3 ms·
Oh, please. There's a million threads on HN complaining about Google and Facebook. Doesn't even matter if they did something, any post will still have those com
by jsnell 6y ago
Oh, please. There's a million threads on HN complaining about Google and Facebook. Doesn't even matter if they did something, any post will still have those comments. You can't consider the proportionality of the response by just one thread.
It's really quite amazing that when a company that's hitched it's brand entirely to privacy first commits a big privacy faux pas, hides it for a year, and then doubles down on it not being a problem, you have somehow managed to turn the top voted thread to a discussion on the failings of other companies instead. Bravo.
- Theizestooke 6y agoIt's because DDG has been shilling on HN for quite a while.
- stepstop 6y ago> It's because DDG has been shilling on HN for quite a while. We’re they caught shilling or something, or are you just upset about just normal promotion?
- dang 6y agoThis breaks the HN guidelines against accusations of astroturfing or shilling without evidence. If there's one thing I've learned from looking at the data for countless hours, it's that internet users are far, far too quick to jump to this interpretation of what they perceive on the internet. The overwhelming majority of such accusations are purely bogus, and they poison the community, so we don't allow them here. Actual evidence is a different story, of course, but then you should be emailing it to hn@ycombinator.com so we can take it seriously and investigate. Lots more explanation at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... going back years now. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- Theizestooke 6y agoWhat would "actual evidence" look like? Proof that the comments in question originate from a known social media marketer? Do you think they all share a specific IP?
- phkahler 6y agoIt was not IMHO meant to deflect from DDG. It was a more general statement about peoples responses. I dislike trendy phrases but the one in play here is "outrage culture". Its not good and it's getting more common.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y agoThanks, that was exactly my point, which some people are missing.
- TheCraiggers 6y ago>hides it for a year Huh? It's an open source project. Maybe you consider them closing the issue on GH to be "hiding it" but I don't. And the plenty of people talking about it in that thread still apparently don't, either. IMHO their response made sense. You're already trusting DDG with your search history which for most people might as well be a list of 99% of the domains they visit. If you trust their privacy policy for that, I don't see the big deal here. I do agree that it should be changed, but only because as is it seems imperfect and I seek perfection in most things. Again, it's an OSS project. AFAIK, any one of these people comprising the screaming masses are free to fix it themselves. Personally, I don't think it's worth my time.
- retpirato 6y agoThe point is DDG has insisted that they put privacy first, & don't collect user data, then (supposedly) in the interest of a small performance increase they introduce code that — wait for it — COLLECTS USER DATA. All they would need to do is use {URL}/favicon.ico which most if not sites have. From what I understand according to posts on the github page this could be done on-device so no need for sending anything to a server. Then when the issue was opened it was closed without the issue being fixed.