Has anyone used ruinmysearchhistory.com to curtail Google surveillance?
:D :D G
jewgle thread?
'how to appear funny', 'why are my thumbs uneven', 'am i lack toast and tolerant', 'your youre difference', 'why doesnt my poo float', 'midget google images', 'tall midgets??', 'homemade lube?', 'i hate my boss', 'what counts as fat', 'how to tell partner they fat', 'is it normal to still love my ex', 'how to get back with ex', 'penis remove dog how to', 'romantic ways to propose', 'engagement rings', 'sex shop in my city', 'how to tell if partner cheating', 'ways to kill someone hypothetically', 'undetectable poisons', 'how to delete search history in browser', 'ashley madison hack', 'view ashley madison list', 'ashley madison list my city', 'paternity test', 'mail order paternity test', 'attracted to mother why', 'is incest illegal in this country', 'latest laws incest', 'seduction guide', 'rohypnol safe dosage', 'smelly penis cure urgent', 'common STIs', 'STI test in my city', 'average penis size this country', 'do penis pumps work', 'best budget penis pumps', 'does liking men mean im gay', 'signs of being gay', 'how to come out as gay to dad', 'age of consent here', 'why is age of consent so old here', 'country low age of consent', 'flights philippines', 'isis application form', 'how to join isis', 'cheap syria flights from here', 'syria hotels with pool', 'bing', 'donald trump', 'OH COME ON DONT JUST COPY AND PASTE THE LIST FROM THE ARRAY YOU CHEEKY SCAMP'
nothing interesting there, really.
Just go to https://history.google.com/history/ and delete anything you want, according to one of their SRE.
>>55036436
>DugDugGo
>nod Stardbage or igsguig
>>55036469
Is this pasta?
>>55036504
It's queries that ruinmysearchhistory have in array to throw at google search, where they came from - beyond my mind.
>>55036344
I signed up for google opinion rewards and get paid to tell google I watch 127 hours of game shows a week, forage for mushrooms daily, and am extremely concerned with venomous snakes at all times. I also keep up several social media identities and only post to my fake ones if I can't get to my VPN.
How can anyone trust Google after this debacle:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFxFRqNmXKg
They're fucking evil.
>>55036344
Yep. It banned my account, so I guess it worked.
>>55036515
That's really retarded. It gave me the same list. Why are these morons using a static list that they don't even shuffle between users. It wouldn't be terribly difficult for someone to create a dynamic list based on trending searches with a few random searches thrown in that would create a search every 5-20 minutes the program is running. The timing being random as well.
>>55036614
>Why are these morons using a static list that they don't even shuffle between users.
Because its probably run by some autist who doesn't remotely have a clue about google's algorithms but wants "privacy" from le surveillance
>>55036614
http://cs.nyu.edu/trackmenot/ and alternatives.
source https://github.com/vtoubiana/TrackMeNot
>>55036587
Nice bait. They themselves posted a video the very next day retracting the claims they made in that one after everyone on the internet jumped on them to explain how google works.
They also got a lot of shit for claiming that negative results were being hidden when if they actually bothered to press enter on any of their autocompletes they would have STILL seen a majority of negative results.
>"Hmm... For the past three years, this user has boring, predictable search entries that seem to indicate he's a 23-year-old who lives somewhere in Wisconsin, likes playing RTS' and is learning German, and can't remember driving instructions for shit."
>"But now in the past five minutes, he appears to be a Cambodian who is obsessed with bellybutton lint"
>"I GUESS WE'LL NEVER KNOW WHICH ONE HE IS!!"
>>55036656
You're full of shit. They completely stood by the analysis. Have you even watched the update?
Fuck off jewgle shill!
>>55036344
>how to get back with your ex
>incest laws
>average penis size
>undetectable poisons
>donald trump
>tfw it's just googling the things I normally google
th-thanks google
>>55036727
>>55036727
wot do we do now
>>55036727
oh my kek the application form
>>55036748
They actually do have application forms too.
>>55036679
Yes I have and I think your characterization either has to be trolling or completely batshit no clue what is going on around you insane. Though they haven't posted their "full" follow up yet so I guess I don't know what they plan on ultimately concluding. Here's the video. Anyone in the world is free to judge for themselves. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6ki2QKVa_8
>>55036587
>they're fucking evil
it took you this long to realize a company that has been in the business of data collection is evil at its heart?
>>55036743
I guess we all have to joining ISIS, there isn't really a choice any more
Do you think they'll value my linux ricing skills?
The most persuasive part was where they used Trends to see how popular the autocompleted searches actually were. Autocomplete suggested "hillary clinton crime reform" yet Trends said that search didn't happen often enough to graph. It was super rare and yet it was the most popular completion to "hillary clinton cri"?
Let's ask Trends what is popular. I am providing you with clickable links so you can see the graphs for yourself. "hillary clinton indicted" vs "hillary clinton indiana"
http://google.com/trends/explore#q=hillary%20clinton%20indicted%2C%20hillary%20clinton%20indiana&cmpt=q
"Indiana" was roughly as searched for in May as "indicted" but searches for "indiana" have dropped to near zero while "indicted" shot way up. So Trends says "indicted" is much more searched for than "indiana".
Let's add in "hillary clinton india" as another item on the graph.
http://google.com/trends/explore#q=hillary%20clinton%20indicted%2C%20hillary%20clinton%20indiana%2C%20hillary%20clinton%20india&cmpt=q
Nope, "hillary clinton india" clearly isn't a popular search.
For "hillary clinton cri" what is the more searched-for completion, "hillary clinton criminal" or "hillary clinton crime reform"?
http://google.com/trends/explore#q=hillary%20clinton%20criminal%2C%20hillary%20clinton%20crime%20reform&cmpt=q
When they tried it they couldn't even get a graph for "crime reform" but by asking for a comparison of the two I got a graph. And wow, slam-dunk win for "criminal", way more searches!
I decided to try one on my own. I went to Bing and typed "hillary clinton cor" and the top suggestion was "hillary clinton corruption" Google? The top suggestions were "hillary clinton corporate" and "hillary clinton correct the record"
Okay, Google Trends, which of those three is the most popular?
http://google.com/trends/explore#q=hillary%20clinton%20corruption%2C%20hillary%20clinton%20corporate%2C%20hillary%20clinton%20correct%20the%20record&cmpt=q
And it's "corruption" by a large margin.
>>55037072
Google search results are personalized based on your search history retard.
>>55037146
Shithead, not in Incognito mode. Go back to sucking dick.
>>55037072
That's all true and seems convincing until you press enter on any of those search terms and count the pro- vs anti-hillary results. There's still more anti-hillary. If the claim is that they're trying to hide negative search results then handing you negative results may not be the greatest tactic. Or maybe it's more likely that ascribing malicious intent to a computer program was a mistake from the start.
>>55036805
>>55036656
>Suggestions had no correlations with search popularity, news articles, page views, fucking nothing
>Just a big black wordfilter for suggestions.
No.
>>55037290
>we don't understand it therefore it's a conspiracy
Then what were they correlated with?
>>55037356
The point is they fucking wheren't.
All other searches correlate with search popularity near directly, with little influence by page views, news articles, trending tags and personalisation.
For hillary, that was simply all gone.
