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

Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

namepros.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 435 posts

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#361

Post by zaat »

ahmedalsudani wrote: post #286
jaysonelliot wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finally, someone will actually mean to type "ducking," and it won't just be autocorrect.

I envy anybody whose autocorrect suggests swearing. For me it’s a constant battle of teaching and reteaching it the different manners of expressing passion and frustration. That’s the one thing I liked about Google’s keyboard on Android: that you could enable “sailor-mouth mode”. They called it something boring though like “Suggest profane words”.

On less used languages their filtering doesn't work. I tried writing "she was rubbing her eyes" and the only suggestion I got after typing "she was rubbing" was clit, even after writing the sentence multiple time, clit was the only suggestion.

I never wrote she was rubbing her clit on my phone. I swear.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#362

Post by MattSayar »

1001101 wrote: post #40
bad_user wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest I've never noticed the filter bubble everybody is talking about with Google. They can infer a lot from context, like city or previous searches, however that's primarily helping users, because coming up with precise search queries is not something that normal people can do and even power users like us fail at it. I have been using DuckDuckGo because I'm making health related queries and I'm pretty scared…

> To be honest I've never noticed the filter bubble everybody is talking about with Google. Filter bubbles are personalized, so YMMV.

True, but I've often switched back and forth between Personal Results and Global Results and rarely see a difference.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#363

Post by kowdermeister »

ConfusedDog wrote: post #86

I do feel like DuckDuckGo is too long to type. That's a barrier for me. Rebranding to just Duck might be a good thing, but why "duck" ... not my favorite animal, or why animal at all...

That would be D+Enter if you indeed use it regularly. Add it yo your bookmark bar => no typing :)

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#364

Post by Gatsky »

TheKarateKid wrote: post #325
johnfn wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive? Apple was on the brink of bankruptcy and MS pushed them off it. Conversely, DDG is nowhere near bankruptcy and although it may be easier to type, a shorter domain name is not going to drastically increase the competitive edge that DDG has over google. To me they seem in totally different categories.

> Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive? A company single-handedly helping to save a direct competitor defies all business logic and obligations to shareholders of that company. The truth is this was a business move to benefit Microsoft, even though it had a benevolent factor to it. Thinking otherwise is overly optimistic, similar to how you believe it being a classic exa…

DuckDuckGo is hardly a competitor to Google. I struggle to think of some future scenario where Alphabet looks back and thinks "Damn, we never should have given DDG that domain name, it was all down hill from there!". No antitrust investigation is going to believe that this small action makes any difference to Google's total dominance of search.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#365

Post by tejado »

azatris wrote: post #204

I wish everyone used DDG for the sake of privacy, but I cannot. It just doesn't give me answers that I am expecting. It reads my mind less than Google and that's a problem.

Same for me. DDG is my preferred search engine but it just don't give me such good results as google so I often searching a second time with google and directly getting much better/expected results...

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#366

Post by jonas21 »

r3bl wrote: post #240
ealhad wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially considering there is .rs

Two-letter TLDs are country codes. R epublic of S erbia isn't that big of a stretch, especially since it's relatively new (2008) and there are already so many that follow .s* pattern. Unless you create a new country, .go ain't happening. That being said, Montenegro scored a freaking gold mine with .me.

> Montenegro scored a freaking gold mine with .me.

Also Tuvalu, which gets 10% of its total government revenue from selling .tv domains [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.tv

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#367

Post by Rebelgecko »

wildmusings wrote: post #136
freeflight wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To be honest I've never noticed the filter bubble everybody is talking about with Google. It's extremely obvious/bad when you try Googling some old article about an topic, often political, that has recently regained popularity. You can try adding all kinds of words from the headline, certain terms will always lead to the results being dominated with "current news", like with Russia/Ukraine or more recently with Chi…

You can specify a date range in Google btw. You click “tools” and then it will present a date option.

Unfortunately on mobile you can only use the date ranges that Google suggests (last hour, day, week, month, or year). Which is unfortunate since half the time I want to filter by date it's so I can exclude recent results.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#368

Post by jhall1468 »

Gatsky wrote: post #364
TheKarateKid wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is this not just a classic example of HN looking for the negative in every positive? A company single-handedly helping to save a direct competitor defies all business logic and obligations to shareholders of that company. The truth is this was a business move to benefit Microsoft, even though it had a benevolent factor to it. Thinking otherwise is overly optimistic, similar to how you believe it being a classic exa…

DuckDuckGo is hardly a competitor to Google. I struggle to think of some future scenario where Alphabet looks back and thinks "Damn, we never should have given DDG that domain name, it was all down hill from there!". No antitrust investigation is going to believe that this small action makes any difference to Google's total dominance of search.

There is nothing illegal about a monopoly. A monopoly that uses it's position to prevent competition is illegal. Giving DDG a very valuable domain name (given their name) absolutely does what you're saying it doesn't.

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#369

Post by zem »

nickjj wrote: post #151
electrograv wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, rather than saying “Google it” maybe we can now say “Duck it”.

I can't wait to start saying "Go Duck yourself", and have it meant to be a request / complement to search your own name.

"ducking the issues" would finally be a good thing

Re: Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo

#370

Post by Kiro »

yamann wrote: post #182

reminder that most praise you find about DDG in popular online communities (e.g. HN, Reddit, /g/, etc...) is mostly by their own paid influencers and shills, Weinberg even bragged about it once on Quora and deleted it later. The only question that he cares about: what's his exit number?

Whenever I point out the fact that DDG is using Bing and Yahoo for all their organic results I get downvoted to oblivion, even when I back it up with a link to their own sources page saying exactly that. Very peculiar.
Post reply on HN