Live data from Hacker News

Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

namepros.com

121–130 of 435 posts

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#125
post #10

No mention of a sale? That seems so strange. I cant think of any other times that a business has given charity to a direct competitor like this.

Is it really a competitor? IMO from the point of Google's view DuckDuckGo is a very small niche service that doesn't really endanger them and they can win a few bonus points with their community.

also some people use bangs [0] like !g !b !yt and other bang's to redirect search another website directly from ddg. (I use this when I do not like the responses and want to check another search engine)

sort of like google giving money to wikipedia, I suspect they do infact collect information on ddg searches and can aggregate it and make something useful from the information. in fact, they can probably infer that ddgs initial response was poor and determine their weaknesses etc

[0] https://duckduckgo.com/bang

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#126
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's a geographic thing? I feel like anyone who grew up in a region where duck, duck goose was a common game for children to play wouldn't be too confused about the name. Not that being confused about the name or disliking it is a bad thing. But I like the name, and it's part of the reason I chose to start using DDG. If they changed it to something more generic, I'd be less likely to keep using it because I'd f…

I’d never heard about the game until I started using DDG, and ducks are definitely a thing in the UK.

Right, that's why I think familiarity with the game might be geographic - it seems like one of those games that's played in some places, but not others.

Or it could also be the case that the same game is played, but with a different name. Tracing the etymology of the name would be pretty interesting. As you mentioned, the game of duck duck goose is unheard of in many places that have plenty of ducks and geese.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#128
post #113
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's a geographic thing? I feel like anyone who grew up in a region where duck, duck goose was a common game for children to play wouldn't be too confused about the name. Not that being confused about the name or disliking it is a bad thing. But I like the name, and it's part of the reason I chose to start using DDG. If they changed it to something more generic, I'd be less likely to keep using it because I'd f…

I'm not a native English speaker and "duck duck go" doesn't evoke anything at all to me. I learned the reference from your comment even though I've been using DDG for years. If they want to expand to non-English speaking countries having a long and somewhat complicated name like "duckduckgo" seems like a liability.

You could certainly be right!

Maybe it is one of those names that could endear your company to a certain audience, but alienate it to a wider audience.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#129
post #123

Technical question: Since DuckDuckGo uses Bing Ads, and Bing Ads have tracking that allow for remarketing, is there a point? advertise.bingads.microsoft.com/en-us/solutions/audience-targeting/universal-event-tracking

Ads on DDG don't use tracking / remarketing, they are only based on your search terms.

See https://duck.co/help/company/advertising-and-affiliates for details.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#130

I'm quite surprised there's no .go tld, I could see it being used quite a lot.

Two-letter TLDs are ccTLDs, and all the existing countries already have their ccTLDs. In order for this to happen, you'd need to have a new country spring into existence that can plausibly be abbreviated to .go, and then they would have to treat it like a faux-generic (like .io) instead of imposing registration/use restrictions as some countries do for their ccTLDs.
Post reply on HN