
Google Shopping now returns no results for searches containing “gun” - dictum
https://www.google.com/search?output=search&tbm=shop&q=guns+germs+steel
======
gfodor
This "if (q.contains('gun')) return null;" approach is such a ham-fisted hack
that causes such collateral damage that anyone who thought Google can be
trusted anymore to responsibly wield their power over human commerce and
thought and not act impulsively based on political whims should reconsider
their position. Even if it is a mistake this kind of change should never be
possible to ship. And if it's not a mistake, then I don't know what to say.

~~~
PhearTheCeal
They did a similar thing with "confederate flag" not that long ago. I'm
convinced Google Shopping is more for political PR than an actual place where
anyone shops (Google probably knows this so doesn't care if they break their
service to virtue signal)

~~~
gfodor
Google is supposed to be _the_ data driven organization that changes things in
a way that will minimize collateral damage. Even if Google Shopping doesn't
draw much traffic in relative terms, at Google scale I'm sure it provides
meaningful revenue to all sorts of companies that have products that include
the term "gun" that do not include weapons. To make such a change and not
methodically try to reduce the blast radius for these people effectively
proves that whoever is in charge over there is not rolling out changes to
search algorithms in the way Google is supposed to be famous for.

I worked on search algorithms for an ecommerce site that would kill for the
kinds of traffic Google Shopping probably gets, and the idea that this would
ever pass code review is laughable because of all of the blatantly obvious
negative effects it would have on recall. At the _very least_ , you would
whitelist bigrams in query logs that go along with "gun" that do not include
weapons. This is a truly amateur move, several steps away from what I would
consider acceptable from the worlds premier search organization. I would fail
a student taking an information retrieval course on a question if they
provided this as a solution to removing a category of products from a search
engine.

------
qubex
Yeah, which is kind of annoying... I’m European and shed no tears whatsoever
for the supposed loss of precious “second amendment” rights (never had such a
thing, never wanted such a thing), but I work in the paint business where we
use electrostatic guns to apply powder coatings... and those have all
disappeared (as has “electron gun” of the cathode ray tube variety), all of
which is quite annoying collateral damage.

~~~
smnrchrds
It's even worse than I imagined. As of now, at least in Canada, Google
Shopping returns zero result when I search for "Burgundy" [1]. For comparison,
Amazon.com returns 100,000 results for the same query [2]. We have known about
Scunthorpe problem [3] for decades now. There is no excuse for this.

[1]
[https://www.google.ca/search?q=Burgundy&tbm=shop](https://www.google.ca/search?q=Burgundy&tbm=shop)

[2] [https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?field-
keywords=Bur...](https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?field-
keywords=Burgundy)

[3]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem)

~~~
smsm42
[1] works fine for me (US). Is it for Canada only?

~~~
smnrchrds
It appears to have been fixed. I should have taken a screenshot instead of
posting a link :(

------
calibas
Not that I'm pro-gun, but I'd much prefer that Google stay out of politics.
The potential for abuse is enormous.

~~~
jumpman500
I mean we can already call this abuse kind of. What if I meant to search for
'nerf gun', 'water gun', 'air gun', 'bb gun' or 'glue gun'? It doesn't seem
like google thought much about this change.

~~~
daveFNbuck
Toy guns are probably a desired target here if this is a reaction to school
shootings.

~~~
DanBC
You can buy toy guns freely in every EU country. We have very few school
shootings.

~~~
daveFNbuck
In the US, toy guns are blamed as part of the gun culture and people may want
to restrict them in reaction to a school shooting. I'm not saying it's
rational, just that it may have been intentional.

------
ravenstine
Apparently this is not terribly sophisticated.

[https://www.google.com/search?tbm=shop&ei=q3uVWtOfMM-4jwPqwZ...](https://www.google.com/search?tbm=shop&ei=q3uVWtOfMM-4jwPqwZoI&q=guhns+germs+and+steel&oq=guhns+germs+and+steel&gs_l=psy-
ab.3..0i13k1l3.1217.1217.0.1789.1.1.0.0.0.0.209.209.2-1.1.0....0...1c.2.64.psy-
ab..0.1.208....0.pEqtr6g99y4)

And more generally:

[https://www.google.com/search?tbm=shop&ei=rnuVWpLsIJKEjwP8uq...](https://www.google.com/search?tbm=shop&ei=rnuVWpLsIJKEjwP8uqrICg&q=guhns&oq=guhns&gs_l=psy-
ab.3..0i13k1l10.26638.26638.0.26870.1.1.0.0.0.0.84.84.1.1.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-
ab..0.1.84....0.vlsuaQD7-ME)

So it would seem they blocked a direct result but not suggested results.

~~~
eterm
That's unbelievably unsophisticated. That combined with not using their vast
ML resources to understand when something isn't a firearm (e.g. glue gun)
makes me wonder how this feature has come about.

~~~
tinalumfoil
Is it possible this was just a mistake or maybe a rogue employee? I can't
imagine Google allowing someone of this low competence to make changes to
search.

~~~
eterm
I can't imagine a single developer would have the power to make this change
either?

I guess it's possible that filtering has existed for a long time for very
specific queries and 'gun' was added to a list.

It seems weird that this feature could be put live in this state getting
passed QA though. That makes me worried what other changes could get live
without much oversight.

~~~
gfodor
For an ecommerce site such as Google Shopping it goes beyond QA -- incremental
rollouts should have triggered alerts noting this as causing a drop in recall
(to effectively zero) for a large category of high traffic queries that
convert (presumably there are some, like "nerf gun" or "glue gun", given that
"gun" is an extremely common term that has high purchase intent for non-
weapons) and it should have been prevented from being deployed by automation.

Presumably if they are doing things correctly there are probably several
overrides that needed to be enabled to let this change out. Or, they're not
doing things correctly. In nearly any other situation, automated systems would
recognize "change goes out -> large number of queries suddenly return zero
results" as a major catastrophic bug and prevent it from being deployed.

~~~
tinalumfoil
I'm hesitant to accept this was intentional because QA process, since this
change was clearly made by someone who didn't know what they were doing.

As another user pointed out, the word burgundy triggers the filter. And if you
spell something incorrectly the "did you mean" results are unaffected.

I'm imagining a higher level manager with very little technical expertise
(just enough to write an if statement) pushing this into prod against Google's
wishes, or maybe by accident.

~~~
gfodor
My point was that at Google, a single person should not be able to break
things to this degree. The automation should roll it back automatically. This
is, technically due to the drop in recall, a bug, unless it is overridden as a
special case so it is not recognized as a bug. To break things this bad you
not only should have to make the change to the code but you should also have
to "sign off" on the dynamics flagged by the X% rollout test as being
acceptable somehow.

So no matter what this paints Google extremely poorly -- either Google
Shopping is one git commit away from going down completely, or they're placing
shipping a hacky, poorly executed political statement higher on their
priorities than potentially damaging the livelihood of those who are
collateral damage.

------
gort
I notice this has been pushed down the rankings on the frontpage (it was near
the top a few minutes ago). Surely this sort of incompetent implementation of
a politically-motivated decision by a major tech company is worthy of our
attention?

(Exactly how submissions end up at a position other than their natural ranking
has always been a bit mysterious to me - should I blame some algorithm thing
or malicious actors?)

~~~
Slansitartop
It probably tripped the flamewar detector and/or was flagged (but not to the
point of getting killed).

------
PhearTheCeal
I can't even search for the word "burgundy", which is quite a nice color.

~~~
JorgeGT
Wait, so even Google engineers are terrible at regexp-ing? I now feel less bad
about myself.

------
DanAndersen
I'm trying to figure out Google's angle here. Is this just a dumb legal-
initiated move to shelter Google from culpability for any future gun crimes
committed with guns purchased after looking at Google Shopping? Is this an
attempt to shield against bad PR on social media from "supporting those evil
gun sellers"? Or is this an attempt by Google to throw their weight around for
ideological reasons, to try to make gun purchasing as much as a pariah as the
Confederate flag became after Dylan Roof (when major online retailers did the
same censoring)?

Whatever the case, it's definitely making breaking up Google look a lot more
appealing. Encourage your friends and family to get off of Google and use
something like DuckDuckGo instead. For too many people, "Google = Internet",
and it's becoming increasingly clear that that mindset will leave people
vulnerable to inhabiting only a small curated collection of approved mindsets.

~~~
cft
Virtue signaling at the highest corporate levels. Must have been approved by
Pichai himself. He probably felt insufficient backing to say no (which would
have been in the interest of the company) to the aspiring apparatchik that
executed this as her career move.

------
mancerayder
"Do no evil" as a marketing ploy, even if they dropped that officially.

One person's evil is another person's free speech rights, or ambiguity (forget
the 2nd Amendment for a moment).

It reminds me a bit of a commercial I saw: in slow motion, people of different
races were smiling and holding hands (nevermind that they looked like models,
all of them), with some motto about diversity. I think the sun was rising, or
setting. A few seconds later: a Nike logo at the bottom.

There you have it, folks, that's what happens when politicial discourse is
about symbols and words (ideas) and most importantly feelings instead of laws
and economic policy.

------
_ph_
I am horrified. Whatever ones oppinion about gun control might be, and whether
it is ok to remove actual guns from search results, it is absolutely horrible
that a company like Google would consider it reasonable to build a filter just
around the three letters "gun" in the search text.

------
sonofgod
Oh, and searches for "revolvor" and "gu n" work just fine. So only people with
bad spelling will be able to buy guns...

~~~
13of40
To their credit, if you type in "holds six magazines" to Google shopping they
still show a couple of magazine racks before the tactical vests.

------
gort
Actually - do we know if this is new? I found this from 2012, for example:

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2012/07/05/google-...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2012/07/05/google-
sadly-joins-the-anti-gun-brigade/)

Edit: The Telegraph picked this up just now, saying Google are "looking into"
it...

[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/27/wine-lovers-
cann...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/27/wine-lovers-cannot-buy-
burgundy-tipple-google-internet-giant/)

------
zestyping
Not just for searches containing the word "gun", but even words that contain
"gun" as a substring!

This returns no results:
[https://www.google.com/search?q=shogun&tbm=shop](https://www.google.com/search?q=shogun&tbm=shop)

But this misspelled query shows that results for "Shogun" exist:
[https://www.google.com/search?q=shogon&tbm=shop](https://www.google.com/search?q=shogon&tbm=shop)

Did anybody review or write tests for this changelist?

------
nemoniac
Brilliant! A search for "gu n" yields "Did you mean gun" and offers gun
related products.

------
GiorgioG
Bravo Google! You've managed to make zero positive impact on your implied
corporate stance on "gun control" in the US.

Worse, you've managed to degrade non-firearms related queries that contain
'gun.'

------
nemoniac
It does return results containing "guns". If you search for "germs" and
"steel", it returns the book "Guns, Germs and Steel". However it does not
appear to return results if you search for "guns".

------
dsl
Well that explains why I couldn't find a replacement Staple Gun this morning.
I actually thought Google Shopping had broken terribly.

~~~
SubiculumCode
And apparently it is broken terribly.

------
5555624
Like the title states, it's only "Shopping" and while it can be more specific
than "gun" \-- for example, "AR-15" will not result in any "Shopping" results
-- "AR-15" under "All" will give results for places to purchase an AR-15.

------
TYPE_FASTER
Wow, this was implemented poorly. Even just adding "gun" to the list of stop
words I assume they have would have allowed "burgundy" to keep returning
results. String contains boolean condition?

Bing Shopping also returns zero results for the search term "gun," but does
return results for "gun safe," "burgundy," etc.

Yahoo! Shopping seems to have the best compromise, returning relevant results
for the search term "gun," like water guns and such, but filtering out "real"
guns.

The beautiful thing about the internet is we can go to another search engine,
like DuckDuckGo. I would rather have Google mess this up and have to go to
another site than the federal government attempt to increase regulatory
control of internet traffic.

------
me551ah
Does anyone actually use Google Shopping? I personally don't know anyone who
does.

~~~
stronglikedan
I do every time I shop. It's (was) the easiest price comparison for general
products (that I know of).

This is certainly a huge disappointment. I don't think I would have searched
out an alternative anytime soon had this not happened.

------
kretash
I don't understand how such a hacky piece of code made it to production. While
water gun returns no results... water gu

[https://i.imgur.com/3pV73rs.png](https://i.imgur.com/3pV73rs.png)

------
joeblow9999
That'll solve the problem!

------
dep_b
I'm actually not getting any results from any query period. Apparently Google
realized online shopping is virtually non-existent in my country and just gave
up?

[https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&output=search&tbm=shop&q...](https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&output=search&tbm=shop&q=iphone&oq=iphone&gs_l=products-
cc.3...25539.25977.0.26072.6.5.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1ac.1.64.products-
cc..6.0.0....0.5pfbC6elbRg)

"Your search - iphone - did not match any shopping results."

~~~
giarc
I get ten pages of results using your link.

~~~
dep_b
That's strange. Apparently nothing is spidered in my country and I can't find
an easy way to switch countries. A lot of people shop abroad.

Google Shopping is a "good enough" experience for the end user, ready to be
shoved in your face when you are searching for links to websites that contain
your search query.

------
dragonwriter
Not just “gun”; “pistol” also works. Funny interaction with their matching /
DWIM logic is that a query for “water pistol” returns no results, but “water
pistil” returns lots of water pistols.

------
DocTomoe
This just smells of a Scunthorpe problem. What about a nice DVD of Gunsmith
Cats, or a watch with gunmetal finish, or maybe a burgundy sweater?

------
tombert
I understand why they did this, but I think this might be a bit too broad.

There are plenty of things that I might buy that have the word "Gun" that are
not directly related to weapons; my favorite XBox game is named "Gun", there
is a Gregory Peck movie I like called "The Guns of Navarone", and there's the
aforementioned "Guns, Germs, and Steel".

~~~
ignoramceisblis
The fact that you

> think

> this might

> be a bit

> too broad

Is to reveal the sorry state of affairs in, at least, our political discourse.

Worse so, you're effectively part of the problem which allows these
organizations to become so powerful.

You always need checks and balances. You always need to be vigilant. You
always need to act.

~~~
tombert
Umm, what the hell are you talking about? Which organizations? The NRA or
Google?

I'm not even disputing that I'm part of the problem, but I would like you to
elaborate on what you think this problem _actually is_.

~~~
ignoramceisblis
I find it hard to believe that anyone would seriously compare a non-profit
membership organization whose mission includes educating American citizens of
responsible gun ownership and defending citizens' second amendment rights, to
a global for-profit corporation with over 100 billion USD in annual revenue,
directly affecting hundreds of millions of lives every day, with the power to
promote or censor search results, advertisements, and more, and consequently
shape what people think. Surely the former does not have sufficient power to
positively shape how it's presented by major media corporations, and it often
takes the blame when those corporations distribute stories of gun violence--
events which, when the intensity of media attention is brought to them, we can
all point to and feel visceral reactions to. But it's obvious that the
political whims of the latter (Google) can be, and has been, carried out at a
massive scale with great(er) efficiency and little(r) checks or balances.

The fact that we have not yet developed and distributed concise-enough
language to discuss the monumental impact of entities like Google is a sign
that there is a problem we are not devoting enough energy to.

~~~
tombert
While I have to say I wholly disagree with your viewpoint on the NRA, I don't
really disagree with your thesis, which makes me wonder how I'm "part of the
problem".

------
dictum
Also, queries containing "revolver":
[https://www.google.com/search?output=search&tbm=shop&q=beatl...](https://www.google.com/search?output=search&tbm=shop&q=beatles+revolver)

~~~
gort
And "rifle", I think. You can't even do searches like "shogun" (famous novel)
or "begun".

------
sfcoder25
Velvet Revolver too. All that money into DeepMind and this is the best they
can do?

------
dhardy
It gives results if you do it with spaces... so g u n works...

*edit for clarity

------
smsm42
Searched right now, got tons of toy guns, not real guns so far - but I
wouldn't shop for a real one on Google Shopping anyway, don't think so.

~~~
smsm42
Interestingly, I get a lot of results for 1911 (none seem to be actual firing
guns, despite pictures), but nothing for Glock or Colt. Funny thing is the
1911 results have a lot of "Colt" words in the title, so it's an obvious
block, and a pretty stupid one (as they all are) at that.

------
cgb223
If only there was some kind of giant innovative cooperation that attracts only
the best and brightest talent that could solve this nuanced problem...

------
johnstew
I like the initiative just not sure about the execution.

I just search "glue gun" and got nothing. Guess that's fine.

¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

------
ISNIT
Damn... I should've bought my "gunge" before today. Now I'll have to use
Yahoo!

------
jasonkostempski
Good thing for Guns N' Roses that no one actually uses Google Shopping.

------
cwisecarver
Hooray! Now just search for firearms and get the same results.

------
sonofgod
Also "ar 15", unsuprisingly.

------
sgurajada
no results for `toy guns` too

------
fiveFeet
I love it. Thank you, Google! A lot of other tech companies - Paypal, Square,
Stripe and Apple pay announced years ago that they would not allow their
services to be used for the sale of firearms.

I hope other companies like Amazon, visa, master card will follow your
footsteps.

~~~
dragonwriter
Google Shopping still shows firearms, it just shows no results for correctly-
spelled searches including “gun”, “pistol”, “rifle”. Search for either
specific models, or misspellings for “rifel" or “pistil” or “revoler”.

~~~
fiveFeet
Hopefully they will take care of this loophole as they improve the algorithm.

