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

DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 224 posts

Re: DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

#161

Post by dschobel »

mahmud wrote: post #154
dschobel wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple answer is wherever they have operations. I don't think it is unreasonable to say that if you are going to run ops within a country you implicitly have to follow the law of the land. That being said, thinking they shouldn't be in a particular country which obligates them to do these things is a much more sound position than just saying they shouldn't follow the law in a few particular cases. Ultimately, if…

wherever they have operations And because of that I choose to use a 1-man search engine, without loss of quality, while gaining everything last bit of privacy. And because of this, his stunt of a billboard ad is actually truthful.

Whether you place your trust in a multibillion dollar company, a one man shop, or just use an anonymizing proxy, the issues are the same.

The billboard is just noise and you are technically sophisticated enough to know better.

Re: DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

#162

Post by dschobel »

patio11 wrote: post #41
coderdude wrote: post #2

More FUD from DuckDuckGo about Google and privacy issues. Didn't we come to the conclusion that the things they are railing against Google for are applicable to any and every Website? Matt Cutts stole the comment show on this one: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2063619 The worst thing about this is how blindly news about DDG gets upvoted around here. Edit: To my down-voters: It doesn't make what I said not true…

Matt's comment is, basically, no fair for criticizing us for incontestably true things which are intrinsic to our business model. That was only fair when w were the scrappy underdog taking on the uncaring megacorp with the unassailable market position.

Pithy but Google won the day because its search quality beat the holy hell out yahoo, altavista, et al.

Re: DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

#163

Post by jamesaguilar »

iamelgringo wrote: post #155
truebosko wrote: post #6

Is the whole privacy on search thing really a big issue? I, for one, want Google to be all Orwellian on me because it will mean better search results. I had a scenario like this a few days ago when I googled for "fabric" -- Being a Python developer I was looking for http://fabfile.org and it shows up as the second result while logged in. If I'm not, it won't show up. This may be the outlier state of mind on HN, but I…

Is the whole privacy on search thing really a big issue? Of course it is. Google and Facebook have been pushing the bounds of privacy repeatedly over the years because it is in their financial best interest to do so. Their primary product isn't search or communication or maps. Their product is plain and simple people's personal information. And, becuase they are a corporation in the USA they are legally bound to maxi…

> they are legally bound to maximize shareholder value

Can you point to a single instance where a company was forced to commit some act that its managers reasonably thought was morally wrong because of the "law" that companies must maximize shareholder value? Personally I think this trope has no basis in fact and cannot explain why Google or any other company is compelled to do things that are wrong.

There are many possible reasons why they would do something you disagree with: maybe they don't think it's wrong. Maybe they actively want to do something bad. Maybe you are not correct in your beliefs about what they are doing. But I think the reason you gave why they need to violate people's privacy is a cop out.

There are also a number of counter-examples where corporations fail to maximize shareholder profits by donating to charity, taking principled environmental stances, etc. I don't know how you or anyone could come to the conclusion that the U.S. legal system rigidly enforces absolute profit maximization.

> Oh, and by the way, the government can have access to all that data without a search warrant.

Don't know where you are getting this from.

Re: DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

#164

Post by JacobAldridge »

tlrobinson wrote: post #98
jeremymims wrote: post #5

This is surprisingly inexpensive advertising and will likely generate the value of its price in press coverage alone.

See that billboard directly behind it with "San Francisco Chronicle" along the top? That's for the auto show in November... 2010. It couldn't have been very expensive if they're still advertising an event that ended two months ago...

I doubt the Chronicle is still paying for that, it just means no paying replacement has been found so it hasn't been covered / removed. That could mean it's REALLY expensive to advertise there, though it's more likely it's just not a prime advertising site.

Still, what's a full page ad in Wired set you back? Solid PR play by DDG.

Re: DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

#165

Post by JacobAldridge »

samstokes wrote: post #82

I'm surprised he's only paying $7000 to put up a massive billboard next to a major consumer route for a month. I'm sure billboard advertising doesn't have great conversion rates, but I still imagined that would cost more. Anyone care to comment on their experiences with billboard ads?

I think the return on investment probably needs to (and intends to) include the public relations events (like the Wired article) created, as well as direct conversion rates.

It's entirely possible DDG / Gabriel will have more new users from that article than from a month of the billboard, but of course the article wouldn't have been written if he hadn't done something novel like old-school advertising a new-school product.

Re: DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

#166

Post by xentronium »

dauphin wrote: post #94
epi0Bauqu wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just the current search, but the problem is millions of pages run third-party ads, and most are run by very few networks. These ad networks can aggregate the terms and then they have previous searches as well.

Pedophilia is illegal in most countries, I'd be happy if ad networks gather data about your interest on young boys and pass it to the feds! Beasts! Edit: judging by the downvotes, I guess a good bunch of hackers like to live in atrocity!

He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security (via Ben Franklin)

Re: DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

#167

Post by ntoshev »

natep wrote: post #131
truebosko wrote: post #6

Is the whole privacy on search thing really a big issue? I, for one, want Google to be all Orwellian on me because it will mean better search results. I had a scenario like this a few days ago when I googled for "fabric" -- Being a Python developer I was looking for http://fabfile.org and it shows up as the second result while logged in. If I'm not, it won't show up. This may be the outlier state of mind on HN, but I…

Not sure why this hasn't been said yet (maybe I missed it), but dukgo.com already has this figured out. https://duckduckgo.com/fabric It knows that fabric means something in textiles, geology, etc, and that it has multiple meanings in computing. To get Python, just click 'more meanings' EDIT: I guess my point was already made, so in order to contribute something to the conversation, I'll add this: if there's anything…

The same word is likely to mean different things to different people. DDG doesn't have the infrastructure to handle this, Google has (with Search History). What you get with DDG is generic Bing results, lightly filered and in a different UI.

Re: DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

#168

Post by simplegeek »

jeremymims wrote: post #5

This is surprisingly inexpensive advertising and will likely generate the value of its price in press coverage alone.

I think this is a brilliant idea and this is very cheap. In fact, he put up a bill-board and also he's on Wired now ;) Nice, two birds in one shot ;)

Re: DuckDuckGo Challenges Google on Privacy (With a Billboard in San Francisco)

#169

Post by epi0Bauqu »

jarek wrote: post #103

Some questions... - is DDG profitable right now? - is it going to be profitable if their user base grows by 10x? 1000x? - do they ever expect a need to be profitable? - if required to be profitable, do they have or foresee a solid business plan that doesn't involve de facto "tracking"?

No, yes (10x), yes, grow the user base.
Post reply on HN