4 ms·

“We don’t censor results”… well… Either that is completely bullshit, or it’s technically-bullshit. 1. They don’t have to censor because their sources censor f

“We don’t censor results”… well… Either that is completely bullshit, or it’s technically-bullshit. 1. They don’t have to censor because their sources censor for them. “Oh we’re just an aggregator of censored results” doesn’t mean “this is an uncensored search engine” like the claim would have you believe. 2. Proof of this is evident in by comparing Russian yandex.com, my now go to for anything related to hacking, pirated anything, topics of censorship or controversial discussion, even “legit” but rarer information like how to train or use X or Y AI model, etc. The domains that appear on yandex remind me a time gone by. Like image search before Pinterest, unreliable but not sterilized. 3. I use DDG everyday. In the last year or so, I have found myself going to Google, Bing, Brave, Yandex, SearX, and other more than ever. The quality of DDG has for me, unquestionably slipped. I have a strong distaste for Google, and have used them this year more than ever. They are not uncensored, although maybe they allow that burden to be done for them to keep their nose high in their air on the topic. However, I fear it may be a moot point as I find myself looking elsewhere often now.

majorchord 11mo ago
Sounds like their claim was technically-correct and you even acknowledged it... I don't see a problem with DDG itself in this aspect. Why do you feel that the actions of a search provider(s) should be reflected so negatively and angrily on the aggregator?
- SV_BubbleTime 11mo ago
  You used technically-correct, and I used to technically-bullshit. We can both be right. The difference what he is intending to convey when they say they’re proud their product lacks censorship and is banned in China. It’s not like anyone can go and see the CCP scoresheet for DDG.
yegg 11mo ago
It's neither, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46259466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46259466 I just made. If you see results missing, I'd be happy to look into them. My email is in my profile.
- SV_BubbleTime 11mo ago
  “We do not censor anything ouselves.” I mean… that’s exactly my issue. That’s just another way to say “we present censored results”. To be fair… my real issue is the last year or so the results have been noticeably sub-par for me. I knew there would be no point discussing a subjective matter like that. So I brought up statement that I found misleading.
  - yegg 11mo ago
    We monitor closely and if something is off then we correct it. If you have particular examples in mind right now, please share them with me so I can look into them.
    - bigiain 11mo ago
      Maybe it's time for a !yandex flag? ;-)
      - flexagoon 11mo ago
        Not sure what you mean, it already exists
        bigiain 11mo ago
        Ha, of course it does. I should have checked. (I should have been using it for years)
D-Coder 11mo ago
> They don’t have to censor because their sources censor for them. If the source has not put something on the web... how is anyone supposed to get past that? Or am I misunderstanding your statement?
baranul 11mo ago
Hacker News sneakily censors and manipulates what you see too, not just DDG. The abuse is inescapable form Big Tech and only getting worse. That's why the next level is trying to force showing IDs to more websites and acting like it's everyone's destiny to be characters from Minority Report or 1984.

majorchord 11mo ago

Sounds like their claim was technically-correct and you even acknowledged it... I don't see a problem with DDG itself in this aspect. Why do you feel that the actions of a search provider(s) should be reflected so negatively and angrily on the aggregator?

SV_BubbleTime 11mo ago
You used technically-correct, and I used to technically-bullshit. We can both be right. The difference what he is intending to convey when they say they’re proud their product lacks censorship and is banned in China. It’s not like anyone can go and see the CCP scoresheet for DDG.

yegg 11mo ago

It's neither, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46259466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46259466 I just made. If you see results missing, I'd be happy to look into them. My email is in my profile.

SV_BubbleTime 11mo ago
“We do not censor anything ouselves.” I mean… that’s exactly my issue. That’s just another way to say “we present censored results”. To be fair… my real issue is the last year or so the results have been noticeably sub-par for me. I knew there would be no point discussing a subjective matter like that. So I brought up statement that I found misleading.
- yegg 11mo ago
  We monitor closely and if something is off then we correct it. If you have particular examples in mind right now, please share them with me so I can look into them.
  - bigiain 11mo ago
    Maybe it's time for a !yandex flag? ;-)
    - flexagoon 11mo ago
      Not sure what you mean, it already exists
      - bigiain 11mo ago
        Ha, of course it does. I should have checked. (I should have been using it for years)

D-Coder 11mo ago

> They don’t have to censor because their sources censor for them. If the source has not put something on the web... how is anyone supposed to get past that? Or am I misunderstanding your statement?

baranul 11mo ago

Hacker News sneakily censors and manipulates what you see too, not just DDG. The abuse is inescapable form Big Tech and only getting worse. That's why the next level is trying to force showing IDs to more websites and acting like it's everyone's destiny to be characters from Minority Report or 1984.