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

Indonesia bans search engine DuckDuckGo on gambling, pornography concerns

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–37 of 37 posts

Re: Indonesia bans search engine DuckDuckGo on gambling, pornography concerns

#31

Post by nunobrito »

elashri wrote: post #30
nunobrito wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't. For that scenario you 1) download the code, 2) verify yourself what is inside and then 3) compile. (optional 4) Subsequent versions check on the delta of changes. There is a cost to your time/effort in performing this type of action that is proportional to the criticality of your context and the level of trust you place on the providers. TLDR: The less you trust, the more you verify

To deploy it I think you mean on a vps. Now all your searches by Searx will be routed to other engines with the IP of your vps. So unless you deploy it with something like gluten to provide VPN access for searx. You will let those engines build profile about you. If you use the public instances so that more people are using it you don't know if they are running the unmodified source code. Id you go with the route of…

That comment is simply ludicrous.

You display enough technical pro-efficiency on the topic but then you try to compare as equivalent the usage of SearX or DDG, ignoring that only one of them has the source code available for review. If you are affiliated to DDG, please disclose openly.

If you honestly are _THAT_ worried about IP tracking on the server level, then you would run SearX inside your local machine with Tor or any VPN of your choice. Simple.

Otherwise you'd just pick an online instance from https://searx.space/

But I wonder if we are having a non-affiliated conversation.

Re: Indonesia bans search engine DuckDuckGo on gambling, pornography concerns

#32

Post by Yawrehto »

jacooper wrote: post #24
suggestion wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you recommend instead?

startpage.com is good, but light on features. brave search offers the best features, however its independent index has its limits.

I sometimes use Startpage if I need a proxy for something or to get around paywalls, as it has an 'anonymous view' for all links.

Re: Indonesia bans search engine DuckDuckGo on gambling, pornography concerns

#33

Post by Chrontius »

wanderingstan wrote: post #2

I checked out a WiFi hotspot from a library recently and was surprised to find that they blocked DDG. (Was less surprised to see they blocked Reddit.) Isn’t it just using the Bing API?

Man, I wouldn't even stop to think that they blocked a search engine, I'd just think that their hotspot was broken.

Well, I guess by my standards, it IS broken.

Re: Indonesia bans search engine DuckDuckGo on gambling, pornography concerns

#34

Post by gregw2 »

mock-possum wrote: post #28
stubish wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both. Most religions consider gambling immoral because it leads to social harm. You need to favor personal freedoms and personal responsibility more to justify taxing gambling rather than banning it. Or acknowledging that prohibition may cause more social harm than not. But only more secular governments get to allow harmful vices for the greater good.

“Only more secular governments get to allow harmful vices for the greater good.” I hadn’t really thought about it before, but yeah, that’s naturally the way it goes.

I think a wise secularist may see greater good in less gambling. Not every secularist is a libertarian in their tradeoffs of "what is good" for people. There is usually some reason vices are squashed that is not religious in nature; take the China society's approach to various vices for example.

Re: Indonesia bans search engine DuckDuckGo on gambling, pornography concerns

#35

Post by rldjbpin »

nunobrito wrote: post #23
suggestion wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you recommend instead?

SearX You can install/run from your own server, or just use a public version like this one here: https://metasearx.com/ Source code is available for verification. You can host yourself or choose from multiple domains to access.

> SearX

it uses combination of search results from other public services. if you self-host, your instance helps make these services single out the searcher (if not used by lots of unrelated people).

did not go through the code but if you use a public instance, it might be possible to do similar level of logging at instance-level what we accuse the search giants for. might be through some opt-out debugging feature or what have you.

at the end you place trust on a third party directly or not.

Re: Indonesia bans search engine DuckDuckGo on gambling, pornography concerns

#36

Post by ycombinatrix »

nunobrito wrote: post #31
elashri wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To deploy it I think you mean on a vps. Now all your searches by Searx will be routed to other engines with the IP of your vps. So unless you deploy it with something like gluten to provide VPN access for searx. You will let those engines build profile about you. If you use the public instances so that more people are using it you don't know if they are running the unmodified source code. Id you go with the route of…

That comment is simply ludicrous. You display enough technical pro-efficiency on the topic but then you try to compare as equivalent the usage of SearX or DDG, ignoring that only one of them has the source code available for review. If you are affiliated to DDG, please disclose openly. If you honestly are _THAT_ worried about IP tracking on the server level, then you would run SearX inside your local machine with Tor…

>pro-efficiency

proficiency?

Re: Indonesia bans search engine DuckDuckGo on gambling, pornography concerns

#37

Post by anewhnaccount3 »

stubish wrote: post #12
anewhnaccount3 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could be a way to launder money into other countries?

Laundering by definition requires spending to look legal. So no.

Laundering requires earnings to look legal.
Post reply on HN