3 ms·
>Or it's an attempt to kill off DuckDuckGo and drive people towards using Bing directly. I didn't even consider that. That would be truly evil of them.
by weberer 4y ago
>Or it's an attempt to kill off DuckDuckGo and drive people towards using Bing directly.
I didn't even consider that. That would be truly evil of them.
- aembleton 4y agoDDG has had ample time to develop their own index. If they're still reliant upon Bing, then poor decision making by DDG, not an evil Bing.
- brookst 4y agoAre you saying Microsoft has some kind of moral obligation to ensure the success of DDG, even if it’s not aligned with Microsoft’s interests? That seems odd. DDG is a for-profit company. Microsoft is a for-profit company. Why is DDG entitled to service?
- jsnell 4y agoIf the motivation is specifically to kill DDG, that'd be bad. If the motivation is that the search API business is not profitable right now, they need to raise prices to be viable, and it's incidental that DDG can't be viable at those prices, that's fine. (Why would it not be profitable any more? Maybe it never was, and they've been selling the API access at below cost to try to effectively buy the query stream and get scale that way. Maybe they're planning to massively improve search quality, and the costs will go up.)
- brookst 4y agoNo professionally-managed company has emotional reactions like wanting to “kill” a company. Bing has, what, 3% market share? Why in the world would they invest energy in trying to help someone else carve out 1%?