311–320 of 761 posts
We face a number of challenges simply letting our paying customers change their search engine: 1. On iOS the list of allowed search engines is simply baked into OS, we have a fiddly extension that hooks outbound calls to /search and redirects them but I wish we didn't need to. 2. On Chrome, we use an extension to change the default search engine and enable search auto-complete etc, but Google has a policy that such a…
On iOS my Safari browser is always in private mode. I never use non-private tabs. Kagi integration via the Safari extension works most of the time - but was broken for several months (required re-logging into Kagi when opening a new private tab after a delay). It looks like you fixed it just a couple of weeks ago, so I appreciate that.
I am raising this just so you are aware of this use case - always staying in private mode.
(The fact that iOS doesn't allow setting the default search provider in Safari to anything other than half a dozen of pre-selected partners is abysmal.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sending a hash seems pointless because I assume sites would salt/pepper the password before hashing so the hashes are different. Or maybe I'm naive about sites following best practices
Google isn't comparing your password to a password inside some other site's server! It's comparing to leaked passwords.
Google didn't payoff the right public sector employees. The Christian and O&G lobbyists were able to buy off politicians and judges to get the right rulings so they can continue to ruin the country (ie, defang regulators so O&G can continue polluting without hurting their bottom line, none to minimal punishment for pushing anti-climate propaganda, pushing "white christian values" to children without consequence, the…
It's not a big conspiracy where everybody is buying judges and politicians.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's because the only way to get on that list at all is to pay Apple (as revealed in this very case).
That's false. Google paid Apple to be the default. There is no reporting whatsoever that there is any other payment to be in the list of alternatives. There is no evidence that Microsoft pays Apple to include Bing in the list of alternatives. So nothing whatsoever like that was revealed in the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I was a government party with subpoena power I'd be really interested in the email chain around that decision.
If you were a government party with subpoena power, you'd think the internet was made of tubes. You'd have no idea how tech works, and only rubber stamp things tech companies provide you. Otherwise, you'd be over qualified and too focused on things other than raising money, kissing babies while stealing their lollipops.
For those with tech knowledge who want to try to change things, I recommend checking out https://www.techcongress.io/, https://horizonpublicservice.org/ (they both have a cohort they're recruiting for right now) and USDS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But your article argues the opposite of your claim. It's not. The article talks about Youtube nailing the final nail in IEs coffin, which it did. As for shoving Chrome down everyone's throats I'm amazed no one remembers the ancient history of just 15 years ago: - showing it on search pages: http://www.webandsay.com/archives/google-is-actively-pushing... - prominently showing it on Youtube: http://googlesystem.blogs…
Fascinating how two people can read the same article and take away two opposite conclusions from it. If anything what Youtube did helped Firefox far more than it helped Chrome, but I suppose from your point of view it's the opposite. Ah well, c'est la vie!
Let's see:
- huge ad banners promoting Chrome
- literally almost singlehandedly killing IE 6.0
- sabotaging Firefox: https://archive.is/tgIH9
This... this is not ancient history. It happened 10-15 years ago. Unless you're very young, and I've fallen under the curse of the old age:
--- start quote ---
One disorienting thing about getting older that nobody tells you about is how weird it feels to get a really passionate, extremely wrong lecture from a much younger person about verifiable historical events you can personally remember pretty well
--- end quote ---
That's why we are developing an alternative to big web search comapanies with our community based search engine at https://beta.mwmbl.org (main site is currently a bit slow due to dev upgrades). Feel free to join our Matrix.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So what's going to happen? Apple might make their own search engine. Apple has a team that's been creating a next-generation search engine codenamed Pegasus under John Giannandrea. They already have search engines for App Store, Maps, Apple TV and News and Spotlight. Apple web search development worked as bargaining chip in pricing negotiations with Google. Google paid them $20 billion per year to not compete as mu…
If apple wanted to or thought they could make a profitable search engine, wouldn't they have already done it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are we supposing that Google made their payment conditional on obfuscating the ability to switch search engines?
This is one of those "a wink is as good as a nod to a blind person" situations so that plausible deniability is maintained while getting the desired results