Scroogle is M A D !!!

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by LockBox, Dec 8, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    Google has taken a step further with Scroogle. They are now blocking Scroogle servers. It's hit and miss right now if you can use Scroogle, as they are basically playing 'tag' with Google.

    Here is the notice that was up just minutes ago - this sounds more serious than past problems:

    Screenshot Of Scroogle Announcement
  2. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    lol I was just wondering today "how long before Scroogle gets shut down?"
  3. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    They've been going strong for many years. Why would you wonder that today?
  4. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    No idea.

    I'll cry tears of joy if it happens. Their website disgusts me.
  5. LoneWolf

    LoneWolf Registered Member

    That is a bummer as I prefer Scroogle over others.
    Hopefully they are back soon.
  6. LoneWolf

    LoneWolf Registered Member

    If you dislike it so much just don't go there. :cautious:
  7. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    I don't think it's that easy.

    If I see someone selling snake oil to someone on the street saying "it'll make your joint pains go away!" I don't just walk by.
  8. Carver

    Carver Registered Member

    Looks like it is escalating, when I saw it earlier this week it just said Please wait 10 minutes before trying again.
  9. LoneWolf

    LoneWolf Registered Member

    How so?
  10. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    Explain, Hungry Man. You're never....(cough, cough,) a loss for words. What, specifically is your problem with Scroogle?
  11. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    In this case they're not selling snakeoil, just taking business from the guy selling something legit.

    Or rather, saying "My snake oil is legit, arthritis cream is evil!"

    Their site just reeks of paranoid bs. That one story they have was hopefully satirical? It was definitely hilarious. The problem is that some people actually think that the story (satirical, humorous, or otherwise) depicts anything other than wild fantasy.

    But since everything I need to pass judgement can be found on the front page of their website and we've all likely seen that front page... we can just assume our conclusions are going to stay separate and leave it at that.
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2011
  12. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    What irony! You think they're stealing from the "legitimate" Google? Are we talking about the same Google who doesn't index a single shred - not one page - of original content? That Google? The one who is being sued for making a "Google News" page from full content from "legitimate" news sites? That Google?
  13. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Yeah i discovered this about 30 mins ago :( At first it was fine for a while, although slower to fetch than usual. Now we know why !

    I love Scroogle :thumb:
  14. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Privacy forums are always good for a laugh.

    But I know better than to try to hold conversations in one!

    Try getting information from somewhere other than inforwars and the like.
  15. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    Hungry Man - You are what some call "copping out." I don't post from InfoWars. What does that have to do with anything? You came in here and slammed Scroogle but can't lucidly tell us why. You had no argument for my counter-argument. There is nothing funny about the "Privacy Forums" or this particular thread. It's just a way for you to spout off like always. If you don't like it around here - stay in the other forums. You are a constant (very clever) disrupter. But, I call you out on this thread because it's clear you're just saying inflammatory things for one reason - to be inflammatory. You know better to try to hold conversations here? That makes no sense at all in this thread. None. You simply make no sense.

    Tired of it,
  16. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    This is pretty accurate.
  17. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    You even admit it? Whatever.

    Back to discussion.....................
  18. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    @ LockBox

    Well we now know for Sure what the MO is :D
  19. Baserk

    Baserk Registered Member

    Hehe. 'Google, the totally legit company that's being ripped off by the not snakeoil-selling folks.'
    You truly enjoy shooting from the hip now and then, don't you?
    Just being inflammatory HungryBraggadocio Man.. :).
  20. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Well it's working ok for me, but with DuckDuckGo available now I'm using Scroogle less and less. I have DDG as my homepage and Scroogle as my search bar.

    Hopefully one day DDG's results will be as accurate as Scroogle's on every subject.
  21. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    This is what I find hilarious by the way:

    What I find less hilarious is people who take things like this seriously.

    Same reason Iron ~ Snipped as per TOS ~ and I'd love to see the project get shut down. Their company is dependent on Google but also dependent on convincing people that Google is evil and that they aren't.

    If they were doing this to Yahoo it would be just as bad.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 8, 2011
  22. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    Your logic makes absolutely no sense at all. Google serves up ZERO original content, but profits from ads next to stories from, say, The Boston Globe (without compensation). But, you have a problem with tiny Scroogle?

    By the way, what you found so silly was a celebrated short story. They simply republished the rather famous short story (Scroogled) by Cory Doctorow
  23. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    I know, he's written quite a lot. I don't see your point?

    Google indexes lots of data on its own servers. I have no idea why you think that's somehow them not providing content.

    It's like saying "OMG Dell doesn't build the hardware, they just facilitate a system where it's distributed." And in this case there would be another company saying "Dell is evil, use these computers instead! (which we get straight from dell.)"

    I have a problem with anyone who spreads bs FUD to get people to use their product. The difference between scroogle and Iron is that Iron is a scam for money and I think the scroogle people probably believe their own bs.
  24. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    Google serves up the content of others. They serve up no original content.

    Your Dell analogy doesn't work. I shouldn't have to point this out, but Dell pays for their hardware and then assembles their computers. Google simply collects and indexes (on however large a scale) material from others, profits handsomely and compensates nobody for their content. Big difference.
  25. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    lol they get paid because one of the most popular sites in the world links to their site. People have jobs that revolve around being hired by companies that want their websites to be on page one of google.

    Any website can tell Google they don't want to be indexed:

    Do you actually think that companies make no money by being on Google? Can you even imagine what would happen if, say, Dell weren't listed on Google? A huge portion of people wouldn't know how to get to it.

    So, to be very very clear, people want to be indexed by Google. They make a lot of their money because of it. And if they don't they can opt out - it's easy. Of course, any business would kill to be the first search result but whatever.

    But feel free to ignore what I'm saying. That gosh darn Google is just so darn evil! Giving all of that money that they steal from those companies they support to charity. And just think of all of the things that they haven't actually done but we like to pretend they might in the future oh gosh just gets me so mad!
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2011
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.