4 ms·

..and by DDG, you mean Bing.

wruza 8y ago
Yahoo, actually, if you insist that DDG is not a fair search engine on its own. Both shown very similar results on my areas of interest.
- utopcell 8y ago
  DDG was built on Yahoo! BOSS, which was backed by Yahoo search engine results until Yahoo switched to Bing (almost 10 years ago.) So, if we are insisting on being accurate, SSG's main backend is Bing.
  - wruza 8y ago
    Didn't know that. So, is it safe to use ddg in a sense of not gifting your data to ms/ggl/etc tech pigs? Or is it just Bing with a new skin?
    - utopcell 8y ago
      I don't think it is just a re-skinned Bing, the people behind DDG have done a lot of work to built features around the "10 blue links." The question is: Do you trust a trillion dollar company, with everything to lose if it is revealed that they are misusing user data [1], or do you trust a 50 people team who is trying to get you to switch using FUD techniques. [1] ..and by the way, have waaay better results than their closest competitor
      - wruza 8y ago
        I trust my eyes. The ads that get through filters show that a trillion dollar company tries to earn another cent of my data and ddg team doesn’t, at least it is not instantly visible. Chances are, their business model really implements my privacy, while a $1T guys openly sell it asap. Health, porn, food, tech, politics — everything. If ddg datamines me too, then, well, data buyers remain the same and there is no way to hide the fact of sale. Given that, is there a reason to trust them less?
        utopcell 8y ago
        Yes, of course! They have little to lose compared to Google, which has _everything_ to lose. Lack of personalization is not a "feature" that DDG implemented. It is a lack of feature that they had to justify. The results that they were getting back from Yahoo! BOSS were not personalized, because Yahoo! (and now Bing,) would not trust a third-party with your ID, let alone your data. More importantly: Google is not selling your info to anyone. They use it to personalize their two main search engines: web and ads. Non-personalized ads means smaller revenue per ad, which in turn means more ads shown to you (which is what you get with DDG.) If you see Google ads on a third-party site, it is still Google that is directly serving those ads, not that site. Think of it this way: Here is a company that screams that Google is evil, but is happy to provide you with direct functionality ("!g") to visit Google, and oh, by the way, says nothing about their main partner, Bing, that also personalizes results. On the other hand, look at Google's behavior. They own duck.com through their acquisition of On2. What do they show when you visit duck.com ? "If you meant to visit the search engine DuckDuckGo, click here." Who does that ?! Brands build trust over many years, and in my (and most of the planet's) opinion, Google has earned mine. I could be more worried about ISPs logging URLs and selling them, but I'm not: I'm just not that interesting to track and I bet this is true for most of us. Maybe you're different.

Yahoo, actually, if you insist that DDG is not a fair search engine on its own. Both shown very similar results on my areas of interest.

utopcell 8y ago
DDG was built on Yahoo! BOSS, which was backed by Yahoo search engine results until Yahoo switched to Bing (almost 10 years ago.) So, if we are insisting on being accurate, SSG's main backend is Bing.
- wruza 8y ago
  Didn't know that. So, is it safe to use ddg in a sense of not gifting your data to ms/ggl/etc tech pigs? Or is it just Bing with a new skin?
  - utopcell 8y ago
    I don't think it is just a re-skinned Bing, the people behind DDG have done a lot of work to built features around the "10 blue links." The question is: Do you trust a trillion dollar company, with everything to lose if it is revealed that they are misusing user data [1], or do you trust a 50 people team who is trying to get you to switch using FUD techniques. [1] ..and by the way, have waaay better results than their closest competitor
    - wruza 8y ago
      I trust my eyes. The ads that get through filters show that a trillion dollar company tries to earn another cent of my data and ddg team doesn’t, at least it is not instantly visible. Chances are, their business model really implements my privacy, while a $1T guys openly sell it asap. Health, porn, food, tech, politics — everything. If ddg datamines me too, then, well, data buyers remain the same and there is no way to hide the fact of sale. Given that, is there a reason to trust them less?
      - utopcell 8y ago
        Yes, of course! They have little to lose compared to Google, which has _everything_ to lose. Lack of personalization is not a "feature" that DDG implemented. It is a lack of feature that they had to justify. The results that they were getting back from Yahoo! BOSS were not personalized, because Yahoo! (and now Bing,) would not trust a third-party with your ID, let alone your data. More importantly: Google is not selling your info to anyone. They use it to personalize their two main search engines: web and ads. Non-personalized ads means smaller revenue per ad, which in turn means more ads shown to you (which is what you get with DDG.) If you see Google ads on a third-party site, it is still Google that is directly serving those ads, not that site. Think of it this way: Here is a company that screams that Google is evil, but is happy to provide you with direct functionality ("!g") to visit Google, and oh, by the way, says nothing about their main partner, Bing, that also personalizes results. On the other hand, look at Google's behavior. They own duck.com through their acquisition of On2. What do they show when you visit duck.com ? "If you meant to visit the search engine DuckDuckGo, click here." Who does that ?! Brands build trust over many years, and in my (and most of the planet's) opinion, Google has earned mine. I could be more worried about ISPs logging URLs and selling them, but I'm not: I'm just not that interesting to track and I bet this is true for most of us. Maybe you're different.