161–170 of 261 posts
Thus, however successful DDG will be, at least it will have supported quite a few other projects in its wake.
I have been using DDG for about a year now, although I had tried using it years ago. It works fine for simple queries( e.g. search name of company rather than typing out url). But I basically have !g programmed into my fingers for everything more complicated. Many times when I don't find the results I am looking for, I subconsciously assume that google would be able to find them. This is in comparison to when I canno…
I have been using DDG for about 2 years. While I also have !g programmed into my fingers, I notice that most of the time Google don't give me the result I want / expect so I have actually stopped doing that lately. In fact, many, many times DDG gives me better results than Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I started out doing that, but I've found myself using !g less and less recently. There are two main things I find myself needing it for: Location based queries, Google will always prioritize UK based results, and often London based results for me. The other is technical searches, I'm not sure how much this is due to Google having better search algorithms for this, or just that it has the data to know that I'm a progr…
> There are two main things I find myself needing it for: Location based queries, Google will always prioritize UK based results, and often London based results for me. As I'm German, that's actually where DDG has the advantage over Google. Most of my searches are in English, but sometimes I want to search for something here, with DDG that's just a single press of a button and I get German results. With Google I'd ha…
Not as handy as the DDG location switch, but still a sometimes useful hack.
DDG is getting better with time. I completely switched to DDG about 2 years ago. I tried Google search recently and found its results are less relevant and presented in an awkward form where I cannot copy result's URL (searched for a technical paper). DDG is clear winner.
How do you copy the URL? Neither of them shows direct URL to search results, https://duckduckgo.com/l/?.. . is no better than https://www.google.com/url?.. .
In DuckDuckGo, you do the same search and also get the same top result, but when you copy the link location for that top result you get this: https://news.ycombinator.com/
I have been using DDG for about a year now, although I had tried using it years ago. It works fine for simple queries( e.g. search name of company rather than typing out url). But I basically have !g programmed into my fingers for everything more complicated. Many times when I don't find the results I am looking for, I subconsciously assume that google would be able to find them. This is in comparison to when I canno…
I find that Google is actually losing ground as the all-seeing-eye-reference-objective-truth due to the increasingly tailored searches. I can no longer refer to a search query and expect a peer to see the same results as I do. This social bubble phenomenon, while no doubt convenient, is sometimes a burden, and with their stricter privacy policy DDG actually has some ground to gain here. Using DDG is more like tuning…
It's been decades since you could do that for yourself. It must be something like 20 years ago on Alta Vista that I got burned using search queries as bookmarks and (surprise, surprise) suddenly not being able to find "that page" any more.
I find that DDG is good for about 80% of what I want. But the other 20%, especially dev queries, I muscle memory type in !g. Is there a bang for the type of query answer we are looking for? Such as for 'Ruby gems' I can use !dev so the engine knows to ignore sites like Ruby Gemstone and focus on dev only. I know there is !so and !gh, but I am looking for something that dynamically combines them and other dev resource…
A few months ago I was hacking some Java code (or a java DSL. Something I had never worked in before) and it had these bangs or at-marks in front of some keywords.
It was nearly impossible to search for what it did, since all search engines would ignore those in my query.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you copy the URL? Neither of them shows direct URL to search results, https://duckduckgo.com/l/?.. . is no better than https://www.google.com/url?.. .
In Google - do a search for hackernews. This site is the number one result. Right click on it, copy the link location and this is what is in your clipboard: https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web... In DuckDuckGo, you do the same search and also get the same top result, but when you copy the link location for that top result you get this: https://news.ycombinator.com/
I’m getting https://duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.ycom...
Update: in Firefox I'm indeed getting https://news.ycombinator.com/ But I use MS Edge as primary browser, and for MS Edge, DDG returns me the above redirection URL.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> when I'm on a browser that's google by default Tip: Type ddg.co/somequery in the address field to quickly get back to DuckDuckGo
Tip: ddg.gg may be easier to type.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find that Google is actually losing ground as the all-seeing-eye-reference-objective-truth due to the increasingly tailored searches. I can no longer refer to a search query and expect a peer to see the same results as I do. This social bubble phenomenon, while no doubt convenient, is sometimes a burden, and with their stricter privacy policy DDG actually has some ground to gain here. Using DDG is more like tuning…
> I can no longer refer to a search query and expect a peer to see the same results as I do. It's been decades since you could do that for yourself. It must be something like 20 years ago on Alta Vista that I got burned using search queries as bookmarks and (surprise, surprise) suddenly not being able to find "that page" any more.
I believe the issue OP is addressing is that even given an identical index, two different users might see to entirely different search results, as their individual search history is factored into the query.
I have been using DDG for about a year now, although I had tried using it years ago. It works fine for simple queries( e.g. search name of company rather than typing out url). But I basically have !g programmed into my fingers for everything more complicated. Many times when I don't find the results I am looking for, I subconsciously assume that google would be able to find them. This is in comparison to when I canno…
BTW, those bangs are great anyway! Can't live without !hn, !sr, !a, !w, !@