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

Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–198 of 198 posts

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#191

Post by gonhidi »

greenyouse wrote: post #147

Anyone use DDG's grouping search syntax much?[0] I've always wondered if this is something just for bots or if humans actually write out complex searches like that. If you use it how are the results? [0] https://duck.co/help/results/syntax

I often submit equivalent queries when searching using Google. I tend to use OR a lot to specify alternatives to specific keywords (e.g. osx OR "os x" OR macos), though it's a years-old habit often not that important with today's search engines; I sometimes also use it to search sets of domains (e.g. site:w3.org OR site:whatwg.org). In general I feel that when the first few pages of results using a simple query don't get me to what I am looking for, using a more complex expression can unearth hits which I would have otherwise skipped or not reached.

Regarding Duck Duck Go's advanced search syntax, I've use it in a similar fashion, though not as much. Keep in mind that the provided link doesn't seem to reflect the current implementation. For instance, the syntax for grouping using parentheses doesn't seem to be as strict (which is a relief), excluded words are seemingly not limited to being at the end of the search string, and AND has a higher precedence than OR (which is currently a pet peeve of mine because I am used to Google doing it otherwise and I like not having to use parentheses in my usual queries).

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#194

Post by nickpsecurity »

hedora wrote: post #167
nickpsecurity wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!…

Here's one last comparison for you that I just did while looking for FOSS tools for software testing. Difference is stark:

http://pastebin.com/j3v1NfYw

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#195

Post by hedora »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #179
hedora wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!…

"What search terms are you using?" Don't even remember. It was mostly technology, history, academic papers, games, movies, and so on. I'm someone whose good at working around search engines but has a bad memory. I'm unfortunately not a good test case for the input as I get good at unconsciously working around problems to make a better baseline. I did have to regularly switch over to Google, though. "but well if you p…

There was lots of overlap of wrong answers. There were highly ranked correct solutions for older ubuntus from 1H 2016 and 2011-2013, I think. Definitely worst case for search engines.

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#196

Post by hedora »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #194
hedora wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!…

Here's one last comparison for you that I just did while looking for FOSS tools for software testing. Difference is stark: http://pastebin.com/j3v1NfYw

Ah ha! This is down to taste, I think. Google seems to rewrite 'FOSS tools for software testing' to 'Open source tools for software testing'.

Ddg does not. I strongly prefer the ddg behavior. To each their own.

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#197

Post by banterfoil »

I use DDG but only because of the bang system. In other words I can supply a !g anywhere in the query and it will use the encrypted google search. This is also useful when you also use other ones like !yt !fl !gh !r and so forth. But to be honest, I hardly ever actually use the ddg search engine.

Re: Let's start using DuckDuckGo more often

#198

Post by l0b0 »

By far my biggest gripe with Google and DDG is that they have started quite simply ignoring search terms. I search for 'foo bar' (without the quotes), they return results which clearly do not include "bar", neither in the blurb nor on the page itself. At least Google will mostly obey if I quote the search terms, but DDG doesn't even do that.
Post reply on HN