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

DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 341 posts

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#111

Post by xlii »

DanHulton wrote: post #70

I debated bringing up Kagi at the top level here, since I already commented on it in a reply, but honestly I really want them to succeed and shit like this is why. It's a paid search service, and I'm honestly really happy with that distinction and what it entails. Being paid means that they can deliver on and support features that users can use to get the best results for them, without worrying how those features may…

I’ve been using Kagi for multiple months and due to advocacy I made few people pay for it too, but I’m completely disheartened by their business model.

The whole explanation of the recent “we want to stay afloat” was weird, unexpected (price doubling with my usage, to 20$/mo) and felt untrue (ordinary user doing 30 searches per day?). I felt like it was written by Cut-Me-Own-Throat Dibbler - made sense but also very abstract and shifting responsibility to the customer.

In the end I ran stats how many of Kagi results were on spot (i.e. weren’t repeated in other search engines). It was around half, probably ones that I “didn’t pay for”.

I was ready to move back to DDG but an acquaintance recommended Brave search to me (which has its own index). I was reluctant to use it due controversial opinions about them. Not only I found it more pleasant to use, but also the results are (in my opinion) slightly better than Kagis.

Edit: To provide additional context - I was using Kagi as daily driver, and I make 200-500 searches per day (that includes duplicate queries to other search engines)

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#112

Post by helpfulclippy »

wastewastewaste wrote: post #86
colordrops wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are working out the kinks with the pricing scheme You mean being way too expensive? I appreciate them wanting to stay afloat but they need to bring the cost per search down drastically. They are doing something wrong behind the scenes with regards to spend or optimization.

yea, the tool tip says "200 searches is enough for 99% of Internet users", but I doubt their target demographic is the 99% that don't need more.

Just a datapoint, but I feel like I do a lot of searches… I’m always looking stuff up, and I’m also in the habit of using my search engine as a lazy form of autocomplete for urls. I apparently do about 700 searches a month according to Kagi. If I were on the basic plan, I think that would mean I’d be paying $5/mo. + $0.015/search * (700-200) searches/mo. = $12.50/mo.

For what search is worth to me, that seems reasonable. (Or I guess more to the point, how much I value a relationship where I’m the customer, rather than companies expressly interested in using psychological manipulation to influence my behavior…)

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#113

Post by evilotto »

freediver wrote: post #101
remram wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$5/mo for 200 searches, $25/mo for unlimited? Loading more pages count as new search? Does anyone actually pay that? It looks like something a real search engine would post on April 1st.

Search has a cost. You can either pay for your searches and own your results or have someone else, a complete stranger, pay for your searches and have the results be in their best interest. Also check: https://help.kagi.com/kagi/plans/why-pay-for-search.html

I think it was Mark Twain who said about Web 2.0, "In every transaction where money changes hands there is a buyer, a seller, and a product. If you are not the buyer or the seller, then you are the product."

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#114

Post by Semaphor »

deltree7 wrote: post #79
p-e-w wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same people who use such features are also on average - more likely to use ad blockers. - more likely to critically evaluate any advertising/propaganda they encounter. - more likely to use VPNs and other technology that makes them more difficult to track. - more likely to be "power users" of the service, thus consuming more resources than the average user. Many more points like these apply, but the bottom line is…

My site always had the highest CTR for Ads from traffic coming from DuckDuckGo. One of the easiest traffic referral that neatly fits into an advertising bucket. VPNs, privacy tools. You name it. These so called self-proclaimed smart people were trained like a sheeple to buy stuff.

It’s two orders of magnitude behind google for our website, but DDG is actually our 2nd biggest source of SE traffic, in front of bing. So I guess at least in Germany, DDG is doing well.

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#115

Post by srge »

DanHulton wrote: post #70

I debated bringing up Kagi at the top level here, since I already commented on it in a reply, but honestly I really want them to succeed and shit like this is why. It's a paid search service, and I'm honestly really happy with that distinction and what it entails. Being paid means that they can deliver on and support features that users can use to get the best results for them, without worrying how those features may…

I also use Kagi and I can confirm that it’s great. I am using Google now maybe still several times a week and most of the time the results are not even better.

I still think it’s too expensive though and I wish prices would come down.

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#116

Post by throwaway2037 »

geysersam wrote: post #83
colordrops wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are working out the kinks with the pricing scheme You mean being way too expensive? I appreciate them wanting to stay afloat but they need to bring the cost per search down drastically. They are doing something wrong behind the scenes with regards to spend or optimization.

Why do you think their prices are unreasonable? Just curious. 1.5 cents per search doesn't sound expensive, although if you do 100 searches per day that's $45 per month...

45 USD per month is more than what most people in advanced countries pay for their mobile phone service or broadband connection. Frankly, it's crazy to me. Anything more than 10 USD per month for better search is hard to defend. And yes, I know that Kagi is targeting a _very_ picky audience! B2C is a brutal business.

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#117

Post by chillfox »

DanHulton wrote: post #70

I debated bringing up Kagi at the top level here, since I already commented on it in a reply, but honestly I really want them to succeed and shit like this is why. It's a paid search service, and I'm honestly really happy with that distinction and what it entails. Being paid means that they can deliver on and support features that users can use to get the best results for them, without worrying how those features may…

Haven't tried Kagi, but I can highly recommend you.com. It allows quite a bit of customization and has been really solid for the last year+ that I have been using it, I only ever go back to Google for thesaurus/dictionary lookup searches.

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#118

Post by ianstormtaylor »

xlii wrote: post #111
DanHulton wrote: post #70

I debated bringing up Kagi at the top level here, since I already commented on it in a reply, but honestly I really want them to succeed and shit like this is why. It's a paid search service, and I'm honestly really happy with that distinction and what it entails. Being paid means that they can deliver on and support features that users can use to get the best results for them, without worrying how those features may…

I’ve been using Kagi for multiple months and due to advocacy I made few people pay for it too, but I’m completely disheartened by their business model. The whole explanation of the recent “we want to stay afloat” was weird, unexpected (price doubling with my usage, to 20$/mo) and felt untrue (ordinary user doing 30 searches per day?). I felt like it was written by Cut-Me-Own-Throat Dibbler - made sense but also very…

Not saying you're wrong, but they grandfathered me on the $10/mo plan with the new pricing changes, and that would cover your usage. I think on the new plans 30 searches a day would come out to $13/month.

I know it may sound like a lot (and definitely is a lot for some folks), but when I think about it as literally being the window to a huge amount of knowledge I take in, the fact that it's way less than Adobe products, and similar to things like GitHub, Figma, Notion, Airtable, etc. feels pretty reasonable.

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#119

Post by vinc »

palata wrote: post #72
Fabricio20 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

200 searches per month at $5? Holy christ I might do that in a single day! I guess this pricing isn't meant to countries outside of the US.

Have you ever tried counting your searches? You may be surprised. I'm slightly above the 500/month.

Not the OP but I just checked my 3 months history and I'm at 800, 469, and 682 searches on DuckDuckGo and 466, 535, and 482 on Google. I feel like I'm a heavy search engine user and I'd have guessed more than this.

I'm considering paying for Kagi but the price seems a bit high, especially considering that I replaced some of my searches with ChatGPT and I pay much less for using the API of OpenAI. But maybe their API price is not sustainable.

For $5 or $10 per month I'd prefer to self-host a search engine and a language model on a server I own.

Re: DuckDuckGo removed the ability to filter search results

#120

Post by alex_smart »

nickcox wrote: post #88
Svip wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quotation marks work for me: https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=%22lowes+pet+bedding%22&atb... I notice in your HN post, you're using fancy quotation marks; I assume you're not using the same while searching DDG.

Doesn't work for me. Like the GP, I get results unrelated to Lowes, bedding or even pets.

That isn't how the quote feature is supposed to work. I just tried putting the individual keywords in quotes ("lowes" "pet" "bedding") and it works exactly like you would expect.
Post reply on HN