2 ms·
Echoing other comments, my problem is with the framing of it. DDG is, as I understand it, basically a light privacy-protecting wrapper around third-party searc
by ubernostrum 10y ago
Echoing other comments, my problem is with the framing of it.
DDG is, as I understand it, basically a light privacy-protecting wrapper around third-party search APIs. So while you may be getting "censored" results, DDG is not an active participant in that "censorship" -- since its job is just to go out and see what another service said and relay it back to you, the responsibility for active censorship rests with that other service.
Whether DDG should try to actively determine when results are censored and correct for it, rather than passively relaying possibly-censored results without further work, is a different question than "is DDG censoring", and trying to sensationalize a story by framing it as the latter when what one really wants is the former is... well, intellectually dishonest.
- Semiapies 10y agoEchoing other comments, my problem is with the framing of it. Your and their concerns, while reasonable, aren't the entirely of the DDG defenses here. I'm not even sure they're the majority.