Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

De-Googleify Internet

degooglisons-internet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 266 posts

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#61

Post by syphilis2 »

tomphoolery wrote: post #52
syphilis2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe this is true. But I also have found that sometimes the user experience is diminished when not "logged in" to encourage people to create accounts. Pinterest has a box that slowly covers up more of the screen as you scroll drown. Facebook has a login prompt box that stays at the bottom of the screen and occasionally expands as a reminder. Quora prevents internal redirects to new pages. With enough know-how th…

Is signing up for an account really that big of a deal to you?

Each user will have their own reasons, but if it's a big enough deal that websites will try to strongarm users into signing up then I believe it's likely a big enough deal for users as well.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#62

Post by Ajedi32 »

ksk wrote: post #35
Ajedi32 wrote: post #27

> These services track us everywhere, while claiming to give us a better “user experience”. That's kind of the problem though; they usually _do_ offer a better user experience. If we want users to start using open source software rather than walled garden solutions from large companies, we're going to have to start building open source solutions which offer a comparable user experience to proprietary ones from large…

I agree with your larger point, but should user privacy be part of the user experience?

Privacy _is_ part of the user experience, but only insofar as users actually care about that particular feature.

Most users I believe do consider privacy a positive, but often it's a low priority compared to other "more important" features like convenience and usability.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#63

Post by tscs37 »

mi100hael wrote: post #12

I like the idea of this project, but I have several nits/concerns: - De-Google-ify is a poor way of marketing these ideas. Your average web user loves Google because they are trendy and make everything so convenient. - The site enumerates the pitfalls of cloud-hosted solutions and then proceeds to link to their own cloud-hosted solutions with no explanation of why they're any safer, better, etc. And not limited to th…

I might add that their services seem to default to French locale for some reason (I guess they're french) with no obvious way to change that.

The average internet user is probably going to understand French as well as they understand the philosophical implications of eating a slice of toasted bread with butter on it.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#64

Post by mi100hael »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #45
mwfunk wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've long felt that RMS/FSF's very specific and nonintuitive usage of "free" was intended to be misleading. If someone says "free" (which has many, many different meanings, all positive) when they really mean "copyleft" (which has one very complicated meaning), they're not trying to clarify anything, rather they're trying to muddy the waters so that people who don't understand copyleft or the FSF's political philosop…

My usual goto about "free" software and "free" service: "Free speech is not the same as free beer."

Sure, that's a common line. But the fact that such an explanation is necessary at all is a pretty strong indicator that the label "free" is a poor one.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#65

Post by anthony_romeo »

stuckagain wrote: post #18
nvk wrote: post #3

Just talking about search alternative; DuckDuckGo is my default search engine for over 2 years. It's incredibly good, the only caveat is you need to re-learn how to search. The same way you "changed yourself" initially for google.

It defies my experience to claim that DDG can have equivalent search quality to Google. For one thing Google search results include my own emails and docs, which DDG doesn't produce. I find that Google's personalization is key to quality, not counter to it. As an example search for "good espresso open now". The DDG results are entirely useless.

Generally yes. I default to DDG, but I when I don't find what I want I often just add the '!g' to the search.

The only issue I have with Google search (aside from privacy concerns and the like) is the frequency to which the results don't actually contain any of the search terms I use. This functionality is fine for general use, but when I'm actually looking for something very specific the guesses Google makes often makes the search results less helpful than nothing at all.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#66

Post by StevePerkins »

myowncrapulence wrote: post #58
tomphoolery wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is signing up for an account really that big of a deal to you?

Did you even read the post? This is about avoiding tracking. And yes, signing up for accounts can be grueling. Try making a google account without submitting a blood sample.

Wat? It's been years since I created my "real" Google account, so I just created "fakeasdlkvjasklfvjasdkljfgasdf@gmail.com" out of curiosity.

It literally took 20 seconds, with a fake name and birthday. There are form fields for your phone number and alternate email address, but you can leave them blank.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#67

Post by babuskov »

mi100hael wrote: post #12

I like the idea of this project, but I have several nits/concerns: - De-Google-ify is a poor way of marketing these ideas. Your average web user loves Google because they are trendy and make everything so convenient. - The site enumerates the pitfalls of cloud-hosted solutions and then proceeds to link to their own cloud-hosted solutions with no explanation of why they're any safer, better, etc. And not limited to th…

> Your average web user loves Google

Many average users I know think Google is the Internet. 10 years ago, they thought that Internet Explorer is the Internet. They don't really care, the same way most people don't care what's the manufacturer of the bus that takes them to work every morning. They just want to get stuff done, get information they need and go on with their lives.

Whether Google makes some money with their data, or nobody makes money because it's all open source, wouldn't change a thing. Even if such change happened, the average user would just say: Okay. And go on with their life as before.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#68

Post by matt4077 »

cookiecaper wrote: post #41
Ajedi32 wrote: post #27

> These services track us everywhere, while claiming to give us a better “user experience”. That's kind of the problem though; they usually _do_ offer a better user experience. If we want users to start using open source software rather than walled garden solutions from large companies, we're going to have to start building open source solutions which offer a comparable user experience to proprietary ones from large…

The most crucial thing for the future of information freedom is to fix American intellectual property and network access laws. "Walled gardens" exist because anyone who effectively frees a user's data on the user's terms is at least sued, if not jailed, under statutes like the Soviet-era, pre-Internet Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and luddite interpretations of the Copyright Act that consider a RAM copy that exists f…

"Walled Gardens" have nothing to do with IP laws.

The user obviously retains copyright on whatever he posts/uploads to fb/twitter/etc. If the user grants you permission, IP laws cannot be used to stop you.

The CFAA did indeed come into play with the guy who wanted to automate Facebook profile transfers. But apart from the questions of that specific case, it's just not true that there are millions of people waiting to migrate away from Facebook if only they could transfer their photo library.

Most of the value in these networks is in "network effect", i. e. it's usefulness is a function of the number of other people using it.

And then there's good old "this service is actually pretty good". Case in point: Gmail. It's quite easy to move away from it: you can download all your data via SMTP and set up forwarding or an autoresponder. That people do not do so has nothing to do with your conspiracy theories. They actually like the service.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#69

Post by ssully »

myowncrapulence wrote: post #58
tomphoolery wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is signing up for an account really that big of a deal to you?

Did you even read the post? This is about avoiding tracking. And yes, signing up for accounts can be grueling. Try making a google account without submitting a blood sample.

A blood sample? The only fields they ask for that might be too much for someone is a phone number and prior email, and neither is required to make an account.

I take my privacy very seriously and understand a lot of the apprehension about Google's tracking, but I think you are being a little ridiculous.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#70

Post by mtgx »

tomphoolery wrote: post #52
syphilis2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe this is true. But I also have found that sometimes the user experience is diminished when not "logged in" to encourage people to create accounts. Pinterest has a box that slowly covers up more of the screen as you scroll drown. Facebook has a login prompt box that stays at the bottom of the screen and occasionally expands as a reminder. Quora prevents internal redirects to new pages. With enough know-how th…

Is signing up for an account really that big of a deal to you?

Try signing into your Google account in Chrome. It will track everything you then search in the address bar, even if you have paused Google history.
Post reply on HN