331–337 of 337 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is extremely annoying when it’s a pdf or other document that’s set to immediately download; it’s rather tricky to get the actual URL if you want to share it as it won’t ever show up in the address bar.
You can usually right-click the file in the downloads panel of the browser and copy its url.
This is a purely anti-user move. No user gains anything by it, this actually helps phishing sites. Oh, and it happens to help Google's AMP effort, which can now pretend to be the original site even more effectively. Time to get everyone to use Duck Duck Go, and to get rid of those Google CAPTCHAs which are an even bigger data harvesting operation than search.
Side note: For those who tried DDG in the past and were unimpressed I suggest giving it a whirl again. I kind of wrote it off a few years ago and then tried it recently and its pretty good. You may have to modify some search habits. If you enable location tracking they do anonymous localized results (can read about it here: https://help.duckduckgo.com/privacy/anonymous-localized-resu... ) Usually good if you're used…
It's a default with Brave browser, and I've decided to give it a go. That was about a year ago when I first started to use Brave. Back then, some search results were poor, especially localised ones, so I've decided to use Google.
Now it's much better, some results are even better than google where better SEO trumps more relevant results. Also, Brave has this nice feature where typing `:g[search term]` uses google for that one serach term. I use it if am not able to get good results with DDG.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's fair to say DDG (i.e. Bing) is clearly worse than Google, which is a real shame. However, it's still usable and you can resort to google when a search query isn't working.
It's not fair to say that at all. DDG has better results than Google for most has cases, and Bing has better results for just under half of use cases.
Virtually all my searches are resolved by DDG. I should also mention that statistically speaking my searches are not particularly complicated, and many are searching for an article or tidbit I had seen before or something where I pick wikipedia as the result.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I found that DDG is okay for two types of queries: common everyday topics and technical queries. For many other niche topic, it’s not good at all. I use DDG as the default and have been doing so for many years. I still have to add !g every time I search for violin related questions. The results are often just not relevant at all. I think DDG still has a long way to grow to be a 100% replacement for Google outside the…
Regarding technical queries, they consistently return links to the python 2 docs, never python 3. What I assume people do is they click on the python 2 docs then change the version on the python website. So, from bings perspective it looks like people want the python 2 links. It always frustrates me and makes looking stuff up longer than needed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding technical queries, they consistently return links to the python 2 docs, never python 3. What I assume people do is they click on the python 2 docs then change the version on the python website. So, from bings perspective it looks like people want the python 2 links. It always frustrates me and makes looking stuff up longer than needed.
There is a very easy workflow remedy for this, if DDG is your default search engine: type "!py [topic]" For example, I tried searching for "python lists" in my address bar (DDG is my default) and I got all sorts of garbage. Next, I typed "!py lists" and the browser immediately opened this page for me: https://docs.python.org/3/search.html?q=lists So that works really nice if what you need is Python's native docs. But…
It's still regular for me but if true this will probably be the last straw for me. It's already absolutely impossible to send someone a link to a pdf you've found through google, this would make it impossible to send any link. That bloody wrapper is also a fine piece of shit. Search engines should link to content, not appropriate that content, hide who supplies it or mess with the links.