Earlier quoted context omitted.
I usually add bangs in the end of the string, since it makes editing and removing them easier if needed.
Longtime user did not know could do this; cheers.
Yes, you can actually put them anywhere in the string.
DuckDuckGo Traffic
151–160 of 251 posts
Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic
#152I just tried DDG for the first time, and I'm blown away how good it is! Since I'm mostly using search engines for programming, I searched for "clojure filter" on DDG out of curiosity. It gave me all the relevant documentation pages BUT here is the "blown away" part - it showed me a small Clojure code snippet on the right side of the screen, explaining the usages of the "filter" with a short and concise docstring. It…
!so -> Stack Overflow
Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic
#153Over the past 5 years I’ve tried DDG several times. Each time except the last I wanted to stick with it but the results simply didn’t stand up to what I’d see on Google. About 6 months ago (a year? I can’t remember) I switched and haven’t looked back. Now, when I look at google, the results actually look less relevant. As well, the ads on Google have become very obnoxious. I don’t feel like I’m being served the best…
It's the cycle of search engines. We saw this with AltaVista et.al. back in the Web 1.0 days, which crufted up their user interfaces only for a neat new upstart to come along: Google. What set Google apart was that it had a simple, effective, and above all clean user interface, with minimal cruft.
Inevitably, Google has succumbed to the same temptation that AltaVista did, and now there's a neat new upstart to come along, with a clean user interface and minimal cruft: DuckDuckGo.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic
#154Over the past 5 years I’ve tried DDG several times. Each time except the last I wanted to stick with it but the results simply didn’t stand up to what I’d see on Google. About 6 months ago (a year? I can’t remember) I switched and haven’t looked back. Now, when I look at google, the results actually look less relevant. As well, the ads on Google have become very obnoxious. I don’t feel like I’m being served the best…
It's the cycle of search engines. We saw this with AltaVista et.al. back in the Web 1.0 days, which crufted up their user interfaces only for a neat new upstart to come along: Google. What set Google apart was that it had a simple, effective, and above all clean user interface, with minimal cruft. Inevitably, Google has succumbed to the same temptation that AltaVista did, and now there's a neat new upstart to come al…
> and now there's a neat new upstart to come along
DuckDuckGo is 12 years old. They're far away from being a new upstart.
To put that into perspective, AltaVista's prime years only lasted six or seven years (~1996-2002; sold off in 2003). DDG is now one of the oldest independent search engines in Internet history.
Their very long-term, very slow, grinding upwards is one of the most amazing aspects of what they're accomplishing. It's incredibly difficult to do versus an entrenched monopoly (and one of the most powerful brands and corporations in the world at that). You almost never see it happen in tech once a monopoly is stable.
Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the cycle of search engines. We saw this with AltaVista et.al. back in the Web 1.0 days, which crufted up their user interfaces only for a neat new upstart to come along: Google. What set Google apart was that it had a simple, effective, and above all clean user interface, with minimal cruft. Inevitably, Google has succumbed to the same temptation that AltaVista did, and now there's a neat new upstart to come al…
> and now there's a neat new upstart to come along DuckDuckGo is 12 years old. They're far away from being a new upstart. To put that into perspective, AltaVista's prime years only lasted six or seven years (~1996-2002; sold off in 2003). DDG is now one of the oldest independent search engines in Internet history. Their very long-term, very slow, grinding upwards is one of the most amazing aspects of what they're acc…
Microsoft could decide to terminate their access to Bing APIs at any time resulting in DDG’s immediately losing most of their users. DDG does not have their own crawler or index.
Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic
#156Over the past 5 years I’ve tried DDG several times. Each time except the last I wanted to stick with it but the results simply didn’t stand up to what I’d see on Google. About 6 months ago (a year? I can’t remember) I switched and haven’t looked back. Now, when I look at google, the results actually look less relevant. As well, the ads on Google have become very obnoxious. I don’t feel like I’m being served the best…
I think I mentally give DDG a harder time than it deserves. When I search something and don't see the result I want I think "Wow ddg is shit, I'll try this on google" And then I still don't see what I want and think "The info I am looking for doesn't exist or my search was wrong" Despite both failing I tend to be a lot more lenient to google.
Bing and Yandex are worth trying too. I just had a total failure from a Google search yesterday, where the official site for a piece of software wasn’t on the first 3 pages. I went over to bing and it was #1. I’m getting to the point where I predict a search will fail on google and I go to another engine. This never happened before, even in the Demand Media content farm debacle where horse shit ehow ranking for millions of major keywords.
I’ve been using the web since the best option was Yahoo’s hand curated directories. Google is in really serious trouble. These search engine switches happen very quickly, as soon as one of them is showing better results, the switch happens abruptly and it’s one way.
Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic
#157I've been using DDG for a while now, my biggest if not only concern with DDG is local specific events or chronologically close events. If my search string has or shares close proximity to either an event in the past or a local event else where of a similar name, I rarely find my results. For instance during the Australian Election recently, if I searched for Australian Election I was never returned results for the el…
I'm on the very same page in Italy. Beside local search and news it's getting very good. And I'm fine trading off some discomfort and some occasional !g bang for clean experience and privacy.
Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an offshoot discussion and I have nothing against DDG or bang commands -- just presenting another side of convenient searches. > I know Firefox had install-your-own search plugins forever, but the total lack of friction of typing “!yt badgerbadgerbadger” to get specifically YouTube results was fantastic. I find "use your own search" to be much less friction than going through DDG since it takes me right to re…
There's a thing I wish FF had that Chrome has had for a long, long time (an older comment of mine): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20056174 re: ease of searching within sites and building that availability (of sites) up
I don't understand the behavior your are talking about. I tried in Google Chrome and could not figure it out.
In Chrome's address bar, you type the name of a site (say reddit.com), then tab, then some keywords, and that does a google search for your keywords inside reddit.com?
Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't know what thread from yesterday you're talking about. It's got >2600 upvotes and has been high on the front page for 18 hours now: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22107823 > people are blind idiots Hm...you may be onto something there :-)
Favicons are mentioned once in the first page of that discussion. I think attributing all that outrage to the favicons, not the fact that they made ads look like results, is a massive mischaracterization of that discussion. Bordering on bad faith... I maintain that favicons are VERY low on the list of reasons people are switching from Google to DDG. DDG having favicons too should be proof enough of that.
I think you are the only person trying to infer that anyone claimed favicons were the key thing.
The original tweet that started the whole discussion is: "There's something strange about the recent design change to google search results, favicons and extra header text: they all look like ads, which is perhaps the point?"
The comment you replied to said: "everyone is hating on Google's new search results, in part because of a distracting favicon" (emphasis mine).
There is no real inconsistency there, but for some reason you seem to have decided that there is and that it is very important.
Re: DuckDuckGo Traffic
#160Bang commands[0] really sealed DDG for me. I know Firefox had install-your-own search plugins forever, but the total lack of friction of typing “!yt badgerbadgerbadger” to get specifically YouTube results was fantastic. !g (search on Google) also makes it far easier to switch. Don’t like the results? Prefix !g and try again. My other favorites: !sr [name of subreddit] - much faster than “reddit.com/r/[name]” !r - Red…
BTW, you can use !w to search for different language wikipedia, eg
!wde aldi
!wes la casa de papel