Live data from Hacker News

Qwant: The Search Engine That Respects Your Privacy

qwant.com

21–30 of 110 posts

Re: Qwant: The Search Engine That Respects Your Privacy

#22

At some point, we're going to cut the branding middle-man, and put Bing on the front page of HN as a viable alternative to Google Search. Not as sexy as the high-minded front organizations that reskin it, but it'd be nice if we could be honest with ourselves about the beasts we were feeding.

[deleted]

Re: Qwant: The Search Engine That Respects Your Privacy

#23
post #2

This was posted in another thread, but I'd never seen it before. French-made. Results seem just as good as Google, PutLocker searchers work, and it's as privacy-respecting as DDG. I've been using it all day and I'm happy with the results, so I thought I'd share.

I have a better one: https://infinitySearch.Co It's Open-source, it's a search engine (they have their own crawler and their own index) and it's private!!!

The slashes after the colon should be forward slashes (/) rather than backslashes (\).

Re: Qwant: The Search Engine That Respects Your Privacy

#24
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a better one: https://infinitySearch.Co It's Open-source, it's a search engine (they have their own crawler and their own index) and it's private!!!

The slashes after the colon should be forward slashes (/) rather than backslashes (\).

WT...?! How the did I do that?!?!

I mean: I've developed websites... What the was in my head?!

LOL

THANKS for not letting me look like a dumb for too much long

Re: Qwant: The Search Engine That Respects Your Privacy

#25
post #8

I've been generally happy with startpage.com, they seem to mirror Google's results. And it works with dark mode. You don't get the contextual niceties that you get with Google though e.g. results for "70F in C".

FYI, startpage seems to be owned by an ad company https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21371577

Re: Qwant: The Search Engine That Respects Your Privacy

#27
I used it for a long time (and 2 years as my main search engine) for 3 reasons... - it is french - it is working in Europa/USA/China (I studied in Paris/San Francisco/Tianjin) - my best friend used to works their. We had some good talks about Qwant, but it will not be relevant for my user review.

So here we are:

1. They are not Open-Source (as opposite to Searx).

Only the plugins are. Can we trust them when they say to respect our privacy ?

2. They are not TOR friendly.

Full of captchaS !!!

3. They have no onion site.

DDG have one.

4. They run some kind of weird analytics.

Each time we click on a search, the JS code trigger a fetch to `https://api.qwant.com/api/action/url` and include: - our current language - the query we searched - the link we clicked - etc... They were backed by Bing before, is it still the case or are they running their own stats engine? I do not know. If we trigger ourself some false fetches, can we show "twitter" as first result when someone searches for "facebook"?

5. Their lite version is not lite (=/= duckduckgo.com/html/).

They redirect all our clicks to be able to run their analytics without the JS's fetch API (proof: `https://lite.qwant.com/?l=fr&q=hacker+news&t=web` the first link does not offer `https://news.ycombinator.com` but `https://lite.qwant.com/redirect/yFOdE8r1P1LTSLsA9IIBNKaZmDF1...`). Possible attack with `https://lite.qwant.com/redirect/yFOdE8r1P1LTSLsA9IIBNKaZmDF1...` (see the fake "&query") ? Also, They cannot store the config: go to settings, do whatever you want, do your search, switch tab (go to "news" for example) => your settings are reset to default. You may fix it by adding your settings to the link "&l=fr...".

6. Their front-side is broken.

If we visit their site without user-agent, we have an exception in their JS which crash the page (blank page). And their is more.

7. They do not care.

I emailed them maybe 5-6 bugs, they never replied nether fixed them.

8. Their API is sometime weird (just because not documented ?).

I ran a custom front-end without Qwant's analytics and the minimum working request is: `https://api.qwant.com/api/search/web?q=hackernews&count=10&o...`. What is "&uiv=4"? Why can't it be null or 0? What is "&t="? Is it really needed? Why is it not needed everywhere? => `https://api.qwant.com/api/suggest?q=duckduck`.

In sum up, in a customer point of view, Qwant is just a frenchy Google hosted mainly in Europa and allowed in China. Nothing new here, I recommend to stick to DDG for the moment.

Edit: fix minor typo + add proof for QwantLite analytics

Re: Qwant: The Search Engine That Respects Your Privacy

#28
Some obvious differences...

Bing sets cookies. Qwant does not set cookies.

Qwant, i.e., lite.qwant.com, prefixes search result URLs to point to Qwant servers. Qwant redirects www.qwant.com to lite.qwant.com when Javascript is disabled. Bing does not prefix search results.

Bing requires sign-up in order to use their API. Qwant's undocumented API is freely accessible, no sign-up.

Qwant, i.e., lite.qwant.com, requires a User-Agent header. Bing does not require a UA header.

Example of Qwant API

   curl "https://api.qwant.com/api/search/videos?q=example&count=150&offset=0&f=xyz&t=xyz&l=en_gb&uiv=xyz"

Re: Qwant: The Search Engine That Respects Your Privacy

#29
post #4
post #2

This was posted in another thread, but I'd never seen it before. French-made. Results seem just as good as Google, PutLocker searchers work, and it's as privacy-respecting as DDG. I've been using it all day and I'm happy with the results, so I thought I'd share.

It's just a front for Bing. The company is pure hype, no results.

It's a bit more than just hype: it's rebranding Bing results to make them more palatable to a EU audience, while guzzling on public subsidies to pretend it's a EU unicorn and gather support from nationalists.

There are actual results - as a public subsidies scam!

Re: Qwant: The Search Engine That Respects Your Privacy

#30

At some point, we're going to cut the branding middle-man, and put Bing on the front page of HN as a viable alternative to Google Search. Not as sexy as the high-minded front organizations that reskin it, but it'd be nice if we could be honest with ourselves about the beasts we were feeding.

Is that meant to imply that the privacy protection and un-bubbling of the "middle men" is bogus? (I don't know about Qwant, but DDG isn't solely Bing, and it feeds some worthwhile organizations with donations.)
Post reply on HN