5 ms·

Respectfully: because nobody knows who the fuck you are, and your reasoning doesn't make sense. You want to offer a privacy focused search service, but the use

Respectfully: because nobody knows who the fuck you are, and your reasoning doesn't make sense. You want to offer a privacy focused search service, but the users need to install an extension because otherwise <some gibberish about google evil here> instead of just having a regular web frontend for the masses to try. Then it's too hard for lusers to switch; you created this problem for yourself. The more you respond, the more it looks like this is some poorly thought out lead capture, or you're so focused on the service you don't understand the broader security concerns.

richardsocher 5y ago
I get it. There are tons of sketchy extensions. We'll open source our extension so you can see the entire 33kB that's needed to make one settings change. Also, you can try it out in incognito mode or change those settings manually and hence give it a try :) But most people need the simplicity and convenience of a few clicks in order to give it a proper try.
- xupybd 5y ago
  What about changing devices. I'm not going to install an extension to search when I have Google at hand on my phone.
- justinpombrio 5y ago
  > But most people need the simplicity and convenience of a few clicks in order to give it a proper try. ... how about zero clicks, by showing search results when someone searches in Chrome using your search box?
- maydup-nem 5y ago
  bruh, i use a chromium-based browser which doesn't support extensions (or an incognito mode) as of this moment. i ain't installing chrome just for some stupid setting, just saying. sounds like a severe case of tunnel vision...
- foobiekr 5y ago
  We don’t trust you not to modify the extension in an update. And no, publishing hypothetical source does not address that.
zhte415 5y ago
I'm late to the comments, did something change? There does seem to be a regular web front end, you.com. The link in the HN post was to a search for you.com on you.com. There's also a search bar at the top of that 'results' page.
dang 5y ago
You broke the site guidelines with this comment. Putting "respectfully" in front of something disrespectful does not make it ok. It's particularly important not to pile on someone when they're presenting their own work—the Show HN guidelines have additional rules about this: https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use HN in the intended spirit.
- ohyeshedid 5y ago
  I don't see anything disrespectful in that comment; it was made entirely in good faith. That concept becomes tricky in situations like this, because you're assuming bad faith, and then tone policing based off that. My point of view is that you got it wrong this time, but that doesn't really matter, you're the one with the hammer, boss. o7 Fwiw, HN needs an alert/messaging system of some kind to deliver these moderation messages to users. If I don't see you responded in an official capacity before I post enough to push it to second page of my profile, I may never see it, which means it's not serving it's entire purpose. The public signaling part works, but the direct signaling could easily get lost. I know usually you aren't doing this a day later, but in those cases, there's gotta be a better solution.
  - dang 5y ago
    You packed so many swipey phrases into your comment ("nobody knows who the fuck you are", "<some gibberish about google evil here>", "you created this problem for yourself", "the more you respond", "this is some poorly thought out", "you don't understand") that the post came across as something between a harangue and an outright an attack. This is not a good way to communicate respectfully on the internet. (Doubly so in the context of a mass pile-on, which is what this thread became.) I believe you that you wrote your post in good faith, but intentions aren't enough. All too often, a comment comes out in a way that doesn't at all make its good intent clear, and damaging effects don't become less when the damage is unintentional. Therefore the burden falls on the commenter to disambiguate intent (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=disambiguate%20burden%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...). (Yes, it's on the list to eventually build a better way of signaling moderation to accounts. I'm sure there is a much better solution.)

richardsocher 5y ago

I get it. There are tons of sketchy extensions. We'll open source our extension so you can see the entire 33kB that's needed to make one settings change. Also, you can try it out in incognito mode or change those settings manually and hence give it a try :) But most people need the simplicity and convenience of a few clicks in order to give it a proper try.

xupybd 5y ago
What about changing devices. I'm not going to install an extension to search when I have Google at hand on my phone.
justinpombrio 5y ago
> But most people need the simplicity and convenience of a few clicks in order to give it a proper try. ... how about zero clicks, by showing search results when someone searches in Chrome using your search box?
maydup-nem 5y ago
bruh, i use a chromium-based browser which doesn't support extensions (or an incognito mode) as of this moment. i ain't installing chrome just for some stupid setting, just saying. sounds like a severe case of tunnel vision...
foobiekr 5y ago
We don’t trust you not to modify the extension in an update. And no, publishing hypothetical source does not address that.

zhte415 5y ago

I'm late to the comments, did something change? There does seem to be a regular web front end, you.com. The link in the HN post was to a search for you.com on you.com. There's also a search bar at the top of that 'results' page.

dang 5y ago

You broke the site guidelines with this comment. Putting "respectfully" in front of something disrespectful does not make it ok. It's particularly important not to pile on someone when they're presenting their own work—the Show HN guidelines have additional rules about this: https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use HN in the intended spirit.

ohyeshedid 5y ago
I don't see anything disrespectful in that comment; it was made entirely in good faith. That concept becomes tricky in situations like this, because you're assuming bad faith, and then tone policing based off that. My point of view is that you got it wrong this time, but that doesn't really matter, you're the one with the hammer, boss. o7 Fwiw, HN needs an alert/messaging system of some kind to deliver these moderation messages to users. If I don't see you responded in an official capacity before I post enough to push it to second page of my profile, I may never see it, which means it's not serving it's entire purpose. The public signaling part works, but the direct signaling could easily get lost. I know usually you aren't doing this a day later, but in those cases, there's gotta be a better solution.
- dang 5y ago
  You packed so many swipey phrases into your comment ("nobody knows who the fuck you are", "<some gibberish about google evil here>", "you created this problem for yourself", "the more you respond", "this is some poorly thought out", "you don't understand") that the post came across as something between a harangue and an outright an attack. This is not a good way to communicate respectfully on the internet. (Doubly so in the context of a mass pile-on, which is what this thread became.) I believe you that you wrote your post in good faith, but intentions aren't enough. All too often, a comment comes out in a way that doesn't at all make its good intent clear, and damaging effects don't become less when the damage is unintentional. Therefore the burden falls on the commenter to disambiguate intent (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=disambiguate%20burden%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...). (Yes, it's on the list to eventually build a better way of signaling moderation to accounts. I'm sure there is a much better solution.)