i got bored from using Google. i like trying new products so i'll go with DDG until i get bored from it.
Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
161–170 of 198 posts
Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
#162I really like that google isn't anonymous and that it pulls everything that I've done in the past to give me better results. I usually have to jump through a lot of hoops to get the same level of results from DDG.
Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. The default of the major search engines is we type in what we're looking for and usually get results. The commenter had a different experience with DuckDuckGo enough times to avoid it. We immediately know it gets inferior results to the status quo search engines. Many will avoid it on that basis. Other commenters might show up with detailed information on what kinds of queries succeed or fail. People wanting…
1) Users do not know how to tell a good search engine from a bad one. There has been a lot of research on this, and it has been shown in many different ways. Here is one paper that is ranked highly by google scholar. It shows users cannot reliably tell a good result ordering from a bad one -- the result presentation is more important than the ordering. Other research has used more sophisticated techniques than "ask t…
> Users do not know how to tell a good search engine from a bad one.
I am sure there is a presentation bias. I am sure that there are plenty of cases where a user cannot tell if a set of results are good or bad for a specific query. I am sure some users have trouble communicating why they think a specific result is good or bad.
However can people tell the general quality of a search engine? Absolutely. Google's simple aesthetics certainly helped them, but they didn't become the top search engine by luck and aesthetics alone. AltaVista, Yahoo, Lycos, Excite were all junk compared to Google, even the first version. It was very obvious.
Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. The default of the major search engines is we type in what we're looking for and usually get results. The commenter had a different experience with DuckDuckGo enough times to avoid it. We immediately know it gets inferior results to the status quo search engines. Many will avoid it on that basis. Other commenters might show up with detailed information on what kinds of queries succeed or fail. People wanting…
1) Users do not know how to tell a good search engine from a bad one. There has been a lot of research on this, and it has been shown in many different ways. Here is one paper that is ranked highly by google scholar. It shows users cannot reliably tell a good result ordering from a bad one -- the result presentation is more important than the ordering. Other research has used more sophisticated techniques than "ask t…
1. Ill look at the scholarly results later out of curiosity. So far, the "found what Im looking for metric" is very strong anecdotally with widespread acceptance. Maybe Ill change my mind. We'll reject all opinions on the effectiveness of the engine in favor of whole, search histories on DDG and Google with terms and resulting HTML files as sole form of feedback in HN comments. Each user will do it for same terms for reproducibility or countering per-user generation biases. We'll discuss these specifics. This will lead, instead of claimed "good" or "bad" results, to claims of X terms or Y category having Z probability of accuracy or acceptance. Our discussion of DDG will be objective, scientifically accurate, possibly free QA for DDG, and likely be ignored by almost everyone everywhere (including most HN readers) outside CompSci or startups studying search engines. Im game, though, if there's a consensus here that we only discuss search constructively, objectively, and scholarly. ;)
2. DDG has contact info. I maintain that it's better to send data directly to them if one is troubleshooting it or helping them improve the product. Hoping a random employee is on same tech forum is a stretch despite it happening here more often than average. So, if we all did search data, we'd post it on a dedicated forum they host after we email them about the project.
Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
#165I use DuckDuck go as my default search on my machines, but I think the fact that Google is not anonymous does give them a big advantage. An obvious example of this is when I search for "Django" (I am primarily a Django developer). DuckDuckGo will return results about the film as the top hits, whereas Google already knows that I mean Django Web Framework and will return those as the top hits. I appreciate the fact tha…
No doubt Google has great search results. (Many people just give up privacy because they're so much better.) Solution: Use StartPage for private Google search results. I also like that StartPage has a proxy option so I can visit webpages anonymously.
Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
#166> Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often I am at a loss to understand really why 'us' should start doing this 'more often'. Is there something inherently good about using ddg vs. google? Why should anyone use it more vs. what they have already decided works best for them? This smacks of 'make the world a better place by using ddg' unfortunately as many others have noted it's simply not a better mouse trap. And what…
I agree. We should all use private search more often. If you need Google search results, just use StartPage.
Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is always a way to show that a search engine is bad with constructive feedback rather than just replying it's "shitty". At least, the OP could have elaborated on why does he thinks this way so that everyone could understand why DDG's results are "shitty". Unfortunately, no one can know what the OP thinks. As a result, it is hurting the work of others without any feedback so that they can improve themselves (i.e…
Alright. I even agree for most comments albeit less for this one. Let's try it your way so the feedback is specific, constructive, inclusive to audiences unfamiliar with grading search, and not profane. Here's my similar experience using the DuckDuckGo, search service after being a long-time user of the Google, search service. 1. I type search terms in text form into Google in an attempt to get a list of results that…
Thank you for the long response. I have done similar comparisons dozens of times, but only using search terms that duck duck go performs poorly on, and have had the opposite experience (this is a much harder test for ddg to pass than what you describe, making your comment more surprising).
What search terms are you using? Ideally, could you provide some searches that perform poorly on ddg, but well if you prepend g! to the term (which runs an anonymized google search)?
If the difference always comes down to google search personalization (so you can't provide a search others can repeat), that would also be interesting to know.
Here is the only query I ran in 2016 (so far) where ddg's results convinced me to use google, and then I found my answer on google:
drmSetMaster permission denied
The correct answer is to install xorg-server-legacy, and edit Xwrapper. I was looking for the now incorrect answer about setting some X binary setuid root. Both search engines provide lots of very out-of-date results, so I filtered ddg on setuid about half way through my search there.
Calling this query a "win" for google is questionable, but it is their top performer for me in the last year. Also the page with the answer does contain the string setuid.
Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
#168Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
#169> I'm getting a feeling that some day in future, DDG is going to become as big as Google, if not supersede it. Well, no, they don't even have their own search engine. > a search engine's results are only as accurate as the number of users who search and contribute to it That makes no sense. Anyway, we don't use DDG because its results are shitty.
> Well, no, they don't even have their own search engine. Really? I've never heard this, do you have anymore information about it?
I think DuckDuckGo mainly uses Yahoo. There was an article recently that said they've got a major new partnership with Yahoo and now use mostly the Yahoo search results and advertising. I'll see if I can find it.
Here. I just found the link to one of the blogs I follow for search. Looks like DuckDuckGo is increasing its use of Yahoo for a big partnership:
http://arnoldit.com/wordpress/2016/12/13/duckduckgo-makes-se...
Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
1) Users do not know how to tell a good search engine from a bad one. There has been a lot of research on this, and it has been shown in many different ways. Here is one paper that is ranked highly by google scholar. It shows users cannot reliably tell a good result ordering from a bad one -- the result presentation is more important than the ordering. Other research has used more sophisticated techniques than "ask t…
> Users do not know how to tell a good search engine from a bad one. I am sure there is a presentation bias. I am sure that there are plenty of cases where a user cannot tell if a set of results are good or bad for a specific query. I am sure some users have trouble communicating why they think a specific result is good or bad. However can people tell the general quality of a search engine? Absolutely. Google's simpl…
I totally agree that google blew its competitors out of the water in the 90's. I switched to Google literally ten seconds after running my first query!
The research I'm citing is from the late 00's. At this point in the game, differences in search relevance are in the measurement noise.