4 ms·

Some possible alternatives you could try: For search engine I'd suggest duckduckgo, it's far from perfect but I don't see any other viable alternative, if anyo

by sakisv 6y ago

Some possible alternatives you could try: For search engine I'd suggest duckduckgo, it's far from perfect but I don't see any other viable alternative, if anyone knows anything please let us know. For messaging I would suggest Signal. The problem there is that most people don't know of it and they won't ditch whatsapp to go on something that their friends won't be on. That's the same problem that a new social network is going to face. I think it's safe to say that if even Google with all their capital couldn't make it work, then it's going to be extremely difficult to find investors to bet on a random guy's idea. Facebook with all the shit it has been and done has almost 2bn users, how are we going to convince even 5% of them to abandon it for something new without anyone they know there?

eitland 6y ago
Thanks! I mostly agree. I already use duckduckgo. It is not as good as Google used to be but a lot less annoying - and Google is not as good as it used to be either, so I consider duckduckgo best now. Also trying with Google after duckduckgo is faster than the other way around. I already Signal but although more and more people join, nobody uses it for day-to-day texts and family updates. Everyone I know uses Telegram and even after following all discussions here I'm fine with that. > That's the same problem that a new social network is going to face. I think it's safe to say that if even Google with all their capital couldn't make it work, then it's going to be extremely difficult to find investors to bet on a random guy's idea. Partly agree. But I think an Instagram or WhatsApp style bootstrapping of a new social network is still possible and no one has stepped up to take the plave of Google+. Remember, it was Google that ran it. I suspect it was utterly mismanaged. A number of things can work very well even if Google can't make it work.
- degski 6y ago
  > Also trying with Google after duckduckgo is faster than the other way around. And with the '!g'-bang you can still have privacy and use google.
  - Legogris 6y ago
    How would this yield better privacy than searching directly from Google?
fishmaster 6y ago
For programming related things (in general, everything non mainstream), I find ddg to be nearly unusable and I always have to go back to Google. The results I get on ddg are almost always only in the general area of the search terms, while Google gives me specific results that are relevant and helpful. Sadly that's why I can't switch as much as I want to.
- Normal_gaussian 6y ago
  I do not find this; I've been using ddg exclusively for several years now.

by sakisv 6y ago

eitland 6y ago

Thanks! I mostly agree. I already use duckduckgo. It is not as good as Google used to be but a lot less annoying - and Google is not as good as it used to be either, so I consider duckduckgo best now. Also trying with Google after duckduckgo is faster than the other way around. I already Signal but although more and more people join, nobody uses it for day-to-day texts and family updates. Everyone I know uses Telegram and even after following all discussions here I'm fine with that. > That's the same problem that a new social network is going to face. I think it's safe to say that if even Google with all their capital couldn't make it work, then it's going to be extremely difficult to find investors to bet on a random guy's idea. Partly agree. But I think an Instagram or WhatsApp style bootstrapping of a new social network is still possible and no one has stepped up to take the plave of Google+. Remember, it was Google that ran it. I suspect it was utterly mismanaged. A number of things can work very well even if Google can't make it work.

degski 6y ago
> Also trying with Google after duckduckgo is faster than the other way around. And with the '!g'-bang you can still have privacy and use google.
- Legogris 6y ago
  How would this yield better privacy than searching directly from Google?

fishmaster 6y ago

For programming related things (in general, everything non mainstream), I find ddg to be nearly unusable and I always have to go back to Google. The results I get on ddg are almost always only in the general area of the search terms, while Google gives me specific results that are relevant and helpful. Sadly that's why I can't switch as much as I want to.

Normal_gaussian 6y ago
I do not find this; I've been using ddg exclusively for several years now.