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

Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 198 posts

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#81

Post by AdamSC1 »

Disclaimer: I work at DuckDuckGo so I'm a bit bias. I won't turn this into a sales pitch, but here are a few common misconceptions people have about privacy and search.

1) Many people don't realize that tracking isn't just about having something to hide. But, it can cost you money. From Airline tickets to staplers you pay based on a profile:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014241278873237772045781893...

http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-you-cant-trust-youre-getting...

2) People don't realize what's being tracked. I usually send them to http://history.google.com/history to have a look. Or http://webkay.robinlinus.com/ to see what their browser can access. That makes a lot of people realize just what is out there.

3) People feel they can't search without personalized searches.

The example is often a matter of disambiguation. For example, if I type "Python" I want code, not snakes. But, really, when is the last time you only typed 'Python' and wanted something generic about Python? You probably wanted a package lookup or the latest news on a release. So if you become more specific there is no issue.

Plus when you get a bit more specific on Python you can trigger things like package lookup:

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=python+numpy&ia=about

Or NumPy Cheatsheet:

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=numpy+cheat+sheet&ia=cheatsheet

At the end of the day some people may truly be ok with all the tracking that takes place, and that's ok that's up to them. But, at DuckDuckGo our goal is to educate people on online privacy, and provide a trusted way to access information as best we can. (Not to mention Instant Answers and Bangs which are super addicting)

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#82

Post by Entangled »

Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, they all have something in common: EaaS. Ecosystem as a Service. DDG should start offering email first, then news, stocks, maps, social, and finally ads. You don't survive with search alone, you need to monetize it on one hand and keep your users coming back on the other.

Oh, I wish it was called something simpler like "Ducker" or "Duckit", but whatever, bikeshedding territory.

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#83

Post by wjd2030 »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #78
RaitoBezarius wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I understand your point, please. > Anyway, we don't use DDG because its results are shitty. These kind of comments are a bit unnecessary, especially on Hacker News, I believe.

Why? The topic is whether or not to use a search engine. This one delivers bad results compared to major ones. Frustratingly bad if you use it enough. I expected such a reply.

Shitty based upon what? I would say they could improve, always room for improvement but DDG handles most of my searches with ease.

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#84

Post by DanBC »

collyw wrote: post #2

I use DuckDuck go as my default search on my machines, but I think the fact that Google is not anonymous does give them a big advantage. An obvious example of this is when I search for "Django" (I am primarily a Django developer). DuckDuckGo will return results about the film as the top hits, whereas Google already knows that I mean Django Web Framework and will return those as the top hits. I appreciate the fact tha…

Have you tried the bang searches?

https://duckduckgo.com/bang?c=Tech&q=django

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#85

Post by nickpsecurity »

cptskippy wrote: post #47
thesmallestcat wrote: post #40

> I'm getting a feeling that some day in future, DDG is going to become as big as Google, if not supersede it. Well, no, they don't even have their own search engine. > a search engine's results are only as accurate as the number of users who search and contribute to it That makes no sense. Anyway, we don't use DDG because its results are shitty.

> Well, no, they don't even have their own search engine. Really? I've never heard this, do you have anymore information about it?

Meta-search is a type of search engine that goes way back. They avoid the cost of maintaining a full, search service by sending the query to all kinds of other search engines, running some analysis on their results, and presenting a condensed form to the user optionally with value adds. DuckDuckGo's value add is privacy. Here's some others to give you an idea for what they do:

http://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/10-meta-search-engine...

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#86

Post by AdamSC1 »

anexprogrammer wrote: post #53

I'd suggest to "Start contributing data to DDG in 2017". Most of their best results are crowdsourced. I've been using it as default for perhaps 2 years now. There's some consistent annoyances, but overall I actually prefer the experience to Google. It's much nicer about disambiguation than google, and can be incredibly helpful. e.g. Search for Zen - you get a wide selection of possibles in probable order. Sadly there…

We always welcome more contributions. We crossed 1000 Instant Answers this year and they make for some wonderful experiences!

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#87

Post by VT_Drew »

collyw wrote: post #2

I use DuckDuck go as my default search on my machines, but I think the fact that Google is not anonymous does give them a big advantage. An obvious example of this is when I search for "Django" (I am primarily a Django developer). DuckDuckGo will return results about the film as the top hits, whereas Google already knows that I mean Django Web Framework and will return those as the top hits. I appreciate the fact tha…

It has it's pro's and con's. I do love how I can just to !a to search amazon, or !w to search wikipedia, or !g if I really want to use Google. Kind of wish Google had a feature like that.

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#88

Post by hedora »

sp332 wrote: post #62
whatshisface wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>* the fact that Google is not anonymous does give them a big advantage.* What if DDG allowed us to manually tell them information about our demographic in a way that wasn't stored on their servers and could be changed at will? If you want convenience, maybe there could be an optional client-side preference detector script that only offered possible configurations.

Like this https://support.google.com/ads/answer/2842480?hl=en&ref_topi...

That is a nice UI, but it seems to be for ad targeting (based on the URL). The more fundamental difference is that google knows nearly everything about you already, so this is helping them complete a dossier on you.

I think the parent poster was asking for a feature more like "I use LaTeX to document Django. This is all you should know about me. Go."

Put another way, can I fill that form out, create a google search bookmarklet that encodes my responses client-side, and then use it with all google cookies and ad domains blocked?

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#89

Post by wjd2030 »

thesmallestcat wrote: post #40

> I'm getting a feeling that some day in future, DDG is going to become as big as Google, if not supersede it. Well, no, they don't even have their own search engine. > a search engine's results are only as accurate as the number of users who search and contribute to it That makes no sense. Anyway, we don't use DDG because its results are shitty.

>Well, no, they don't even have their own search engine.

This is false, as has already been pointed out.

If by 'shitty' you mean it has areas for improvement then yes I agree; as does your tact.

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#90

Post by st3v3r »

RaitoBezarius wrote: post #49
thesmallestcat wrote: post #40

> I'm getting a feeling that some day in future, DDG is going to become as big as Google, if not supersede it. Well, no, they don't even have their own search engine. > a search engine's results are only as accurate as the number of users who search and contribute to it That makes no sense. Anyway, we don't use DDG because its results are shitty.

While I understand your point, please. > Anyway, we don't use DDG because its results are shitty. These kind of comments are a bit unnecessary, especially on Hacker News, I believe.

Why? It's a discussion about a search engine. The quality of the results are one of the most important aspects of it.
Post reply on HN