181–190 of 222 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm on a fresh install of Fedora 36 (KDE Spin) and my Firefox UA is currently showing as "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:103.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/103.0".
cool, so don't switch to chromium. then the internet will know you run fedora.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Recently the National Advertising Division looked into our privacy claims and found them supported, see https://bbbprograms.org/media-center/newsroom/duckduckgo-pri... & https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/privacy-protection/12106... Also a lot of what we do is open source on GitHub. We recently put out a help page detailing or web tracking protections that link to a lot of the relevant repositories: https://help.duc…
Those aren't proper audits. And again, bringing up the fact that it's open source is a meaningless piece of information since there is no way to verify it's the same software code on production. It only serves to trick the average user who doesn't understand how web servers work into trusting your service more. The best thing you could do, if you actually care about privacy and not just $$$, is to open-source the ent…
Easy to self-host? How large do you suppose the Bing index is, for example? Simply storing the index would be an immense undertaking beyond the reach of probably everyone who has ever self-hosted anything, ever. This ignores the compute required to actually search it, as well as how it would get updated.
I'm not sure your request is remotely reasonable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like a Chromium bug, not a Debian bug--it's an insidious way to keep Google search as the default.
Uh, no? This is managed policy, and this is a 100% good way of letting the user know that someone else has control of their settings Just because Debian thinks that they are doing the right thing, they are in fact, controlling the user's settings through a policy It's just telling you that, as it should. The notion that it has anything to do with keeping search the default or not is like, such a silly assumption i do…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know what server-side profiling occurs or does not occur? There is no way to know that. DDG gives people a completely misplaced and false sense of security, when they are just as easily comprimisable/corruptable/subpoenable/susceptible to NSLs, EDRs and secret court orders as any other company. And I disagree with your premise that it's particularly difficult to link a persons IP to their real world identi…
DDG offers a JavaScript-less page. don't trust them use that. don't trust them at all? don't use them?
I’m guessing they’re intentionally degrading the non-Javascript page as an anti-bot measure, but it’s so bad that I find it disingenuous to suggest that the non-Javascript page even a valid alternative at this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those aren't proper audits. And again, bringing up the fact that it's open source is a meaningless piece of information since there is no way to verify it's the same software code on production. It only serves to trick the average user who doesn't understand how web servers work into trusting your service more. The best thing you could do, if you actually care about privacy and not just $$$, is to open-source the ent…
> open-source the entire search index db and accompanying webserver software, making it easy for users to setup their own local instance of DDG which is actually auditable Easy to self-host? How large do you suppose the Bing index is, for example? Simply storing the index would be an immense undertaking beyond the reach of probably everyone who has ever self-hosted anything, ever. This ignores the compute required to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uh, no? This is managed policy, and this is a 100% good way of letting the user know that someone else has control of their settings Just because Debian thinks that they are doing the right thing, they are in fact, controlling the user's settings through a policy It's just telling you that, as it should. The notion that it has anything to do with keeping search the default or not is like, such a silly assumption i do…
The messaging does seem excessive and hostile. It says "Managed by your organization." every time you click the menu button. It's even in a different background color and bigger margins. If you click it, it says "Your administrator can change your browser setup remotely. Activity on this device may also be managed outside of Chromium. Learn more" I made the policy myself and copied it myself. The remote part is purel…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those aren't proper audits. And again, bringing up the fact that it's open source is a meaningless piece of information since there is no way to verify it's the same software code on production. It only serves to trick the average user who doesn't understand how web servers work into trusting your service more. The best thing you could do, if you actually care about privacy and not just $$$, is to open-source the ent…
> open-source the entire search index db and accompanying webserver software, making it easy for users to setup their own local instance of DDG which is actually auditable Easy to self-host? How large do you suppose the Bing index is, for example? Simply storing the index would be an immense undertaking beyond the reach of probably everyone who has ever self-hosted anything, ever. This ignores the compute required to…
Can someone please explain why we are supposed to trust DDG? Isnt it just a random website that popped up out of nowhere claiming to be private yet no audit has ever been conducted which substantiated those claims?
You're not supposed to totally trust DDG, but they are a better default search engine than Google if you care about privacy. - they are less likely to throw a captcha in your face if you connect over VPN - they have less surveillance infrastructure and run less code clientside than Google does - they are at least not explicitly tracking you - they have a lower number of secondary data-points from other services that…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> open-source the entire search index db and accompanying webserver software, making it easy for users to setup their own local instance of DDG which is actually auditable Easy to self-host? How large do you suppose the Bing index is, for example? Simply storing the index would be an immense undertaking beyond the reach of probably everyone who has ever self-hosted anything, ever. This ignores the compute required to…
I was curious, so as a point of comparison, the latest Common Crawl [0] is 3.1 billion pages and 370 TB uncompressed. I would presume that Bing would be significantly larger given commercial interests. [0]: https://commoncrawl.org/connect/blog/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Linux users are probably the worst target market for advertisers. Yes but not for the reason you are imagining. I can think of a few things in common between everyone I've ever known to use Linux for personal use and general consumerism to improve quality of life is not one of them.
That is exactly what I was thinking. I suspect the algorithms in the real time bidding engines put anybody with Linux in their browser signature in a very cheap ad category. The market researches probably concluded that these people continue using $200 computers for years and try to repair things instead of buying new wherever possible.