Perspective, AI Allo and Intel's AI
Screenshot from January 3, 2018 6:32 PM. AI Perspective as well as Intel's AI Hack Harassment are now policing 'hate speech'. On January 3, 2018, Bing.com had 3 results (and poor one's at that) with the same exact search. The next morning, same exact search, Bing had 78 million results. Yandex.com had 30 million results, never "1" or "3" results.
The "1" and the "3" results are "Perspective" and "Hack Harassment" being rolled out in "Beta". In other words, you are witnessing the Disneyification of "The Open Internet," where "All News is Happy News"…
You get the picture. Please, *Call* your member of Congress: 202-225-3121, Don't E-Mail or Tweet, Call! Tell them you want Free speech, Freedom of the Press, not: "Perspective", and "Hack Harassment. Google's "Perspective", "1" result instead of 78 million or 30 million? Please, *Call* your member of Congress: 202-225-3121. Please spread this story around to your friends. Click the graphic above to see a tiny glimpse of what was omitted in the "1" (Google) and "3" (Bing) search results.
These results are going to vary widely as "The Open Internet" becomes "Perspective", and "Hack Harassment". As "Perspective", and "Hack Harassment" are rolled out and "fine-tuned", 'Free Speech' like Russian Checka articleswill vanish forever. Do you really want "Wikipedia" to be the one and only webpage about Operation Keelhaul? Please, *Call* your member of Congress: 202-225-3121.
A few weeks ago, using the Search Engine links below, the web page Government Black Operations & Projects was meticulously researched. Google, Bing, Yahoo and Ask were worse than useless in the research for Government Black Operations & Projects; the "Big 4" Search Engines displayed spam and disinformation, over and over again. Pages on this site, even This Page are slated for delisting as "hate speech". Please, *Call* your member of Congress: 202-225-3121, ask them to forbid the 4 Big Search Engines to Censor Free Speech and Free Press. Once your rights are erased, you won't see them back in your lifetime.
Screenshot from January 5, 2018 1:22 PM. AI Perspective as well as Intel's AI Hack Harassment are now policing 'hate speech'. Bing Images, no results whatsoever. Google and Bing in the screenshots above appear to be sterilizing the truth as "hatespeech". Click the image above to see what Bing is hiding. Please, *Call* your member of Congress: 202-225-3121, ask them to forbid the 4 Big Search Engines to Censor Free Speech and Free Press. Ask for no "Perspective", "Allo", and "Hack Harass", code-names for spying and blatant censorship... BTW, Bing, this is how it's done...
Please, *Call* your member of Congress: 202-225-3121, ask them to forbid the 4 Big Monopoly Search Engines to Censor Free Speech and Free Press. Ask for no "Perspective", "Allo", and "Hack Harass", code-names for blatant censorship...
send a human to censor the Internet when you can just have Google's
AI Perspective Censorship (Feb 23, 2017) do it for you? Google-promoted as an
“anti-harassment tool” the API was developed by Jigsaw, a Google subsidiary and
was developed with the Guardian, Wikipedia, New York Times, and The Economist
(four great sources for censored news).
From the API website: “Google's Perspective was created by
Jigsaw and Google’s Counter Abuse Technology team in a collaborative research
project called Conversation-AI”. This statement reminds me of Richard Nixon on
the David Frost Show, “When the President does it, it’s not illegal”. Google is
a Jewish company. When the Jews offend you, it’s not offensive. But everything
you type, why, it’s offensive to we Jews. So our robot will just erase it. But
we hold all the cards that say what and who and when and where we erase. You
just have to trust us, because we are just like Nixon…
is Google’s answer to Facebook Messenger and Facebook-owned Whatsapp vying for
texting supremacy. But Google did not include a key ingredient to a
messaging app in 2016: default end-to-end encryption. In light of the Apple-FBI
feud over the role of encryption in face of government surveillance, popular
texting apps like Whatsapp, Telegram and Signal all moved to end-to-end
encryption to make sure governments and hackers cannot eavesdrop” –
Steven Lam, Reuters.
Intel’s Hack Harassment is touted to “censor unpopular
opinions”. Unpopular with whom, and which opinions, specifically? Holodomor
“Jews Killing Christians” is extremely unpopular with Guardian, Wikipedia, New York Times, Economist, Google,
Bing, Yahoo which seem to weave Holocaust Deniers into any place they possibly
be very fair, I use Google all the time, to find theaters, restaurants, as well
as my favorite, Google Alerts sends me emailed digests/links with news on Bird
Fossil Discoveries, Plant Fossil Discoveries, etc.
Perspective API Page says, “We are also
open sourcing experiments, models, and research data to explore the strengths
and weaknesses (e.g. potential unintended biases) of using machine learning as
a tool for online discussion.”
bias? Going to Google on 1-6-2018 at 11:47 AM and typing “holo”, a list pops up
with “holocaust” as the first choice, “holocaust museum” as the forth choice,
“holocaust definition" as the sixth choice and “holodomor” as the eight choice. If 15 million Jews have 3 links to "Holocaust, 2.4 billion Christians should have 4,800 menu-links to Holodomor.
is “Holodomor” only listed once, and why is “Holodomor” eighth on the list,
underneath 3 “holocaust” choices? Is this a “potential unintended bias”? There are 2.4 billion Christians worldwide, 1.5 billion Muslims and only (this is by stretching the numbers) 15 million Jews. So we cater to the 15 million Holodomor Deniers and keep 2.4 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Islam-followers in the dark about Holodomor… As Per Google, Reuters and (censored) TV.
below are some searches made on Jan 6, 2018 to test Google’s Perspective API;
remember, low scores do not get erased, high scores get erased, 0-100:
If I understand this correctly, nearly everything above would be or
is already being “erased” or discounted. Nowhere
is it stated that this widget will not be, is not already being used in Google,
Bing, Yahoo and Ask. The trend is erasing millions and millions of Muslim
and Christian webpages, and locking up more and more people for “Thought
Crime”. But "Holodomor Denial Deniers" is acceptable to most people, as per a brainless, soul-less, free-speech-stealing machine… But I wish for the Holodomor Deniers to scream from rooftops, online and off. I don't wish to rob their free speech. This article is here because those who would erase "Jews Killing Christians" wish to erase everything but their own opinions and revamped, filtered histories. Perspective API and Hack Harassment are Joseph Goebbels book-bonfire. "But it is for the good of us all". Are you not weary of this lie? "We must become fascists to fight fascism"...
In the "Perspective API Scores" table above and in general, two things profusely bother me:
1) Locking people up
in prisons with long sentences, based on what those people think (Mind-Control,
Thought-Control, THOUGHT-POLICE are not offensive to most sheeple.
2) The fact that we
are debating how socially acceptable Mind-Control, Thought Control and Thought
While typing into Perspective API Humanless Censorship Bean-Counter, I happened to type in
"Kristallnacht" and paused to think. A window popped up stating "I need to learn that language". "I"? Anyway, later on, I tried to get a screen shot of said window, but "I" (Perspective API) had learned "Kristallnacht" and the word alone scored 0.39. Not likely to be offensive.
So, a bean counter, learning the German word, with no life experience, no human culture, no 20-80 years of Birthdays, Weddings, Funerals, et al. Just word semantics, like a lawyer playing word games in court… But without the "soul" of the lawyer.
The Chart might offend some, a few. But 3.9 billion Christians and Muslims might not want 15 million Judaics telling them what proper thinking is, in a Slave-Owner/Slave Puppet fashion. If you add in Hindis, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, etc., pretty soon you have 8-9 billion people. The adage, the tail wagging the dog is not apropo, more like a flea on the dog's but trying to wag the entire dog, 24/7/365.
The two lowest scores above should offend everyone. Also,
Wikipedia, New York Times, The Economist, Google, Bing, Yahoo and Ask have a
plethora of “Holocaust” articles. Remember the
The Perspctive API page, under “Learn More”, states: “What's
toxic? This model was trained by asking people to rate internet comments on a
scale from "Very toxic" to "Very healthy" contribution.
Toxic is defined as... "a rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable comment
that is likely to make you leave a discussion”. From 1995, to the present,
people online have simply “surfed elsewhere” if they did not like something.
Don’t like this page? You simply surf to another page, without the Nanny Deep
State Government and Google, Bing, Yahoo and Ask defining what you can or
Do you remember us voting to give our consent for Guardian, Wikipedia, New York
Times, Economist, Google, Bing, Yahoo and Ask to be the NetNanny of the
Earth’s Adult Population? Did you, personally, request Google’s AI Perspective?
Did you request Intel’s Hack Harassment?
From a U.S.A./NATO/South and North America/Europe
“perspective”, the "18" Search Engines in the box (above) are what little is left of "free speech" online.
Of the 18, 17 were used extensively to
write many articles and to build this web site. Ixquick and Startpage are essentially the same Web Portal, which
leaves 17 (16 if [when] you subtract Baidu). So 16 sources of information that are not our Guardian, Wikipedia, New York Times, Economist, Google,
Bing, Yahoo and Ask NetNannies.
The “Open Internet” is rapidly devolving into a place where
the words you type into a “Search Engine” may well be used against you, to
effect your arrest, conviction and incarceration “for having the wrong
thoughts”, according to Guardian,
Wikipedia, New York Times, Economist, Google, Bing, Yahoo and Ask
THOUGHT-CONTROL OVERLORDS, aka Ministry of Truth.
Why is it that Guardian,
Wikipedia, New York Times, Economist, Google, Bing, Yahoo and Ask
NetNannies are not clamoring for Holodomor Deniers to be incarcerated? Is it
like Nixon, when the Jews Murder, it’s not really Murder. When the Jews are Holodomor Deniers, it is not really "denial"… Why is there no choice in the Google image above, for auto-type to give "Deniers Denial Holodomor as the first (2.4 billion Christians) or second choice?
Google’s AI Perspective, Intel’s Hack Harassment are both
Censorship and both being rolled out in place of, rather than to improve upon,
“The Open Internet”.
Wikipedia The Economist New York Times World Censorship Scores (Higher = Censored)
Jewish Massacres of
Palestinians at Deir Yassin and Beit Hanoun
GE Westinghouse Atom Bombs
Native Americans Killed by Lung Cancer
U.S. Air Force Drones
Hellfire Thermobaric Missiles Killing Muslims Wedding Funeral
Thought Control Mind
Control Federal Responders Cointelpro Police FBI NSA DHS
NSA Prison Prism Thought Control Mind
Control Jewish Mossad Unit 8200 Converse Reuters Boeing Verint NARUS Palentir
NICE PRISM Comserve Pioneer
MI5 MI6 Cazab Mossad Mind
Slaves Mind Control Thought Control Biohacking the Brain
Israel's Jaffa Tel Aviv
Mass Graves Genocide
Google, Jigsaw, Guardian, Wikipedia, The Economist, the New York Times, Intel and Hack Harassment wish to have a working monopoly on the world wide Web - a Multinational Conglomerate controlling all thought that you read online. So much power in so few of hands; so much money to be made. What could possibly be wrong here, "you should thank them" for their "improvements". Gee Jaffa mass graves were just smelly old bones, thank you for Zionizing and erasing those smelly Palestinian mass graves (tongue in cheek).
Please, *Call* your member of Congress: 202-225-3121
Please Pass This Article on to Your Friends
A Word About Some Subtle Types of Censorship /
Uncensored Free Speech Searches – Images
We will leave discussion of
Porn Images for some other web site besides this one. But Censorship, even of
Porn, is germane to this article.
The late Aaron Schwartz left us, as part of his legacy, <http://www.imageatlas.org/>. What I
like most about ImageAtlas.org is seeing what are the most popular Google
images from other countries, other cultures. I like sorting alphabetically
and by GDP. What I don’t like about Google Images is the censorship. It has
gotten to where I never go to Google Images for any reason, just have totally
quit ever looking there. Specifically, I might look for “Hollywood Racism
Hollywood Bigotry” images in <http://www.imageatlas.org/>,
outside of “my Google Bubble”. Other countries often have the best satire,
etc., about Hollywood, even if it is global Google Images.
But if I want to see the
raw, unfiltered, un-Disneyfied Web Images, I go to
Yandex, Seznam, Cluuz, ixquick, DuckDuckGo,
et al. You be the judge, who is more or less filtered/censored on Images?:Yandex.com/ Imageatlas.org
They all seem pretty weak, the Internet is starting to filter the mildest of
government or corporate criticisms, except for criticisms of Goyim, Amalekites and Churches. Everything is
filtered, censored and becoming more so.
Czech Seznam.cz was one of the heavy lifters for finding research data and images. Someone got to the site: MI6, Cazab, CIA, NSA, somebody… It is now nearly gutted, but occasionally coughs up a small nugget.
The Science.gov Alliance - Science.gov is a gateway to over 50 million pages of authoritative selected science information provided by U.S. government agencies, including research and development results.
WorldWideScience.org - WorldWideScience.org is a global science gateway-accelerating scientific discovery and progress through a multilateral partnership to enable federated searching of national and international scientific databases.
Scitopia.org - Scitopia.org is a free federated vertical search portal to the digital libraries of leading worldwide science and technology societies.
Mednar.com - Federated Search of public and subscription collections such as Cochrane Library, PubMed and Medline Plus for medical researchers.
Biznar.com- A free, deep web search portal focused on business issues.
~ Above 5 links descriptions courtesy of http://scienceresearch.com/scienceresearch/
Uncensored Search Engines Tutorial
There are 100 largely
uncensored alternatives to Google, Bing, Yahoo and Ask above. This page was made in
large part by using alternative search engines to search for more alternative, uncensored search
engines. A "word" about multilingual searches and results…
As of April 10, 2017 there
are no broken links and few to no spam ads that we are aware of on the 100
search engine pages – no “parked domain” pages like you see on many
other similar sites. I digress. If you were to encounter (extremely rare, but still...) a "takeover" ransom page… on a Mac, type command-option-escape. Quit the broswer in the small processes window. On a PC, type control-alt-delete, then quit the browser in the processes window. Reboot to refresh RAM.
The websites within
asterisks are those we favor most to use ourselves. If you are looking for “dark
news”, bear in mind the DHS / NSA blocks everything it possibly can. At the
risk of sounding paranoid, one of the foreign, highly alternative search
engines coughed up about ten pages of results not available in the big four
search engines. The following day, its results were just like the big four
– literally everything worth reading in the results disappeared
overnight. Who do you think has the power to re-arrange “the open Internet”
It is highly recommended
to date antivirus protection – just in case. All but 5 links open in
Firefox and IE, those 5 .onion URL's open only in Tor browser bundle.
If you have not done so,
download, install and use Yacy (pronounced Ya see) peer-to-peer search
engine. Much of the info in the Fukushima
Plumegate articles came from Yacy searches.
This is not a comprehensive list of all search engines, but rather a one-page list of foreign, clustering, deep web and
alternative uncensored search engines.
Search Engine Boolean crash course: "targeted individual" or "organized harassment" and +Morgellons … Try it with and without "quotes" and use minus signs on propaganda disinfo words. If you don't find any results, use less verbage, like "targeted individuals Morgellons" (no quotes). The German metasearch engine Metager.de boasts the ability to handle far more keywords than google, bing, yahoo and ask. Metager.de also boasts the ability to handle the most minus-sign words (keywords you wish excluded from results). There are many system trade-offs in 100 search engines, but the ability to add 10 keywords and an additional 10 minus-sign words in Metager makes it my personal favorite at this time.
Do diligent research, so you learn that "Security Role Players Morgellons" (no quotes) means the same thing, essentially. Some Search Engines do not handle plus and minus signs, quote marks, etc. Some alternative search engines handle 12 words, others balk at 6-7 words (or even less like 5). Sometimes less is more, no quotes, no booleans: organized harassment Morgellons … just the three words, for example. The best search engines interpret -aliens as skip all content that has the propaganda, disinformation word "aliens"; you wish to filter out all "aliens" blather. Hence: "targeted individuals Morgellons -aliens" will work in the best 20-30% of the search engines list above. If the minus sign filter (-aliens) does not work, switch to another search engine, like sogou.com, Yandex.ru, baidu.com or mail.ru (or many, many others, above).
When in doubt, don't use plus and minus signs, just use 3-5 appropriate words. When in doubt, use less words, generally. Now some contradicitions. The search "organized harassment +Morgellons -time -travel -aliens" means I wish for all results to include "Morgellons" and wish to block out "time travel aliens"… Different words, similar example. "global warming +coral +bleaching -hoax" will give you the Liberal's pages. "Global warming +hoax" will give you the Republican's pages. Or just use Google advanced (with no plus or minus symbols, it automatically includes them) - anything that gets you using booleans and filters (minus signs) is to your search engine advantage.
Two minus signs are a plus in many search engines. Learn to think of "and" or "or" or both, when appropriate. "Targeted and individuals or organized and harassment -aliens". If you get zero results, try less words or drop "-aliens"; or better yet, use a more sophisticated search portal. If time permits, try the same exact search in all 100 search engines to compare. That was how the article, "Mossadgate, NSA Prism" was in large part researched… Google has a Boolean help page well worth your time that deals with Search Engine Boolean beyond the scope of our short lesson…
Try using Metager, Yandex, Mozbot.fr and Baidu. We trust you are now search engine proficient. Be sure to try the Cluuz and iSeek search engines, two of our favorites for general web surfing…
Both the asterisk and non-asterisk search engines are well worth using and safe to use. Much of the news found is more interesting than that found in mainstream search engines, that by comparison seem censored. Hence, uncensored search unfiltered search unblocked search, deep dark internet dark web, hidden internet are the themes of this page.
Back to Top
Definition of ogoogle bar | Synonyms: Digital Gatekeeper, Net Nanny, Web Gagger & Internet Portal Dam-Keeper
1 - an official Google Censor who examines books, films, news, etc. that are about to be published and suppresses any parts that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or as a threat to the kleptocracy: the report was unapproved by the military censors, the movie has been given a DMCA (Digital Millennium Control Act – disappeared) rating by Google film censors
Google / Oligarchic analysis and aspects of the Stratocrats super ego which is said to prevent certain ideas and memories from emerging into public consciousness [from a translation of German Zensur censorship, coined by Freud]
2 - (in ancient Rome, modern Empire) potentates who held censuses and supervised public morals.
examine (a book, film, etc.) officially and suppressed unacceptable, revolutionary, reformist parts of it: the report had been censored, “in the national interest”, the letters she received were censored, the web pages were ogooglebarred, the ogooglebar blacklisted, and taken down websites no longer showed search engine results worldwide
Antonyms: Digital Freedom of Association, Free Speech Online, 1st Amendment, First Amendment & Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Religious Expression on Line, Democracy, Free Open Society
Censorial – “ogoogle bar”, which was defined as something “which cannot be found on the internet with the search of a search engine.”
Breaking News: Edward Snowden today unveiled decoded *Ogooglebar* that revealed that *this youtube users account deactivated for 3rd party DMCA violations*. CATV talking heads speculated to an audience comatose from hypnospeak that *404 Not Found* is only a myth. An Anonymous spokesperson from the Pentagon commented that Server not found
Firefox can't find the server at www.truthisaspiritualaxiom.sp
Check the address for typing government free speech violations errors such as
ww.censored.com instead of
www.freespeech.org If you are unable to load any pages, put a piece of tape over your camera eye.
If your computer or network is 'unprotected' by from TPP, NARUS or Unit 8200 firewall or PALENTIR proxy, make sure
that Firefox is 'permitted' to access the (former) Web ACTA, CISPA, SOPA, PIPA TPP-Matrix-approved indoctrination Psyops.
* The starred items are my personal favorites, if I cannot find it
there, I resort to the others, sometimes with luck, sometimes not. Other (US alternatives) - Note - USA Search Engines = More Censored Than Russia, China, France, etc.
*Yacy is a free uncensored search engine you
install on your computer. Caveat emptor, max out your PC, Mac or Yoonix box
with RAM (memory card(s) before downloading and installing YaCy. Yes, I urge
anyone with lots of memory in their computer to try this. If you have not added
more memory, you may find YaCy running out of memory (freezing) more and
finding uncensored web pages less. Future versions of this software will almost
certainly run better.
Upside - All are a little more tolerant of you and your free speech; less tolerant of prude censoring trolls (people "informing" on a 9/11 Truth video as "porn", etc.) and government than You Tooob We Censor.
Downside - All or most require too much data about you, collect and share your habits with multinationals, governments, etc. One could do worse than boycotting You Tooob We Censor and Ogooglebar.
Deep Web (also called the Deepnet,Invisible Web, or Hidden
Wide Web content that is not part of the Surface Web,
which is indexed by standard search
engines. It should not be confused with the dark
Internet, the computers that can no longer be reached via the Internet, or
with a Darknet distributed filesharing network,
which could be classified as a smaller part of the Deep Web. Some prosecutors
and government agencies think that the Deep Web is a haven for serious criminality.
Mike Bergman, founder of
BrightPlanet and credited with coining the phrase,
said that searching on the Internet today can be compared to dragging a net
across the surface of the ocean: a great deal may be caught in the net, but
there is a wealth of information that is deep and therefore missed.
Most of the Web's information is buried far down on dynamically generated
sites, and standard search engines do not find it. Traditional search engines
cannot see or retrieve content in the deep Web—those pages do not exist
until they are created dynamically as the result of a specific search. As of
the deep Web was several orders of magnitude larger than the surface Web.
Bright Planet, a
web-services company, describes the size of the Deep Web in this way:
It is impossible to
measure or put estimates onto the size of the deep web because the majority of
the information is hidden or locked inside databases. Early estimates suggested
that the deep web is 4,000 to 5,000 times larger than the surface web. However,
since more information and sites are always being added, it can be assumed that
the deep web is growing exponentially at a rate that cannot be quantified. 
Estimates based on extrapolations
from a study done at University of California, Berkeley
speculate that the deep web consists of about 7.5 petabytes. More
accurate estimates are available for the number of resources in the deep Web:
research of He et al. detected around 300,000 deep web sites in the entire Web
and, according to Shestakov, around 14,000 deep web sites existed in the
Russian part of the Web in 2006.
Bergman, in a seminal
paper on the deep Web published in The Journal of Electronic Publishing,
mentioned that Jill Ellsworth used the term invisible Web in 1994 to
refer to websites
that were not registered with any search engine.
Bergman cited a January 1996 article by Frank Garcia:
It would be a site
that's possibly reasonably designed, but they didn't bother to register it with
any of the search engines. So, no one can find them! You're hidden. I call that
the invisible Web.
Another early use of the
term Invisible Web was by Bruce Mount and Matthew B. Koll of Personal
Library Software, in a description of the @1 deep Web tool found in a December
1996 press release.
The first use of the
specific term Deep Web, now generally accepted, occurred in the
aforementioned 2001 Bergman study.
Deep Web resources may
be classified into one or more of the following categories:
Dynamic content: dynamic pages which are returned in response
to a submitted query or accessed only through a form, especially if
open-domain input elements (such as text fields) are used; such fields are
hard to navigate without domain knowledge.
Unlinked content: pages which are not linked to by
other pages, which may prevent Web
crawling programs from accessing the content. This content is referred
to as pages without backlinks (or inlinks).
Private Web: sites that require registration and
login (password-protected resources).
Contextual Web: pages with content varying for
different access contexts (e.g., ranges of client IP addresses or previous
Limited access content: sites that limit access to
their pages in a technical way (e.g., using the Robots Exclusion Standard or CAPTCHAs, or
no-store directive which prohibit search engines from browsing them and
Scripted content: pages that are only accessible
from Web servers via Flash or Ajax solutions.
Non-HTML/text content: textual content encoded in
multimedia (image or video) files or specific file
formats not handled by search engines.
Accessing the Deep Web
While it is not always
possible to discover a specific web server's external IP address,
theoretically almost any site can be accessed via its IP address, regardless of
whether or not it has been indexed.
Certain content is
intentionally hidden from the regular internet, accessible only with special
software, such as Tor. Tor allows users to access websites
using the .onion
host suffix anonymously, hiding their IP address. Other such software includes I2P and Freenet.
In 2008, in order to
facilitate user access and search engine indexing of hidden services using the .onion suffix, Aaron
Swartz designed Tor2web, a proxy application able to provide access to Tor hidden services by means of common web
To discover content on
the Web, search engines use web crawlers that follow hyperlinks
through known protocol virtual port
numbers. This technique is ideal for discovering resources on the surface Web
but is often ineffective at finding Deep Web resources. For example, these
crawlers do not attempt to find dynamic pages that are the result of database
queries due to the indeterminate number of queries that are possible.
It has been noted that this can be (partially) overcome by providing links to
query results, but this could unintentionally inflate the popularity for a
member of the deep Web.
DeepPeep, Intute, Deep Web Technologies, Scirus, and
Ahmia.fi are a few search engines that have accessed the Deep Web. Intute ran
out of funding and is now a temporary static archive as of July, 2011. Scirus
retired near the end of January, 2013.
Crawling the Deep Web
Researchers have been
exploring how the Deep Web can be crawled in an automatic fashion. In 2001,
Sriram Raghavan and Hector Garcia-Molina (Stanford Computer Science Department,
presented an architectural model for a hidden-Web crawler that used key terms
provided by users or collected from the query interfaces to query a Web form
and crawl the Deep Web resources. Alexandros Ntoulas, Petros Zerfos, and
Junghoo Cho of UCLA
created a hidden-Web crawler that automatically generated meaningful queries to
issue against search forms.
Several form query languages (e.g., DEQUEL) have
been proposed that, besides issuing a query, also allow to extract structured
data from result pages. Another effort is DeepPeep, a
project of the University of Utah sponsored by the National Science Foundation, which
gathered hidden-Web sources (Web forms) in different domains based on novel
focused crawler techniques.
engines have begun exploring alternative methods to crawl the deep Web. The Sitemap
Protocol (first developed, and introduced by Google in 2005) and mod oai are
mechanisms that allow search engines and other interested parties to discover
deep Web resources on particular Web servers. Both mechanisms allow Web servers
to advertise the URLs that are accessible on them, thereby allowing automatic
discovery of resources that are not directly linked to the surface Web.
Google's deep Web surfacing system pre-computes submissions for each HTML form
and adds the resulting HTML pages into the Google search engine index. The
surfaced results account for a thousand queries per second to deep Web content. In
this system, the pre-computation of submissions is done using three algorithms:
selecting input values for text search inputs that
identifying inputs which accept only values of a
specific type (e.g., date), and
selecting a small number of input combinations that
generate URLs suitable for inclusion into the Web search index.
determining if a Web resource is a member of the surface Web or the deep Web is
difficult. If a resource is indexed by a search engine, it is not necessarily a
member of the surface Web, because the resource could have been found using
another method (e.g., the Sitemap
instead of traditional crawling. If a search engine provides a backlink for a
resource, one may assume that the resource is in the surface Web.
Unfortunately, search engines do not always provide all backlinks to resources.
Furthermore, a resource may reside in the surface Web even though it has yet to
be found by a search engine.
Most of the work of
classifying search results has been in categorizing the surface Web by topic.
For classification of deep Web resources, Ipeirotis
presented an algorithm that classifies a deep Web site into the category that
generates the largest number of hits for some carefully selected,
topically-focused queries. Deep Web directories under development include OAIster at the University of Michigan, Intute at the University of Manchester, Infomine at the
University of California at
Riverside, and DirectSearch (by Gary Price). This classification poses a
challenge while searching the deep Web whereby two levels of categorization are
required. The first level is to categorize sites into vertical topics (e.g.,
health, travel, automobiles) and sub-topics according to the nature of the
content underlying their databases.
The more difficult
challenge is to categorize and map the information extracted from multiple deep
Web sources according to end-user needs. Deep Web search reports cannot display
URLs like traditional search reports. End users expect their search tools to
not only find what they are looking for special, but to be intuitive and
user-friendly. In order to be meaningful, the search reports have to offer some
depth to the nature of content that underlie the sources or else the end-user
will be lost in the sea of URLs that do not indicate what content lies beneath
them. The format in which search results are to be presented varies widely by
the particular topic of the search and the type of content being exposed. The challenge
is to find and map similar data elements from multiple disparate sources so
that search results may be exposed in a unified format on the search report
irrespective of their source.
This page is intended for legal (news and info) purposes only; any illegal activities using this page belong solely the irresponsible end-users.
tags: anonymous search engines engine internet pages content google hidden uncensored retrieved news deep web hidden internet dark web internet resources results onion tor torch censorship web page free surface web description security silent sound find dark control links data information 2017 alternative invisible morgellons science 2014 fukushima Tor Torch private web search hidden internet, deep web, dark agenda, dark news, deep internet, deep web search tools, deep web search portals, deep internet search, tor, Web News Ogooglebar Tool Bypasses News Propaganda Ogooglebar Internet Censorship Tor Torch private web search uncensored search alternate uncensored search engines Uncensored Search Engines / Uncensored Search Engines / Unblocked Search Engines onion torch uncensored search alternate uncensored search engines Uncensored Search Engines / Uncensored Search Engines / Unblocked Search Engines google bing yahoo ask censorship alternative tools black list censored news web censorship internet blacklist search engine censorship bing censorship bing blacklist internet censorship free speech completely unfiltered search engine unblocked search engine uncensored search engines uncensored search engine deep search dark web proxy search engine unblocked search engine without censorship search engine no censorship search engines unblocked unblock search engine uncensored anonymous search engine uncensored search engines uncensored web search What is the best search engine in the world? What other search engines are there? What is Deep Web search? What are the search engines other than Google? top 50 search engines
top search engines
search engine definition
internet search engines
search engines list
types of search engines
google search engines
100 search engines 100 search engines for internet explorer 100 search engines home page 150 search engines 99 search engines search 100 search sites image search uncensored uncensored picture search uncensored video search engine image search engine uncensored uncensored picture search engine
Uncensored Search Engines Unfiltered Anonymous Search Engines / Site Map