5 ms·
Don't be evil, they said. Surely there's some sort of hypothetical "Securities Exchange Commission" for this type of shenanigan. I don't like the way they own h
by eliasmacpherson 14y ago
Don't be evil, they said. Surely there's some sort of hypothetical "Securities Exchange Commission" for this type of shenanigan. I don't like the way they own http://www.duck.com http://www.duck.com either.
EDIT: thanks for the correction, I had written Do No Evil without thinking. Check the second Google result for 'Do No Evil', as you say it's a common enough mistake to make.
EDIT2: as one of the commenters has pointed out below, the owner of duck.com was a previous acquisition, that owned duck.com prior to duck duck go being a competitor to Google. So owning duck.com is fine with me! I thought it was a prank/jibe on Google's part. Thanks for the info.
- prezjordan 14y agoHm, I'm confused - why do they own www.duck.com? And why is this a bad thing?
- nodesocket 14y agoCompetitor -- http://duckduckgo.com http://duckduckgo.com
- loceng 14y agoFairly sure they owned duck.com first
- codeka 14y agoThey own duck.com because they bought On2 who used to own duck.com. I'm really not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand, though.
- TillE 14y ago"Do no evil, they said." No, they didn't. What really annoys me about this persistent misquote is that it gets the character of early Google so wrong. "Do no evil" sounds incredibly pompous, self-important and serious. "Don't be evil" is obviously more playful and hackerish.
- eliasmacpherson 14y agoYou can commit evil accidentally, without being evil, so, you're dead right "Don't be evil" is a weaker instruction than "Do no evil". Accidental evil is allowed for Google, so long as it's an unintended consequence. That said, their motto is a lot better than most!
- program 14y agoThey own duck.com cause it was the old site name of the "The Duck Corporation" (now On2 Technologies) acquired on 2010 (the VP8 Codec.) I see no evil here, only an unfortunate coincidence.
- nivla 14y agoApart from the conspiracy theory, I found something interesting while looking through the WayBack Machine[1]. Around Nov 02, 2010 duck.com's server was compromised and the script kiddie inserted a php string onto a HTML file. Was he was really expecting it to work? <?php @system($_GET['c']); ?> [1] http://wayback.archive.org/web/20100615000000*/http:////////////////www.duck.com//////// http://wayback.archive.org/web/20100615000000*/http:////////...
- emehrkay 14y agoIf they ran php it probably did work. That right there is the keys to the kingdom