3 ms·
This is a bad comparison for 2 reasons: 1. [Opinion] As someone who uses DDG for 95%+ of my queries, the sacrifice is orders of magnitude less than using the l
by smichel17 7y ago
This is a bad comparison for 2 reasons:
1. [Opinion] As someone who uses DDG for 95%+ of my queries, the sacrifice is orders of magnitude less than using the local DSL provider in your example.
2. [Fact] Switching ISPs has a much higher cost. Switching back to Google for a few minutes if DDG isn't getting the job done is three keystrokes: " !g".
- AnthonyMouse 7y agoThere is also a third reason. Having the option of DSL doesn't do any good if the DSL provider doesn't respect privacy either. The question isn't whether a viable competitor exists, it's whether a viable competitor that respects privacy exists.
- penumbra2000 7y agoFurther to this, in Canada at least, all DSLs are subleasing lines in bulk from one single backbone provider (Bell). Competition is legislatively required but de facto questionably existent; in addition I would be surprised that Bell doesn't have all the aggregate data on traffic through subleasing ISPs as well.
- MadWombat 7y agoDoes DDG do spreadsheets? Document editing? Maps and direction finding? Video streaming? Photo management? DDG is nowhere near providing the services that Google provides.