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

DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

dontbubble.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 219 posts

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#141

Post by Matt_Cutts »

mtogo wrote: post #136
Matt_Cutts wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Scroogle hits Google from a relatively small set of IP addresses. Be aware that Google is probably trying to localize for those IP addresses, so your results could be less relevant (in the same way that if you searched through a proxy in Germany, you'd be more likely to get results with a German emphasis). Personally, if I have a search that feels a bit sensitive, I just hop into incognito mode in Chrome. Con…

Your reccomendation is hilarious because it still does not give the user any privacy. Neither private browsing mode nor SSL will give the user any privacy from google, which is the real concern. You still log searches and IP addresses for an extremely long time. One solution that actually does solve this is to use Scroogle or to access google through Tor. EDIT: I feel that i should clarify that of course SSL is a ver…

"Your recommendation is hilarious because it still does not give the user any privacy."

I'm a big believer in prioritizing actual issues over perceived issues. Using SSL search prevents bosses, ISPs, and governments from sniffing your queries, and I consider those to be the largest threats to your privacy. Some ISPs sell their customers' query data and surfing patterns, for example. In contrast, when the Department of Justice tried to subpoena two months worth of user queries, Google resisted that challenge and won in court. Having worked at Google for 11+ years, I know that my colleagues care a great deal about our users' trust and privacy and work to protect it with features like SSL search, two-factor authentication, warnings when sites might be hacked or hosting malware, etc.

If you're that worried about Google, don't use it, but if you still want Google results but with as much anonymization as possible, I would choose Tor+incognito-Chromium instead of Scroogle for your searches.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#142

Post by glassx »

yanw wrote: post #35

Shame on DDG for endorsing this nonsense. I understand the quest for a larger userbase but please don't use this sort of FUD that is being peddled by those who don't understand the technical aspects of search and are trying to sell their books. A search engine's prime function is to filter the millions of results for each query down to the most relevant results for each individual user, and never the same 10 results…

Maybe we don't want a filter that sucks, plain and simple? Whether the filter sucks or not is completely subjective, but it sucks for me, so there.

Changing the language not that intuitive in Google, it's a drag. I have to do it all the time when I clean my cookies, and sometimes I still get crappy "pt.wikipedia.org" results on top instead of "en.wikipedia.org" just because my browser isn't in english and I don't want to change it just because of Google.

I might want to type www.google.it and search for Berlusconi news in Italia, but it won't let me, because it just show me brazilian news. So yeah, I can't even get to another bubble.

Also, apparently Google filters by IP, since searching via Tor or a VPS renders very different results. I dislike this for personal reasons because it breaks the internet for me.

Also, I might not like the fact that Google collects stuff about my search habits, which is also a valid concern.

So, there, it's an issue for me. Might be an edge case, might be an exception, but I think that I deserve to know why this happens and the alternatives.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#143

Post by Matt_Cutts »

jannes wrote: post #140
Matt_Cutts wrote: post #103

If I had to tackle the notion of over-personalization in ~5 minutes, I'd say: - If someone prefers to search Google without personalization, add "&pws=0" (the "pws" stands for "personalized web search") to the end of the Google search url to turn it off, or use the incognito version of Chrome. Personalization tends to be a nice relevance improvement overall, but it doesn't trigger that much--when it launched, the imp…

I agree, I don't believe that over-personalization is an issue. (As I already said in another comment.) But here's why some people probably don't like personalization: It's invisible. There is nothing on the results page that tells you whether your results are personalized or not. Sure, you can look at whether the browser is in incognito mode or you can look for some parameter in the URL, but these things require tha…

"But here's why some people probably don't like personalization: It's invisible. There is nothing on the results page that tells you whether your results are personalized or not."

Sorry, this is just not the case: we do provide indication on Google's search results page for personalized results. Here's a couple links that talk about how we surface whether results have been personalized: http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/answer.py?answer... is our support page and http://searchengineland.com/google-now-notifies-of-search-cu... is an article on Search Engine Land from 2008 when we started surfacing information on how results were personalized.

Here's a simple demo. Do a search in Chrome incognito mode and go to the bottom of the page. You won't see a link that says "View customizations." Now do a search in regular Chrome and check for that link. When I did a search for [matt cutts] in regular Chrome, I saw the "View customizations" link, clicking the link gives this message:

"Search customization details: matt cutts

When possible, Google will customize your search results based on location and/or recent search activity. Additionally, when you're signed in to your Google Account, you may see even more relevant, useful results based on your web history. The following information was used to improve your search results for matt cutts:

Web HistoryOne or more items in your Web History were used to improve search results. Manage Web History Remove Web History from my Google Account If you're curious, you can see what a search for matt cutts looks like without these improvements. The 'More details' link on your search results page can be used to display this page for approximately 30 minutes, after which it will no longer show this page."

In other words, not only can you tell whether a search results page was personalized, you can click a link right on the search results to see exactly what criteria were used to personalize the results. And that page has a clear link to run the search again without personalization.

As I mentioned before, personalization is typically a minor effect in Google's search results and it's almost always an improvement. But for people who are worried about potential "over-personalization," we do provide easy ways to see when a search was personalized, why it was personalized, and do the search again without personalization.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#144

Post by _zeo8 »

I don't like the direction Google is taking with Search. My view of "improvement" is very different from Google's view. I have the feeling that the more features they add to Search the worst the service gets. I miss the old simple Google Search. I think there is a big oportunity here for another search engine focused on: simplicity, speed, relevance (algorythm) and unfiltered. Back to basics.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#145

Post by Matt_Cutts »

nextparadigms wrote: post #138
Matt_Cutts wrote: post #103

If I had to tackle the notion of over-personalization in ~5 minutes, I'd say: - If someone prefers to search Google without personalization, add "&pws=0" (the "pws" stands for "personalized web search") to the end of the Google search url to turn it off, or use the incognito version of Chrome. Personalization tends to be a nice relevance improvement overall, but it doesn't trigger that much--when it launched, the imp…

I don't want to jump so many hoops just to do one damn search. Personally, I hate the country specific personalization, and perhaps it's useful to most people in my country rather than showing more US results, but I'm really not interested in those types of results myself. I wish I could just check a box in my Preferences and then be able to see the universal search results. I know I can use /ncr at the end, but I'd…

"I want to see the best results, period - not the best results for me"

But aren't you a part of the relevance equation? The ideal results for a search like [bitcoin crash] should be different for a Japanese-speaking searcher in Tokyo vs. a German-speaking searcher in Munich vs. a bitcoin expert vs. a programmer trying to diagnose why compiling bitcoin is crashing vs. my Mom who has never heard of bitcoin before, right?

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#146

Post by elehack »

yanw wrote: post #3

This assumes that 'filter bubble' is something more than a nonsense term. There is little difference between personalization and the relevance of search results. How would you go about ranking then? alphabetically?! it's a matter of tuning the relevance 'dials' and it's all in early stages so a solution to this imaginary problems is more research and not to create bullshit terminology in order to sell some books.

There is a major difference between personalization and "pure" relevance, at least as used here. However, it is more of a question of inputs than actual terms.

"Pure" relevance is solely a function of the query and the document - R(q,d).

Personalization involves the user and possibly the context - R(q,d,u,x). Now, if you consider the user and their context to be part of the query, then yes, it's the same thing as relevance.

So the real question: should the user's identity/history/profile and/or current context be considered a part of the relevance function or not? DDG says no, Google says yes.

Thinking of it in this way makes the real question clearer. Unfortunately, it will probably make little sense to most Real Users.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#147

Post by assemble »

nextparadigms wrote: post #138
Matt_Cutts wrote: post #103

If I had to tackle the notion of over-personalization in ~5 minutes, I'd say: - If someone prefers to search Google without personalization, add "&pws=0" (the "pws" stands for "personalized web search") to the end of the Google search url to turn it off, or use the incognito version of Chrome. Personalization tends to be a nice relevance improvement overall, but it doesn't trigger that much--when it launched, the imp…

I don't want to jump so many hoops just to do one damn search. Personally, I hate the country specific personalization, and perhaps it's useful to most people in my country rather than showing more US results, but I'm really not interested in those types of results myself. I wish I could just check a box in my Preferences and then be able to see the universal search results. I know I can use /ncr at the end, but I'd…

Just add a new search engine with the special url and make it the default as opposed to the pre-baked search engines.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#148

Post by jannes »

Matt_Cutts wrote: post #143
jannes wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I don't believe that over-personalization is an issue. (As I already said in another comment.) But here's why some people probably don't like personalization: It's invisible. There is nothing on the results page that tells you whether your results are personalized or not. Sure, you can look at whether the browser is in incognito mode or you can look for some parameter in the URL, but these things require tha…

"But here's why some people probably don't like personalization: It's invisible. There is nothing on the results page that tells you whether your results are personalized or not." Sorry, this is just not the case: we do provide indication on Google's search results page for personalized results. Here's a couple links that talk about how we surface whether results have been personalized: http://www.google.com/support/…

Thank you for the clarification. This comes as a surprise to me. I did not know that.

In my defense, I couldn't know about the "View customizations" link because I do have web history turned off, so apparently I never saw any personalized search results. After reading the DuckDuckGo page I expected that everyone's search results get personalized, especially if I am logged in with a Gmail account.

It's obviously not your fault that I didn't know about that, but, on the other hand, you can never expect from a user to know the contents of any help page. Clicking on "help" links is not what most users do. (imagine smiley face here, I don't dare to do that on Hacker News)

Additionally, I think that the "View customizations" link is a bit misleading, because usually customizations (in terms of software) are not automatic. At least I would expect that customizations are something that I do.

Also, the link seems to be placed at the bottom of the page, which means that 99% of the users are probably blind for it. (I can't verify where it is actually placed, because I don't see it.)

After all, I am thankful for the great search results that Google offers. Thank you for your hard work.

Re: DuckDuckGo: Escape your search engine filter bubble

#150

Post by sambe »

Matt_Cutts wrote: post #145
nextparadigms wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to jump so many hoops just to do one damn search. Personally, I hate the country specific personalization, and perhaps it's useful to most people in my country rather than showing more US results, but I'm really not interested in those types of results myself. I wish I could just check a box in my Preferences and then be able to see the universal search results. I know I can use /ncr at the end, but I'd…

"I want to see the best results, period - not the best results for me" But aren't you a part of the relevance equation? The ideal results for a search like [bitcoin crash] should be different for a Japanese-speaking searcher in Tokyo vs. a German-speaking searcher in Munich vs. a bitcoin expert vs. a programmer trying to diagnose why compiling bitcoin is crashing vs. my Mom who has never heard of bitcoin before, righ…

But why on earth do you persistently try to present German search results to an English speaker in Munich? This has been peeve #1 for years, across all Google services.
Post reply on HN