4 ms·

More FUD from DuckDuckGo about Google and privacy issues. Didn't we come to the conclusion that the things they are railing against Google for are applicable to

More FUD from DuckDuckGo about Google and privacy issues. Didn't we come to the conclusion that the things they are railing against Google for are applicable to any and every Website? Matt Cutts stole the comment show on this one: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2063619 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2063619 The worst thing about this is how blindly news about DDG gets upvoted around here. Edit: To my down-voters: It doesn't make what I said not true anymore.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
potatolicious 16y ago
That's disingenuous. DDG has legitimate claim to "Google tracks you" beyond just referrer URLs. When you search for "athlete's foot" on DDG you won't see an add for foot cream the next time you're watching a video on YouTube. That's the sort of tracking Google undeniably does do that users may find troubling (I know I do). Most users don't know about this level of tracking. Moreover, while referral URLs containing search terms has been the norm for a long time (and IMHO, is not an evil move, just legacy from a privacy perspective), there is no real reason why things must stay this way.
- citricsquid 16y ago
  I was under the impression you can opt-out of all that, is that not the case?
  - epi0Bauqu 16y ago
    No, you cannot opt-out of the referrer header. However, you can use the SSL version, which doesn't send it in most cases (still sends it for HTTPS->HTTPS traffic). Edit: sorry, I meant you cannot opt-out using http://www.google.com/privacy/ads/ http://www.google.com/privacy/ads/ or other HTTP (regular Google) settings.
    - ezalor 16y ago
      So it's really just a time-limited solution, a temporary chance.
    - moultano 16y ago
      Of course you can. That's a setting in your browser.
    - djmdjm 16y ago
      You can opt out using https://encrypted.google.com/ https://encrypted.google.com/ (this has been pointed out a number of times)
- coderdude 16y ago
  Then that is their ONLY claim against Google (yet not Google alone). Everything else on that donttrack.us page is applicable to any and every search engine or Website. I believe DDG is being disingenuous by making it sound like this a Google-only thing. Even if Google is the big guy they want to go after, they should be up front that this is not something that makes Google evil or is specific to Google.
  - potatolicious 16y ago
    donttrack.us also rips on third-party ad networks that are non-Google for extending the tracking even further. This also seems to be the core reason why DDG rails against search terms in referral URLs, since it's a major enabler for third-party network tracking. So yes, DDG is targeting the 800# gorilla in its marketing, but it's not unjustified, nor has DDG claimed on the donttrack.us page that Google is the sole culprit in the destruction of user privacy. There's a certain amount of opportunism in this billboard/privacy ad campaign here, that much is obvious. But, as a search engine it does not seem unreasonable to call out the failings of your main competitor.
    - coderdude 16y ago
      >donttrack.us also rips on third-party ad networks that are non-Google for extending the tracking even further On the site it says "Those sites usually have third-party ads. and those third-parties build profiles about you," How are they able to do this? Because Google lets them. That's the message they are sending across to people. The entire campaign is anti-Google only in nature. It's not this fair and balanced reporting on privacy that you're making it out to be. >nor has DDG claimed on the donttrack.us page that Google is the sole culprit in the destruction of user privacy Their campaign only talks about Google. That's the only name and logo they ever show or speak of.
      - potatolicious 16y ago
        > "That's the message they are sending across to people." Which is true. > "The entire campaign is anti-Google only in nature." Well, yes. DDG is a search engine. They are targeting their chief competitor, a search engine, in their marketing. > "It's not this fair and balanced reporting on privacy that you're making it out to be." Correction: it's not a comprehensive guide to everything online that violates your privacy. But donttrack.us never claimed to be. You seem to be under the impression that the intent for donttrack.us is an entirely selfless, complete, and comprehensive guide. Now, I'm not affiliated with DDG, but it seems absurd to derive that from the site. The way I see it is: yes, they're targeting Google, but that's not exactly unfair given that Google is DDG's chief competitor. If you were Subway, running attack ads on McDonald's on the obesity angle, why would you waste your breath also ripping apart I Can't Believe It's Not Butter? Nothing DDG has said is false, nor (IMHO) have they deceived their users by omission. Everything in this campaign is accurate. I simply don't see the outrage. Now, whether or not the privacy issue is even worth fretting about, or whether using DDG will reverse the tide of privacy destruction that you're exposed to everywhere else, that's another issue entirely. DDG hasn't claimed that switching from Google will fix all of your privacy woes, but what they do claim is that it will fix the privacy violation that Google directly allows. That seems fair enough.
patio11 16y ago
Matt's comment is, basically, no fair for criticizing us for incontestably true things which are intrinsic to our business model. That was only fair when w were the scrappy underdog taking on the uncaring megacorp with the unassailable market position.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- dschobel 16y ago
  Pithy but Google won the day because its search quality beat the holy hell out yahoo, altavista, et al.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

potatolicious 16y ago

That's disingenuous. DDG has legitimate claim to "Google tracks you" beyond just referrer URLs. When you search for "athlete's foot" on DDG you won't see an add for foot cream the next time you're watching a video on YouTube. That's the sort of tracking Google undeniably does do that users may find troubling (I know I do). Most users don't know about this level of tracking. Moreover, while referral URLs containing search terms has been the norm for a long time (and IMHO, is not an evil move, just legacy from a privacy perspective), there is no real reason why things must stay this way.

citricsquid 16y ago
I was under the impression you can opt-out of all that, is that not the case?
- epi0Bauqu 16y ago
  No, you cannot opt-out of the referrer header. However, you can use the SSL version, which doesn't send it in most cases (still sends it for HTTPS->HTTPS traffic). Edit: sorry, I meant you cannot opt-out using http://www.google.com/privacy/ads/ http://www.google.com/privacy/ads/ or other HTTP (regular Google) settings.
  - ezalor 16y ago
    So it's really just a time-limited solution, a temporary chance.
  - moultano 16y ago
    Of course you can. That's a setting in your browser.
  - djmdjm 16y ago
    You can opt out using https://encrypted.google.com/ https://encrypted.google.com/ (this has been pointed out a number of times)
coderdude 16y ago
Then that is their ONLY claim against Google (yet not Google alone). Everything else on that donttrack.us page is applicable to any and every search engine or Website. I believe DDG is being disingenuous by making it sound like this a Google-only thing. Even if Google is the big guy they want to go after, they should be up front that this is not something that makes Google evil or is specific to Google.
- potatolicious 16y ago
  donttrack.us also rips on third-party ad networks that are non-Google for extending the tracking even further. This also seems to be the core reason why DDG rails against search terms in referral URLs, since it's a major enabler for third-party network tracking. So yes, DDG is targeting the 800# gorilla in its marketing, but it's not unjustified, nor has DDG claimed on the donttrack.us page that Google is the sole culprit in the destruction of user privacy. There's a certain amount of opportunism in this billboard/privacy ad campaign here, that much is obvious. But, as a search engine it does not seem unreasonable to call out the failings of your main competitor.
  - coderdude 16y ago
    >donttrack.us also rips on third-party ad networks that are non-Google for extending the tracking even further On the site it says "Those sites usually have third-party ads. and those third-parties build profiles about you," How are they able to do this? Because Google lets them. That's the message they are sending across to people. The entire campaign is anti-Google only in nature. It's not this fair and balanced reporting on privacy that you're making it out to be. >nor has DDG claimed on the donttrack.us page that Google is the sole culprit in the destruction of user privacy Their campaign only talks about Google. That's the only name and logo they ever show or speak of.
    - potatolicious 16y ago
      > "That's the message they are sending across to people." Which is true. > "The entire campaign is anti-Google only in nature." Well, yes. DDG is a search engine. They are targeting their chief competitor, a search engine, in their marketing. > "It's not this fair and balanced reporting on privacy that you're making it out to be." Correction: it's not a comprehensive guide to everything online that violates your privacy. But donttrack.us never claimed to be. You seem to be under the impression that the intent for donttrack.us is an entirely selfless, complete, and comprehensive guide. Now, I'm not affiliated with DDG, but it seems absurd to derive that from the site. The way I see it is: yes, they're targeting Google, but that's not exactly unfair given that Google is DDG's chief competitor. If you were Subway, running attack ads on McDonald's on the obesity angle, why would you waste your breath also ripping apart I Can't Believe It's Not Butter? Nothing DDG has said is false, nor (IMHO) have they deceived their users by omission. Everything in this campaign is accurate. I simply don't see the outrage. Now, whether or not the privacy issue is even worth fretting about, or whether using DDG will reverse the tide of privacy destruction that you're exposed to everywhere else, that's another issue entirely. DDG hasn't claimed that switching from Google will fix all of your privacy woes, but what they do claim is that it will fix the privacy violation that Google directly allows. That seems fair enough.

patio11 16y ago

Matt's comment is, basically, no fair for criticizing us for incontestably true things which are intrinsic to our business model. That was only fair when w were the scrappy underdog taking on the uncaring megacorp with the unassailable market position.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
dschobel 16y ago
Pithy but Google won the day because its search quality beat the holy hell out yahoo, altavista, et al.