[LAU] This could affect all of us.

[jonetsu]

On Fri, 07 Sep 2018 14:49:09 +0200
David Kastrup <dak at gnu.org> wrote:

> jonetsu <jonetsu at teksavvy.com> writes:

> > Daniel Swärd <excds at kth.se> wrote:

> >> The whole point was the irony of an article about automated
> >> censorship machines got blocked by such a machine...  

> > It's not a good test at all I find.  Why would someone input the
> > full URL in a text search box as a test ?  Is that supposed to
> > mimic the public access to information ?  

> No, it is to prove that not even the most direct search method
> imaginable would have returned the article.  Otherwise you can always
> revert to "oh, you were using the wrong search terms for sure", "some
> indexing glitch" or whatever rationale.

This utterly uprooted.  The most direct search method really used in
day-to-day life by actual normal people and thus representing the people
fully and its access to information assumes that you know at least the
family name of the person you want to know about.  Which materializes
in a way akin to the following search criteria:

"EU internet censorship Reda"

Bingo !  The first item returned is the article.

And if you do not know the name of the person:

"EU internet censorship"

Will return a lot of links to various information.

These are real search criteria proving something.  Not the uprooted
senseless one provided by Reda herself who is perhaps gathering an
audience by people stuck between Fatima Merkel and the far-right.

>> It does not represent public access to information at all.  
 
> Sure.  It shows that even if you try really, really hard to find the
> article, the search will not be successful.

It does not represent trying hard at all.  It represents dumbness at
best.  Inputting a full URL you already know (and can directly use
instead) as a search criteria to see if access to information is
restricted proves nothing at all.  Now if you input that URL in your
browser and the result is a page that says you can't access the
information, now that would very serious.
 
> "I doubt you'll be able to bench press 10kg" "Dude, I just pressed
> 50kg" "That doesn't seem like a realistic way to prove you could
> press 10kg".

Why press ?  That's totally not efficient.  Flexibility and quickness
fares way better in fights, health and much more.