3 ms·

I don't see any mention of favicons in this thread other than the one I responded to, and I don't know what thread from yesterday you're talking about. But sin

I don't see any mention of favicons in this thread other than the one I responded to, and I don't know what thread from yesterday you're talking about. But since both DDG and Google have favicons on the results page, I find it hard to believe this is really a matter that has people moving to DDG. This hypothesis basically amounts to "people are blind idiots who notice favicons on one page but not the other", and I don't think that's true.

mkl 7y ago
> I don't know what thread from yesterday you're talking about. It's got >2600 upvotes and has been high on the front page for 18 hours now: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22107823 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22107823 > people are blind idiots Hm...you may be onto something there :-)
- catalogia 7y ago
  Favicons are mentioned once in the first page of that discussion. I think attributing all that outrage to the favicons, not the fact that they made ads look like results, is a massive mischaracterization of that discussion. Bordering on bad faith... I maintain that favicons are VERY low on the list of reasons people are switching from Google to DDG. DDG having favicons too should be proof enough of that.
  - mkl 7y ago
    I think you are the only person trying to infer that anyone claimed favicons were the key thing. The original tweet that started the whole discussion is: "There's something strange about the recent design change to google search results, favicons and extra header text: they all look like ads, which is perhaps the point?" The comment you replied to said: "everyone is hating on Google's new search results, in part because of a distracting favicon" (emphasis mine). There is no real inconsistency there, but for some reason you seem to have decided that there is and that it is very important.

3 ms·

I don't see any mention of favicons in this thread other than the one I responded to, and I don't know what thread from yesterday you're talking about. But sin

by catalogia 7y ago

mkl 7y ago
> I don't know what thread from yesterday you're talking about. It's got >2600 upvotes and has been high on the front page for 18 hours now: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22107823 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22107823 > people are blind idiots Hm...you may be onto something there :-)
- catalogia 7y ago
  Favicons are mentioned once in the first page of that discussion. I think attributing all that outrage to the favicons, not the fact that they made ads look like results, is a massive mischaracterization of that discussion. Bordering on bad faith... I maintain that favicons are VERY low on the list of reasons people are switching from Google to DDG. DDG having favicons too should be proof enough of that.
  - mkl 7y ago
    I think you are the only person trying to infer that anyone claimed favicons were the key thing. The original tweet that started the whole discussion is: "There's something strange about the recent design change to google search results, favicons and extra header text: they all look like ads, which is perhaps the point?" The comment you replied to said: "everyone is hating on Google's new search results, in part because of a distracting favicon" (emphasis mine). There is no real inconsistency there, but for some reason you seem to have decided that there is and that it is very important.