Earlier quoted context omitted.
and without IPv6 support
What impact does that have?
not sure, but the impact is all on IPv4 apparently
Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
31–40 of 252 posts
Re: Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
#32Re: Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
#33They're actually reasonably good. I often find that they do weird things like linking to non-US versions of websites instead of a US version. So I end up on the British or Dutch version of a website, with prices quoted in GBP or EUR. I find myself using the "!g" shortcut (which takes me to Google) more often than I'd have liked to. Thankfully, Apple offers this as one of their search engine options (despite being pai…
I cant give up DDG cause those shortcuts are just too damn good. !m and !ud
Re: Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course you do not mind. But that means that you have no room for complaint when they delete something that you consider to be "not garbage".
Yes you do. Agreeing with some moderation does not mean you must agree with all moderation.
Calling censorship "moderation" doesn't make it not censorship.
Re: Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
#35I was able to convince my wife to switch for anything remotely "controversial", when, during the pandemic, we caught the relatively "real time" disappearance of several "against the grain" articles about covid [1]. By disappeared, I mean top results for the rough concept one day to not being able to find it, even with the exact title and text, the next. I want a search engine, more than a curated guide. [1] https://w…
[flagged]
[flagged]
Re: Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
#36The bugs around Exact match and text/content (not site!) exclusion operators not working at all are what keeps me from using it as an actual substitute for Google or Bing. I hope that getting that stuff fixed is a high priority. DDG is the default in a lot of privacy-oriented browsers and forks, but it gives users a really bad first impression when their first search just doesn't work. But I suppose that the average…
The bugs around Exact match and exclusion operators not working at all are what keeps me from using it as an actual substitute for Google or Bing.
Duck used to be great for only searching for what you asked for. But in the last few months, it's fallen into the Google trap of showing me things it thinks I want, and not what I asked for. And no method of punctuation seems to get around that.
At this point, the only reason I still use Duck is because the other option is Google.
Re: Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
#37These companies are solely built around the concept of trust. Your average person just doesn't care that Google is tracking them, and will therefore not take the obvious productivity hit by using a service with lower quality results (anything not Google).
I feel like DuckDuckGo has had enough controversy in the trust department that it's entirely worthless as a company and as a service. Anything I do need to actually search these days, I just use Google, as I don't care about Google knowing I needed help with a Golang compiler error. It's not a worthwhile tradeoff for me.
Re: Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Much of the "antivax garbage" turned out to be true. In hindsight, do you still believe that censoring true but inconvenient information is morally acceptable?
[flagged]
Truth is messy. The vaccine is an amazing achievement and saved many lives. Understating the health risks to young men (myocarditis), and overstating the efficacy fed the anti-vaxxers, and was a disservice to science and healthcare.
Re: Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
#39I was using DDG exclusively for over a year. It gives way better results than Google. Recently I switched to Kagi, for its ability to prioritize my favorite sites, and block others. I'm paying $5 a month for it, and I've honestly not been this confident in the search results I'm getting for a long long time.
Re: Advertise on DuckDuckGo Search
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Everyone wants a censor on their side, but they rarely are
In this particular case, it's about wanting information from the people actually researching a subject vs people making stuff for political or business purposes.
Even if researchers are wrong initially, because of lack of data, they are still acting in good faith. Which you can't say for people who are spreading made up or poorly sourced information to make a buck.
Society generally frowns upon allowing people to blatantly lie or act in bad faith order to sell products. While that might be a form of censorship, it's one that society largely benefits from having in place.