Live data from Hacker News

DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

dontbubble.us

21–30 of 219 posts

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#21
I heard about this book on NPR a couple of weeks ago [1]. I really don't like this biased view of ML.

In summary what he said on the show was something like: At least the news shows (and news pappers, radio) gives the same information to everyone, so instead of showing Kardashians news they do show you Bin Laden news, even though, they know the Kardashians are more profitable... this is not the case with Google Search or Netflix, Yahoo, Bing, etc (all attacked by this author).

I think that ML helps more than it hurts and viewing it in a non-technical way is wrong, the author gives the impression that Google (the company and their execs) manually (via algorithms, but very manageable in his opinion) change the search results to not show things that they don't like, then it raises the question "do we really trust one company?".

Its arguable that the search results in Google or Netflix are optimized for profits, but how do you make profits in the customer industry? IMHO you do that by making their happier, showing useful results, for them, not for everyone.

I'm waiting for the time when I google: "what channel and time is Conan on" [2] and I get "channel 43 11pm" as the result. Of course that is very personalized, and the result will be just for me... but again I'm the one searching and I'm the one needing the results.

[1] http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-05-17/eli-pariser-fil...

[2] At the moment I get this 1st result: http://articles.boston.com/2010-11-10/ae/29330376_1_conan-an... which is not what I searched for nor wanted...

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#22
Of course, I might want my search results to be filtered. To take but one example: Neither FOX nor CNN are providing any valuable insights at all, so filtering them out is a good idea for me.

Or, to get all pithy about it, the problem is not the filter bubble, it's the crap bubble.

If there's a problem with relevance sorting at all, it's the issue that it is based on history, not intent.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#23
I think this is a real issue, and I am glad that DDG is addressing it. This is a more-compelling take on the tracking issue IMO.

What I'd really like to see, is a search engine to allow me to do both. I'd like to have a profile (that didn't use my name), and when I wanted to, I could click a result as 'useful'. This would go into my personal algorithm. I could then toggle between filtered search, or unfiltered search, whenever I like.

It might even be useful to build search filter categories. But I'd keep that a bit buried for the power users.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#24
I just had to explain this to my co-founder last night after he freaked out because our old site with a different name was showing up first in his search results with our new name as the query . With web history off the old site wasn't even on the first page.Now I just have to explain that no one searches for early-stage startups let alone cares if they change their names :)

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#25
post #5

It is the ultimate quest for serendipity. If you filter by what you want you don't get what you didn't know you wanted. I will give DDG the benefit of the doubt and try it out for a couple of months. Starting now.

Long time DDG user here. I highly encourage people to try and make the switch. I often find DDG gives me the needed information without having to actually having to visit the site. I still find myself going to Google sometimes if DDG doesn't give me what I want, but it's smart enough to get me the most relevant information faster most of the time. Often enough that I don't feel the need to switch back.

In making the switch, I highly advise you to spend a little bit of time learning the keyboard shortcuts, especially the !Bang feature (https://duckduckgo.com/bang.html). You'll love the HN search options. =) There are so many, you won't be able to learn them all.

You can also still use Google if you want, or even Bing (or other engines). Basically, the !Bang syntax would mean even if you aren't using DDG, it enables you to quickly use whatever engine you really want.

I'm just a fan of DDG. Hope you find it as useful as I do. =)

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#26
Confirmation bias is bad enough already, it's really a shame that powerful companies like Google reinforces it just for the sake of giving you more pleasing search results. (Pleasing and Good overlap, but they're not equal.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

http://lesswrong.com/lw/iw/positive_bias_look_into_the_dark/

Edit: I didn't intend to bash Google specifically. But they are faced with a choice in which their own interest conflict with those of their users. And as Capitalist Bastards are more and more accepted in our society, we don't blame them for the selfish choice. Maybe not a shame then, but at the very least a pity.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#27
post #21

I heard about this book on NPR a couple of weeks ago [1]. I really don't like this biased view of ML. In summary what he said on the show was something like: At least the news shows (and news pappers, radio) gives the same information to everyone, so instead of showing Kardashians news they do show you Bin Laden news, even though, they know the Kardashians are more profitable... this is not the case with Google Searc…

Exactly! it's just nonsense peddled by those who don't understand the technical aspects of search, people who don't realize that a search engine's prime function is to filter the millions of results for each query to down to the most relevant results for the users, and not the same 10 results are relevant to each and every user.

And user regardless of nay personalization can dig through any initial results.

It's just annoying an ignorant bullshit being disguised as a real issue.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#28
post #23

I think this is a real issue, and I am glad that DDG is addressing it. This is a more-compelling take on the tracking issue IMO. What I'd really like to see, is a search engine to allow me to do both. I'd like to have a profile (that didn't use my name), and when I wanted to, I could click a result as 'useful'. This would go into my personal algorithm. I could then toggle between filtered search, or unfiltered search…

Use Incognito mode in Chrome when you would like to search the un-"filtered" Google.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#29
post #14
post #11

Yeah this is an important issue. Google apparently ranks results (for you personally) based on some 57 inputs, even when not logged into Google services. In short results suffer from a self-reinforcing feedback loop, forever constraining what you see. I wonder how easy it is to get "clean" or "default" results from Google? And I know it's been discussed many times , but just how easy would it be to maintain real anon…

Incognito/private browsing + going through DuckDuckGo (even for Google queries, with !g prefix) works for me. (Edit to add since I can't reply: going through DDG avoids Google redirecting to country-specific variation).

Whit, what? Doesn't going through DDG with !g not just redirect to google, where your normal filter will be applied (private browsing notwithstanding)...

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#30
post #19
post #11

Yeah this is an important issue. Google apparently ranks results (for you personally) based on some 57 inputs, even when not logged into Google services. In short results suffer from a self-reinforcing feedback loop, forever constraining what you see. I wonder how easy it is to get "clean" or "default" results from Google? And I know it's been discussed many times , but just how easy would it be to maintain real anon…

No it's a non-issue, and by the way Google probably uses much more that 57 'inputs' (signals) to determine relevance. Personalization is just a different term for relevant results and this is just FUD, the source of which is people who don't understand the technical aspects.

I'm gonna humbly disagree. There are many potential ranking factors in a search result: how well the query matches the document text, how important that text is in the document, how important the document is (PR) and so on. What I don't necessarily want is further ordering by what a machine thinks is my political inclination or world view.
Post reply on HN