB has some huge issues which is why i do not use it for private stuff, but the major problem is that the internet indeed will not forget, at least not what should be forgotten. In the Parson case, and many other similar cases that happen every day, it is also a big problem of the offline Systems not getting anywhere anytime soon enough.
About FBs policies .. if it is on their servers... it is pratically theirs...
+EebstertheGreat Not really.. there have been cases in which applications used backdoors to just colect data even without consent of the user. I usually isn't as dramatical but stilll ...
This is called the Streisand effect. It's been around for a long time.
Barbara............?
+Yordanos Tesafmichael whooohooooooooooooooooo, whooohooooooooooooooooo, whoohooo hoo, whoo hooo hooo, whoooo hoooo hoooohooo hoooo.
thought it was called mandella effect
Nah, the Mandela Effect is a lot of people remembering that something happened, when it in fact did not happen at all.
The namer being people remembering that Nelson Mandela died in prison. He did not.
i've completed this "Clips" playlist after 4 days of INTENSE watching... amazing! and all without a single ad! thank youuuuu
You know Mr. Oliver... that photo is embarrassing... but nothing is more embarrassing than you pulling out a mac :P
HOMESTUCK!
Lana Lala stop...
What's that? Mom can't afford one for you? Better hate on the product, right?
ginito I hate on shit products for being shit :P *rolls around on an expensive windows computer* LOOK AT HOW MANY GAMES I CAN PLAY FLAWLESSLY! *rolls around some more*
Aickavon the Techpriest You seem to be living in the 90s. Kid, you can install windows on a Mac. And if you have a laptop and it is not a macbook, then you don't know what the fuck you're doing, "techpriest". What a fucking poser. Gross.
Thumbs-up for the Morrissey impression, alone.
1:56 I literally said "that's way too specific" right before John Oliver did. That dude definitely killed a squirrel whilst naked.
2:36 that malevolent giggle 🤣
I just love how adorably nerdy he looks! He still looks similar, just with better hair and glasses, but he's so successful now!
Yup, that's pretty much a Morrissey song.
+Mareepu It's a hell of an impression, tho
+Mareepu One of the most perfect impressions I've ever heard.
i love moz but yeah, that is pretty much it
+giligara30492 totally
Self deprecation is a forgotten art. Except with John Oliver, a master.
the brian sullivan bike naked squirrel picture is actually his top 3 results gold silver and bronze all one photo when u search his name 😂 lmfao
Am I the only one who, right now, *really* wants Morrisey to write that song?
yyes you are. cos ALL morrisey's songs SOUND EXACTLY LIKE THAT. EVERY VERSE SOUNDS THE FUCKING SAME! [falsetto voce] "i'm the DJ i'm the searching for a job and then i found a job...etc" [i obv am not into morrisey but i have friends who deliberately put his albums on to annoy me cos i would rip the piss outta morrisey w that weird voice ... i rem the 'best of morrisey' and every song did sound like the partial harmony john oliver sang].
how the fuck did morrisey ever get to be so big? surely the only people who enjoyed... oh i get it.. it's the people who were gay as teenagers and morrisey's songs struck a chord in them because it certainly has nothig to do with the actual music or muzac. the guitars had the same settings, jangly pop rock ad infinitum, the drums were weak and limp, the bass is non existant. lyrics sometimes interesting but mostly not and were aimed at a specific audience [openly gay bands do NOT get anywhere in the music industry and morrisey was aware of that even tho the industry is actually run by the 'pink pound'].
still, awful muzac.
it just goes to show that you don't need talent in the arts industry... just luck and suck.
Dude... Chill
Also Morrissey is a highly intelligent songwriter, that'd probably be why you don't quite get him...
Fred Callaghan
Hey, never mind him. He obviously has some issues; just count the gay references in his post.
"People who were gay as teenagers". Seriously, you can't make that shit up.
I *really* want to see a picture of that dude running over a squirrel naked.
I'm very mixed with this law. On thr one hand it could have prevented a suicide in my town but it does give politicians the ability to get rid of things thay could hurt them. What we need is third party politicians in office that aren't there for the money. Then this law would be perfect.
The law doesn't apply to politicians and other public figures.
Centrist 922 So in other words, we need our public leaders to be better than humans. That's basically the only way we're ever going to get an ideal government, unfortunately :(
+Centrist 922 Also this law only applies in Europe. Also, it isn't a law. It's a judicial ruling.
+Centrist 922 politicians are people who have a lot of power and therefore responsibility. i think it should apply to private people but not necessarily politicians
It's a Weasley Christmas jumper! He had a real life Weasley Christmas jumper! :D
The squirrel picture really is the 2nd hit, and has its own entire category, when searching "Brian Sullivan"
2:00 I nearly choked laughing.
i liked the quicksand example about the internet
too bad quicksand works like that only in the movies
I find it genuinely adorable that THAT'S the most embarrassing thing in John Oliver's past. That sweet little bottle of sugar free, vanilla coffee creamer. Never change John!
omg i am doing my law essay on this topic!!! I hope to be able to reference this :)) thanks John + team!
It calls the Streisand effect. How trying to censor something on the internet just highlights it further.
+Das Neko Luckily, Streisand isn't famous anymore.
The term 'Streisand effect' is likely to be stay relevant for much longer than she is in the common consciousness.
Are you a Troper, too?
I have the right to be forgotten ♫
oh oh oh ♪
I actually googled 'Ryan Sullivan' to see what came up, and that squirrel picture was one of the top results
😂 😂 😂
man this show has come a long way. feels like just yesterday that I was watching you work on the dailyshow. glad to have been a fan of yours for so long, you've quickly become a legend in your own right
He is charming with guinene wit and humor.
Good job dude and his crew
You are a blessing to this world
Mr. Meeseeks Thank you!
The woman on the far right at 2:04's reaction to his hypothetical scenario sums up how everyone responded.
Morrisey impression on point. I'm only a minute in and already love this bit
.... and the rest of it is money too. Well done Mr. Oliver sir. once again
I personally have an issue with this, 10 years ago i made a 911 call upon some dude stealing light bulbs of my building.. a few years later the local journal posted my full name and id number addressing me as a witness being called in another (bigger) cause against this guy.. 10 years passed and the post is there, waiting for the robber to find that article and get the information of the guy who call 911 upon him.. that would be a case i'd like to, at least, remove the article from google since the journal refuses to remove my information from the post.
That's the problem. Google just does the linking and caching, he does not hold the content. And Google is just one search engine - Google is not the internet.
I'm not sure on my own country how things would go (Brazil's so fucked up), but I'm pretty sure that if you are on US you can sue them (journal), specially if they didn't had permission to publish your personal info. That kind of crap is ridiculously unethical. People simply don't even think about the possible consequences of their actions.
I think people are way too worried about privacy issues online. All you have to do is not post stuff online, nor allow anyone to publish stuff about you that you did not allow (since that's illegal).
As someone who works with and loves technology I'm way more worried about abuses of cameras, recordings and drones (specially the most stealthy ones).
With our world-wide stupid and corrupt politicians and leaders, if we don't rush to fix the legislation about all those things, it will all get very, very bad in just a few years.
He now can have that journal remove the article using that, if he is from the EU.
Anyone else here during the quarantine?
This is why I love John Oliver so much.
The right to be forgotten is different then this
if you search google images for 'Brian Sullivan' (that news guy 2 minutes in) your top result actually is now that picture - Thanks John Oliver
God I love your show man.
God I love you, You sexy beast.
God is a sexy beast?
I think Colbert and Stewart have to be Incredibly envious of the amount of freedom Oliver has on his show. At first i didn't think he was all that funny during his segments on the DS, but dude he is just fucking bringing it every sunday night. Please HBO don't stop posting this vids on TH-cam.. this is awesome.
That Morrissey bit. Killed it. :-) Hilarious.
There is no right to be forgotten. Your rights do not include other people's memories
well this isn't about other's people memories, this is about what people who don't know you can access, back to the Spanish man, in 2009 a Spanish newspaper recklessly wrote about him and his debt, years later when he tired to get a home, after having improved his debt, the mortgage company looked up his name and up came the newspaper which was reckless in the way it portrayed him and led to the mortgage company not selling him the house, even though he had a good credit score.
There is no black and white answer to this. Its not a question of yes it should be or no it shouldn't be. The content on the internet should be divided into categories and some like previous criminal accusations should not be removed without the permission of the government while embarrassing photos/videos of yourself can be removed at your request. This requires a complex debate and discussion.
It also requires untold manpower to actually get it done. Millions of people would be asking for things to be removed. It's just an impossible task to ask of anyone when almost everyone on the planet has access to the internet and can easily duplicate whatever someone wants to be removed. I also find it funny that people think Google=the internet. Even if Google removes something from their search engine it can still be easily found. They don't have access to these individual websites to take things down. It really seems like a reactionary policy made by people who are ignorant of how the internet actually functions.
Always Skeptical I know it requires manpower and investment but it is worth it. This is privacy we're talking about.
See, I'd say dividing content like the way you're talking about would be a horrible idea, and making it so people can take things like that down would be worse. Because that immediately sets a precedent that would allow all groups to remove anything they consider to be "embarrassing". And considering how much power corporations have in the government, I could easily see them abusing such power to remove things that could cause them trouble.
Sithlordnergal How could you POSSIBLY be against this idea? I am saying that certain content should not be deleted without government permission but certain content should be allowed to delete with user consent alone. Where is the harm in this? The government can decide where to put which category of content. The corporate companies needn't have a say in this. Not every country is pro-capitalists like America.
yeah. But who the hell would like to look through all those images and categorise them into these groups. There are millions of images and it would be way too hard to divide them into categories
Hah...the story of the Spanish dude reminded me of Umbridge and the Quibbler.
'Don't you get it Harry? She'll make sure éveryone will want to read it.'
the morrisey comment and song has to be the best john oliver yet
hahaha!! Mr. Oliver is freakin brilliant! :D
this guy is a fucking genius!
That Morrissey joke was classic!!! Sing it Steven Patrick Oliver!!!
The second Google suggestion for Brian sullivan is Brian Sullivan Squirrel :) Magnificent.
Wow he is 300x better without a censor. Thank god he got away from comedy central. This is a great show.
you can escape google... but you cant escape reddit.
Omg that STILL IS the top Google image search for Brian Sullivan.
Well played, sir. Well played.
and a year later, we still haven't forgotten.
From what I understand though, this law isn't getting rid of the information from the internet. It is only removing the tag from Google's (and only Google) search results. The news article, for example, will still be on the internet, it just won't show up on Google's search result.
but if you can't find it on google, is it really there?
Yeah, but most employers just Google you so they won't find it.
ReturnDivided & georgeguy007 , I mean, yeah, but it is still technically there. Run a different search engine, or browse the site it is on (some people browse newspaper sites). I mean, for a cursory glance, sure it is gone, but technically it is still there.
Indeed, but the fact is it is far less likely to be found. Nothing is truly lost from the internet but it can be made hard to find.
ReturnDivided
actually, i'm one of the fortunate ones, i don't have any pictures of myself on this internet.
+lavafoxx "this" internet
Phoenix Issa
there is only one internet
+lavafoxx That's just not true.
*****
of course it is, a company's intranet doesn't count.
+Phoenix Issa i was laughing my ass off. on this internet
December 2017 and that photo of Brian Sullivan is still one of the top image results!
The comparison of the card catalog explained it perfectly and was most elegant, i thought.
The thing is though that there's a database containing all criminal data, so no one will be able to get rid of that.
You fucked up John. And I already beat you to the punch. My worst photo has been up for 2+ years. I guess Germans beat English once again.
This comment was totally cool until it got uncomfortable
*cough* The War *cough*
"once again" ?
You mean, "after all".
The Germans were beating the English, then they fucked up. Also, German's did way better in the World Cup, as in they won and England went 0-2 I'm pretty sure.
Mutually assured humiliation that's hilarious. that had me rolling on the floor LMFAO LMFAO.
7 years later, "Spanish guy with" still has "debts from 1998" as it's 5th autocomplete. Nice.