[sideshowb]

It begs the question seeing as they've written a bot to determine what's offensive why don't they hook it directly to the ad servers and auto disable ads on the offending pages only?

[NullPrefix]

It's kind of like the tax thing. IRS knows what you owe, but you need to come up with the same or greater number on your own.

[syshum]

That would be Pro-Consumer. Google is Anti-Consumer so that would be against their core principle

[some_random]

I detest Google, so I absolutely have to say this is an absurd way to look at the world. Google doesn't care if it's actions are pro or anti consumer, they care about money and power and go about pursuing it in a way that tends to be anti-consumer.

[cwkoss]

I think that google doesn't care is precisely the point

[merpnderp]

Google won't even let you know the app privacy on their iOS apps, how could they possibly be pro-consumer?

Maybe the downvoters mean "pro-consumer" in that they're pro manipulating people into consuming their advertisements and incredibly invasive tracking?

[sn_master]

Most websites aren't static (e.g. forums).

[sideshowb]

Neither are the ads they serve; furthermore the amount of profanity detection required scales linearly with the number of pages on which ads are served, so this really shouldn't be a barrier.