10 ms·

Unverifiable privacy claims aside, I quite like that DDG is suitable for most (80%+) things I need to look up. Having !bangs to jump to wiki (or google) has bee

Unverifiable privacy claims aside, I quite like that DDG is suitable for most (80%+) things I need to look up. Having !bangs to jump to wiki (or google) has been great too. That said, it is not without faults, even functionally. - Local search is naturally very poor, to the point that 100% of my local search traffic is still on Google. - Image search is nothing to write home about. - I'm not pleased that looking up something contentious/political more often than not brings up reactionary or false content. It's either bad news sources or low quality blogs. The last one might not be a problem to people whose opinions the results align with better but it is what it is. It's hard to say whether this is what the web would be without Google "censorship"/filter bubble stuff, or whether these are just the kinds of content the DDG (bing + other sources) algorithms have decided to rank ahead of them. Either way, it is an invaluable resource and an important one to have. Search is already extremely concentrated towards Google but ideally there should always be usable alternatives.

dont__panic 5y ago
Agreed, with one caveat: DDG image search, in my opinion, is far superior to Google Images because it still allows you to right click -> save image and right click -> open image in a new tab (and it actually opens the image, not the page that contains the image). Google Images has been deteriorating every year for over a decade now.
- luke2m 5y ago
  Exactly. The view file button is also very useful.
- GuB-42 5y ago
  About Google Image, it stopped doing direct links as a result of a lawsuit by Getty Images. How does DDG get away with it? Another advantage of DDG/Bing is the ability to really turn off safe search. Unlike Google, it will not try to guess if you want nudity or not based on your search query, resulting in weird situations where you have to look for porn in order to get "anatomically correct" pictures.
  - unknown_error 5y ago
    In Google you can manually turn off safe search too https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/510/filter-explicit-results-using-safesearch-computer https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/510/filter-expli... That forces it off no matter what your query is. I, err, only know this because of anatomy class homework.
    - dangrossman 5y ago
      Google filters out what it thinks are pornographic results for non-pornographic queries even if SafeSearch is explicitly turned off.
      - unknown_error 5y ago
        How do you know?
        dangrossman 5y ago
        By searching for adult webpages I know exist, and not finding them until I add an adult word to the search query so they're not filtered out.
  - markdown 5y ago
    They should have just stopped displaying Getty Images in results. They're scam artists anyway, claiming to own public domain historic photos and selling them for a thousand bucks a piece.
- eric-lee 5y ago
  I don't use Google but as far as I can tell the behavior is very similar on both sites. (right click -> open image in new tab) on Google links directly to the image like DDG, though some are links to a data URL or cached versions of removed images on encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
- unknown_error 5y ago
  If that's the only thing holding you back from Google Images, this is a useful extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/view-image/jpcmhcelnjdmblfmjabdeclccemkghjk https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/view-image/jpcmhce... (not arguing for GI over DDG or any other image search, just pointing out that those UI issues -- which were coerced by publisher lawsuits, not Google's own preference -- can be trivially fixed with extensions)
  - dont__panic 5y ago
    I'd also like to avoid using Google Search when possible to support alternatives. Sadly, your link is a Chrome extension, and as a Firefox user, it doesn't really resolve my problem at all.
- loudtieblahblah 5y ago
  DDG has a better image search b/c Bing has a better image search and the grand majority of DDG results are just scraped Bing results.
  - slongfield 5y ago
    It's probably not scraped, FWIW--Bing has a paid API: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/bing/apis/bing-web-search-api https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/bing/apis/bing-web-search-ap... (Can't find a source indicating that they're using this, but I'd be surprised if they weren't.)
    - loudtieblahblah 5y ago
      they're probably using it. with the volume of traffic they're using, and the fact Qwant and every other 'private' search basically uses Bing results, paying for API access makes the most sense.
hpoe 5y ago
I've found image search better, because every result isn't pintrest.
- andrewzah 5y ago
  You can do "-pinterest.com" to avoid that.
  - dasfsi 5y ago
    Even then, google likes to link to a twitter account (that is, main account) of some random person who reposted the image three months ago instead of the actual tweet, or author's twitter, or anything usable
  - sprkwd 5y ago
    Yes, but the fact we have to do that…
    - andrewzah 5y ago
      That's just the nature of the game. Pinterest figured out what the google algorithm wants. At least we can easily filter out results with the advanced search operators that google has.
  - latexr 5y ago
    -site:pinterest.* is better. It filters the site specifically and includes all TLDs.
Mediterraneo10 5y ago
Instead of going to Google, if you are looking for local businesses in a particular category and their opening hours or contact information, then one recommendation that would preserve privacy is using OSMAnd on your phone for looking all that info up without requiring any network connection. Of course, that assumes that your community is well mapped on OSM.
- mark_l_watson 5y ago
  I have DDG as my default, except sometimes I switch it back to G for a few days. I do something both odd and inefficient for local business search: I open the Apple Map app, and restaurants and other businesses show up, especially when I zoom in. I live in a small town, and seeing a map (with satellite imagery enabled, of course) and zooming in on different areas reminds me of where I might want to eat, etc. Fun.
zaat 5y ago
My counter experience - after giving DDG a chance for more than two years, two days ago I replaced my default search browser to Google, and never looked back. In my experience I had to add g! to 90% of my search to get useful results, except for the most trivial searches. It was so much so that I would often add one in the beginning and one at the end, resulting in my google query ending up as "search term g!".
- chayleaf 5y ago
  i switched to a self-hosted searx instance and it was way better than ddg for me, although i do still have to switch to google in very rare cases
  - zaat 5y ago
    This does look interesting. I might give it a shot sometime soon
  - NmAmDa 5y ago
    The problem with self-hosting your own instance that you are only using is that Google can still make a profile for you based on your search history.
- moksly 5y ago
  I was sort of in your boat, but is google really working out for you? It sure isn’t working out for me. I still use it out of familiarity and because DDG isn’t working either, but almost all the time that I want to find something that isn’t on Wikipedia or related to me buying something, I end up needing to do multiple search typically ending up doing something like site:these-are-all-the-bees-in-the-world.com because I was trying to identify the huge bee my cat almost ate, not trying to buy honey, or bee coloured dresses, or plush bees or bee branded diapers or whatever else. Some of it isn’t Google’s fault or course, all the hobby stuff that happens in the blood bowl community group on Facebook never ends up in a search engine, but some of it is certainly Google’s fault. I’m just not sure how much privacy helps though, sure DDG might not try to sell me diapers because their advertisers might not know I have a two year old, but it still tries to sell me honey.
smoldesu 5y ago
After I realized you could theme DuckDuckGo, I switched.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
wolverine876 5y ago
> Image search is nothing to write home about DDG has my favorite image search. Generally, I haven't used Google in years. If DDG isn't finding something, I use some other privacy-oriented search engine.
- jeroenhd 5y ago
  After the recent censoring of "tank man", I don't trust DDG's (Bing's) image search anymore. I'm not sure about their search engine either. Has DDG published a statement about the whole deal? I've only seen the Microsoft's response ("oops something went wrong we only intended to censor a little bit") but I don't think DDG even said anything.
  - Retric 5y ago
    It worked for me, either the API worked or DDG was caching results or something. That said some DDG users did mention an issue so who knows.

dont__panic 5y ago

Agreed, with one caveat: DDG image search, in my opinion, is far superior to Google Images because it still allows you to right click -> save image and right click -> open image in a new tab (and it actually opens the image, not the page that contains the image). Google Images has been deteriorating every year for over a decade now.

luke2m 5y ago
Exactly. The view file button is also very useful.
GuB-42 5y ago
About Google Image, it stopped doing direct links as a result of a lawsuit by Getty Images. How does DDG get away with it? Another advantage of DDG/Bing is the ability to really turn off safe search. Unlike Google, it will not try to guess if you want nudity or not based on your search query, resulting in weird situations where you have to look for porn in order to get "anatomically correct" pictures.
- unknown_error 5y ago
  In Google you can manually turn off safe search too https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/510/filter-explicit-results-using-safesearch-computer https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/510/filter-expli... That forces it off no matter what your query is. I, err, only know this because of anatomy class homework.
  - dangrossman 5y ago
    Google filters out what it thinks are pornographic results for non-pornographic queries even if SafeSearch is explicitly turned off.
    - unknown_error 5y ago
      How do you know?
      - dangrossman 5y ago
        By searching for adult webpages I know exist, and not finding them until I add an adult word to the search query so they're not filtered out.
- markdown 5y ago
  They should have just stopped displaying Getty Images in results. They're scam artists anyway, claiming to own public domain historic photos and selling them for a thousand bucks a piece.
eric-lee 5y ago
I don't use Google but as far as I can tell the behavior is very similar on both sites. (right click -> open image in new tab) on Google links directly to the image like DDG, though some are links to a data URL or cached versions of removed images on encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
unknown_error 5y ago
If that's the only thing holding you back from Google Images, this is a useful extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/view-image/jpcmhcelnjdmblfmjabdeclccemkghjk https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/view-image/jpcmhce... (not arguing for GI over DDG or any other image search, just pointing out that those UI issues -- which were coerced by publisher lawsuits, not Google's own preference -- can be trivially fixed with extensions)
- dont__panic 5y ago
  I'd also like to avoid using Google Search when possible to support alternatives. Sadly, your link is a Chrome extension, and as a Firefox user, it doesn't really resolve my problem at all.
loudtieblahblah 5y ago
DDG has a better image search b/c Bing has a better image search and the grand majority of DDG results are just scraped Bing results.
- slongfield 5y ago
  It's probably not scraped, FWIW--Bing has a paid API: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/bing/apis/bing-web-search-api https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/bing/apis/bing-web-search-ap... (Can't find a source indicating that they're using this, but I'd be surprised if they weren't.)
  - loudtieblahblah 5y ago
    they're probably using it. with the volume of traffic they're using, and the fact Qwant and every other 'private' search basically uses Bing results, paying for API access makes the most sense.

hpoe 5y ago

I've found image search better, because every result isn't pintrest.

andrewzah 5y ago
You can do "-pinterest.com" to avoid that.
- dasfsi 5y ago
  Even then, google likes to link to a twitter account (that is, main account) of some random person who reposted the image three months ago instead of the actual tweet, or author's twitter, or anything usable
- sprkwd 5y ago
  Yes, but the fact we have to do that…
  - andrewzah 5y ago
    That's just the nature of the game. Pinterest figured out what the google algorithm wants. At least we can easily filter out results with the advanced search operators that google has.
- latexr 5y ago
  -site:pinterest.* is better. It filters the site specifically and includes all TLDs.

Mediterraneo10 5y ago

Instead of going to Google, if you are looking for local businesses in a particular category and their opening hours or contact information, then one recommendation that would preserve privacy is using OSMAnd on your phone for looking all that info up without requiring any network connection. Of course, that assumes that your community is well mapped on OSM.

mark_l_watson 5y ago
I have DDG as my default, except sometimes I switch it back to G for a few days. I do something both odd and inefficient for local business search: I open the Apple Map app, and restaurants and other businesses show up, especially when I zoom in. I live in a small town, and seeing a map (with satellite imagery enabled, of course) and zooming in on different areas reminds me of where I might want to eat, etc. Fun.

zaat 5y ago

My counter experience - after giving DDG a chance for more than two years, two days ago I replaced my default search browser to Google, and never looked back. In my experience I had to add g! to 90% of my search to get useful results, except for the most trivial searches. It was so much so that I would often add one in the beginning and one at the end, resulting in my google query ending up as "search term g!".

chayleaf 5y ago
i switched to a self-hosted searx instance and it was way better than ddg for me, although i do still have to switch to google in very rare cases
- zaat 5y ago
  This does look interesting. I might give it a shot sometime soon
- NmAmDa 5y ago
  The problem with self-hosting your own instance that you are only using is that Google can still make a profile for you based on your search history.
moksly 5y ago
I was sort of in your boat, but is google really working out for you? It sure isn’t working out for me. I still use it out of familiarity and because DDG isn’t working either, but almost all the time that I want to find something that isn’t on Wikipedia or related to me buying something, I end up needing to do multiple search typically ending up doing something like site:these-are-all-the-bees-in-the-world.com because I was trying to identify the huge bee my cat almost ate, not trying to buy honey, or bee coloured dresses, or plush bees or bee branded diapers or whatever else. Some of it isn’t Google’s fault or course, all the hobby stuff that happens in the blood bowl community group on Facebook never ends up in a search engine, but some of it is certainly Google’s fault. I’m just not sure how much privacy helps though, sure DDG might not try to sell me diapers because their advertisers might not know I have a two year old, but it still tries to sell me honey.

smoldesu 5y ago

After I realized you could theme DuckDuckGo, I switched.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

wolverine876 5y ago

> Image search is nothing to write home about DDG has my favorite image search. Generally, I haven't used Google in years. If DDG isn't finding something, I use some other privacy-oriented search engine.

jeroenhd 5y ago
After the recent censoring of "tank man", I don't trust DDG's (Bing's) image search anymore. I'm not sure about their search engine either. Has DDG published a statement about the whole deal? I've only seen the Microsoft's response ("oops something went wrong we only intended to censor a little bit") but I don't think DDG even said anything.
- Retric 5y ago
  It worked for me, either the API worked or DDG was caching results or something. That said some DDG users did mention an issue so who knows.