3 ms·

If I hadn't already ditched Google long ago, this would be more than enough to chase me away.

by JohnFen 14d ago

scottyah 14d ago
Why? I don't really see why this is bad, other than if your company blocks url shorteners/redirects. What are you losing?
- nextaccountic 14d ago
  I use a Firefox extension to rewrite those Google redirects into plain links, to remove Google tracking of which links I click. The extension is broken now
- JohnFen 14d ago
  Because I wouldn't want Google to know what links I click on. When I used to use Google, and they added such redirects that included the destination URL as a parameter, I'd edit the link to make it just that URL before resolving it. This new scheme would make that impossible.
  - what 14d ago
    They already knew which links you clicked on though…
    - googapologist 14d ago
      [flagged]
    - deleted 14d ago
      [deleted]
    - JohnFen 14d ago
      How? I never allowed Javascript or anything.
    - smart_asslop 13d ago
      Even with JS enabled, they did not. Linked below is an explanation which includes confirmation of that fact by a member of the uBlock Origin team. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49680338 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49680338
  - brainwad 14d ago
    They own the JS on the page, they don't need the redirects to know where you clicked...
    - googapologist 14d ago
      [flagged]
    - deleted 14d ago
      [deleted]
    - smart_asslop 13d ago
      Hello! It appears that you are disseminating misinformation. A uBlock Origin developer now confirms, regarding Google results click tracking: It existed in a way or another, but it could be blocked. Now it can't. Which corroborates the mysteriously flagged sibling comment. https://old.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1we7491/how_to_bypass_googles_goto_url_rewrite_for_search/p9fnjzq/ https://old.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1we7491/how_t... Next time, please consider listening to people who know how the web works and avoid overconfidently parroting what Big Tech gatekeepers want you to think. Thanks!
      - brainwad 13d ago
        It's not misinformation. By default Google has been able to click track with JS. If you disable JS, they don't serve you search (https://serpapi.com/blog/google-now-requires-javascript/ https://serpapi.com/blog/google-now-requires-javascript/). Yes, if you are tricky, you can block just the part of the JS that does click tracking, probably. But most users can't do that. They therefore were already getting 99% complete click tracking before this change. This change is not about click tracking, it's about blocking scrapers. And btw about the result filtering the uBlock dev wants to do: of course this can still be done, if you preload all the goto links on the page and then inline the real URLs returned by the preload requests. Perhaps not easy to do as an extension but at a browser level (Brave?) totally possible. Though Google might then think your users are scrapers...
        13d ago
- Fabricio20 14d ago
  Blocking URL shorteners and google-ad links yes! Personally for me it's also the fact that this is effectively an unresolvable URL shortener, store that link somewhere and it will most likely be dead. Can't copy link anymore and paste it on a notepad or chat app to check it out later as there isn't a guarantee it will load at all (ie: the problem with url shorteners).
- exlr 14d ago
  [flagged]
tarkin2 14d ago
They are forcing my further and further towards kagi. I do hope the fawning on here is at least partly justified.
- JohnFen 14d ago
  Kagi is what I settled on a couple of years ago. I do think sometimes the fawning is over the top, but it is a solid search engine and tended to give me a bit better results than Google out of the box. The real win, though, is that you can give various sites a weight, so the search results will prefer or avoid sites according to your desires. Once I had that going, my search results tended to be much better than Google.
  - tarkin2 14d ago
    Yeah, that's the thing for me: filtering out the SEO crap that Google happily serves up. Google's actual search results are a waste of time visiting, both for the mindless CEO content and the ad-laden, analytics-happy, javascript-heavy websites. So I tend to use the AI overview. But plugging myself into the all-seeing corporate oracle, that grew on all the web's content, and now seeks to supplant it seems unseemly. It's just sad that kagi will likely only be a fringe thing, and google will continue to promote these foul, foul, mindless websites and then supplant them with its AI.
  - Zambyte 14d ago
    Yup, same here. Been using Kagi for years. It's boring, it just works. Hoping they can stay that way.
    - lukeify 14d ago
      My ongoing concern with Kagi is they always seem to be focused on sidequests like their Orion browser and their LLM-powered Translate tool. Maybe that's interesting for some people, but I can't help but feel like I just want a damn search engine than works.
      - 14d ago

If I hadn't already ditched Google long ago, this would be more than enough to chase me away.

by JohnFen 14d ago

If I hadn't already ditched Google long ago, this would be more than enough to chase me away.

Why? I don't really see why this is bad, other than if your company blocks url shorteners/redirects. What are you losing?

nextaccountic 14d ago
I use a Firefox extension to rewrite those Google redirects into plain links, to remove Google tracking of which links I click. The extension is broken now
JohnFen 14d ago
Because I wouldn't want Google to know what links I click on. When I used to use Google, and they added such redirects that included the destination URL as a parameter, I'd edit the link to make it just that URL before resolving it. This new scheme would make that impossible.
- what 14d ago
  They already knew which links you clicked on though…
  - googapologist 14d ago
    [flagged]
  - deleted 14d ago
    [deleted]
  - JohnFen 14d ago
    How? I never allowed Javascript or anything.
  - smart_asslop 13d ago
    Even with JS enabled, they did not. Linked below is an explanation which includes confirmation of that fact by a member of the uBlock Origin team. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49680338 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49680338
- brainwad 14d ago
  They own the JS on the page, they don't need the redirects to know where you clicked...
  - googapologist 14d ago
    [flagged]
  - deleted 14d ago
    [deleted]
  - smart_asslop 13d ago
    Hello! It appears that you are disseminating misinformation. A uBlock Origin developer now confirms, regarding Google results click tracking: It existed in a way or another, but it could be blocked. Now it can't. Which corroborates the mysteriously flagged sibling comment. https://old.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1we7491/how_to_bypass_googles_goto_url_rewrite_for_search/p9fnjzq/ https://old.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1we7491/how_t... Next time, please consider listening to people who know how the web works and avoid overconfidently parroting what Big Tech gatekeepers want you to think. Thanks!
    - brainwad 13d ago
      It's not misinformation. By default Google has been able to click track with JS. If you disable JS, they don't serve you search (https://serpapi.com/blog/google-now-requires-javascript/ https://serpapi.com/blog/google-now-requires-javascript/). Yes, if you are tricky, you can block just the part of the JS that does click tracking, probably. But most users can't do that. They therefore were already getting 99% complete click tracking before this change. This change is not about click tracking, it's about blocking scrapers. And btw about the result filtering the uBlock dev wants to do: of course this can still be done, if you preload all the goto links on the page and then inline the real URLs returned by the preload requests. Perhaps not easy to do as an extension but at a browser level (Brave?) totally possible. Though Google might then think your users are scrapers...
      - 13d ago
Fabricio20 14d ago
Blocking URL shorteners and google-ad links yes! Personally for me it's also the fact that this is effectively an unresolvable URL shortener, store that link somewhere and it will most likely be dead. Can't copy link anymore and paste it on a notepad or chat app to check it out later as there isn't a guarantee it will load at all (ie: the problem with url shorteners).
exlr 14d ago
[flagged]

tarkin2 14d ago

They are forcing my further and further towards kagi. I do hope the fawning on here is at least partly justified.

JohnFen 14d ago
Kagi is what I settled on a couple of years ago. I do think sometimes the fawning is over the top, but it is a solid search engine and tended to give me a bit better results than Google out of the box. The real win, though, is that you can give various sites a weight, so the search results will prefer or avoid sites according to your desires. Once I had that going, my search results tended to be much better than Google.
- tarkin2 14d ago
  Yeah, that's the thing for me: filtering out the SEO crap that Google happily serves up. Google's actual search results are a waste of time visiting, both for the mindless CEO content and the ad-laden, analytics-happy, javascript-heavy websites. So I tend to use the AI overview. But plugging myself into the all-seeing corporate oracle, that grew on all the web's content, and now seeks to supplant it seems unseemly. It's just sad that kagi will likely only be a fringe thing, and google will continue to promote these foul, foul, mindless websites and then supplant them with its AI.
- Zambyte 14d ago
  Yup, same here. Been using Kagi for years. It's boring, it just works. Hoping they can stay that way.
  - lukeify 14d ago
    My ongoing concern with Kagi is they always seem to be focused on sidequests like their Orion browser and their LLM-powered Translate tool. Maybe that's interesting for some people, but I can't help but feel like I just want a damn search engine than works.
    - 14d ago