3 ms·

> how do you really know? You don't really know. However, when your entire USP is being privacy-friendly (and really, that's the primary feature that Google ca

by Vinnl 8y ago

> how do you really know? You don't really know. However, when your entire USP is being privacy-friendly (and really, that's the primary feature that Google can't copy), it would be incredibly damaging if word got out that that wasn't true. And we can be reasonably certain that, if it wasn't true, word would get out. Also note that DDG explicitly says they don't do user tracking. So while ads are targeted in the sense that you'll see ads relevant to the search term you're using (and your location and other data attached to the query), they're not keeping a profile of you and targeting ads based on that. In other words: there should be no significant user data for them to hand over. I'm not sure why they would have to become the number 2 search engine at some point, although regular search engine manipulation does already seem to affect them sometimes. I don't see why they would have to track users to combat that. Sure, open source would be nice. But right now, we do have reason to assume that they're at least significantly better than Google, without having to sacrifice a lot in search result quality.

scoutt 8y ago
> we do have reason to assume > word would get out > no significant user data These, as you say, are assumptions. That's why I don't (still) buy it. They are in "sell" mode right now. They would say anything to gain traction, and it's working. That's why they are pushing hard and investing a lot. Remember it's about making BIG money through an advertisement-based business, what could possibly go wrong? Imagine that you are magically handled the DB for the searches done today. What would you can possible learn from that information? Perhaps you can't track what searches did HN user Vinnl, but the info has surely a value. They may not be honest about what are they doing with that information.
- Vinnl 8y ago
  Absolutely those are assumptions - hence my first sentence. That's still more reliable than trusting Google, about whom we don't need to make assumptions. Another assumption I make is that I don't expect then to seriously displace Google any time soon,but rather remain a player that fills the niche of private search. If that ever appears to change, we can always adapt - let's not make perfect the enemy of the good :-)

by Vinnl 8y ago

scoutt 8y ago

> we do have reason to assume > word would get out > no significant user data These, as you say, are assumptions. That's why I don't (still) buy it. They are in "sell" mode right now. They would say anything to gain traction, and it's working. That's why they are pushing hard and investing a lot. Remember it's about making BIG money through an advertisement-based business, what could possibly go wrong? Imagine that you are magically handled the DB for the searches done today. What would you can possible learn from that information? Perhaps you can't track what searches did HN user Vinnl, but the info has surely a value. They may not be honest about what are they doing with that information.

Vinnl 8y ago
Absolutely those are assumptions - hence my first sentence. That's still more reliable than trusting Google, about whom we don't need to make assumptions. Another assumption I make is that I don't expect then to seriously displace Google any time soon,but rather remain a player that fills the niche of private search. If that ever appears to change, we can always adapt - let's not make perfect the enemy of the good :-)