21–30 of 70 posts
I stopped using Google's search a long time ago because of the monstrous "instant" feature. Sure, you can turn it off, but you have to be signed in to do that. And if you're signed in, you're being very closely monitored. It wasn't that hard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair to DuckDuckGo, I tried your searches and did get useful results. "movies near me" took me to Yahoo! Movies, which showed me theaters near me. I could also search for something like "movies [zip code]". I tried it for a few different zip codes and it always got me the results I wanted, but not always through the same site. For one zip code, it brought up the Fandango page for that area, which had exactly wh…
The author touted DuckDuckGo returning different results as an advantage, so I've been looking for differences between DuckDuckGo and Google, not similarities, and semantic data pulled is the easiest way to show that Google results are more informative faster. After all, if we ignore all the sugar from Google results, and they merely return the same top result, why then would I use DuckDuckGo? I've been fooling with…
I like to run my email on my server, but it’s a significant undertaking and I don’t recommend you do that. I agree with Ben on this point, but don't really understand why things are this way. In looking for a replacement for Google Reader I found a bunch of high quality self hosted options. Similarly, hosting a website on your own server (or one you rent from someone else) is a pretty trivial exercise for anyone that…
If you've ever run a WP site, you're well aware of the number of security fixes (and the insane number of attacks, if the site happens to be semi-popular) that go with it. That's why it's a significant undertaking - the setup is a one-time cost, but fighting to stay as secure as possible is an ongoing nightmare.
[Edit: Not to diss WP here. I think they're doing a great job. It's the general problem of staying up-to-date re: patches]
I like to run my email on my server, but it’s a significant undertaking and I don’t recommend you do that. I agree with Ben on this point, but don't really understand why things are this way. In looking for a replacement for Google Reader I found a bunch of high quality self hosted options. Similarly, hosting a website on your own server (or one you rent from someone else) is a pretty trivial exercise for anyone that…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair to DuckDuckGo, I tried your searches and did get useful results. "movies near me" took me to Yahoo! Movies, which showed me theaters near me. I could also search for something like "movies [zip code]". I tried it for a few different zip codes and it always got me the results I wanted, but not always through the same site. For one zip code, it brought up the Fandango page for that area, which had exactly wh…
The author touted DuckDuckGo returning different results as an advantage, so I've been looking for differences between DuckDuckGo and Google, not similarities, and semantic data pulled is the easiest way to show that Google results are more informative faster. After all, if we ignore all the sugar from Google results, and they merely return the same top result, why then would I use DuckDuckGo? I've been fooling with…
> It’s not an easy thing to do, mostly because old habits die hard, but it is actually very possible. That's a different premise than most people are using. I wouldn't quit Google services because its possible. I would quit Google services if it was personally worth it. And it simply isn't. Not for me and not for the overwhelming majority of internet users. Oddly, he confuses why it might be worth it too. He says at…
To be fair to DuckDuckGo, I tried your searches and did get useful results. "movies near me" took me to Yahoo! Movies, which showed me theaters near me. I could also search for something like "movies [zip code]". I tried it for a few different zip codes and it always got me the results I wanted, but not always through the same site. For one zip code, it brought up the Fandango page for that area, which had exactly wh…
For that search, DuckDuckGo shows an inline calculation: "Conversion result: 1.524 meters". It also includes a link to Wolfram Alpha, but it shows the result inline.
Hmmmm, I suspect that Google, just like Facebook, creates "shadow profiles" on non-members, ie profiles on unique non-member users across a very large part of the internet (G: any site using google analytics, a +1 button, etc; FB: any site with FB like button) As such, escape from Google or FB is near-impossible. You might say: sure, but at least they will not know my identity! Try again. Most US ISPs sell click-stre…
Now that people are learning about how companies use their data in dubious ways (and they can't deny it, only PR-speak it), it's in their best interest to twist the narrative so that people believe that they now have no agency—that everyone is being tracked all the time, and that there's no way to escape that.
Why? Because if you think there's no way around it, you just give up and eventually stop worrying about being tracked and analyzed. Since you no longer care, you give up on blocking tools, and most importantly for them: you give up on trying to find alternative companies that respect your privacy.
Why is anyone under the impression that living sans Google is difficult or unrewarding? I haven't used a single Google product in months (and I use Android.)