This was a very meandering project, and trying to corral it into some sort of coherent narrative was a bit of an undertaking on its own. Hopefully it makes some sense.

▲

BrunoBernardino 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Hi Viktor! Really cool write-up, thanks! Uruky is already using the `nsfw` param, but set to `0` or `1`, and I see in your example this looks like a new value option (`2`) that's "better" than `1`? How "safe" is it to implement it as the value to send when someone wants SFW results?

▲

marginalia_nu 8 hours ago | parent [-]

0 disables all filtering

1 filters 'harmful' sites per the UT1 blacklists

2 is 1 + the new NSFW filter.

The new filter works pretty good in my assessment. It's not infallible, but it gives significantly cleaner results.

And if you do find queries it fails to sanitize, I'd love to hear about them.

▲

IncreasePosts 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Can you add 3, which only returns content flagged as NSFW?

So I can make sure I know what sites to stay away from, of course

	▲	marginalia_nu 6 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Wouldn't work very well, in that you'd get awful recall. The way the filter is implemented, it runs after the query has been executed. I'd have to run it at document processing time, code in a pseudo-keyword for the label, and then add that to the query. It's doable, but I question whether the juice is worth the squeeze.
	▲	cosmicgadget an hour ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Asking the real questions.
	▲	VectorLock 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Or perhaps -2

▲

BrunoBernardino 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Thanks, already implemented and tested a couple of queries and it does look good!