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

DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 475 posts

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#461

Post by guyzero »

KMag wrote: post #444
guyzero wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon ran A9.com as a search engine from 2004 to 2008. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A9.com#A9.com_search_portal

Yes, A9 was one of the competitors for some of my time at Google, but I'm talking about Amazon basically creating some search engine infrastructure and a framework for building search engines on top of. Selling shovels to the gold miners, in a sense. The crawling and initial indexing stages need a lot of scaling and performance tuning work, which is a core competency for the AWS engineers. Furthermore, essentially ze…

Unfortunately I suspect this would be selling gold shovels to dirt miners and the economics of it are not compelling.

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#462

Post by ColinHayhurst »

darekkay wrote: post #450
ColinHayhurst wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, thanks. Why did you think that? Looks like, at least some, is indexed: https://www.mojeek.com/search?q=darekkay+site%3Adarekkay.com

I've searched just for site:domain (without any specific keyword), which both Google and Bing support.

Thanks for pointing that out. We'll add support for that too.

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#463

Post by account42 »

freediver wrote: post #413
srg0 wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is kagi more private? It requires an account to use, and it’s going to be a paid service. So it always has a strong user ID associated with every query. Whether it is not stored and not processed cannot be verified. It’s the same story about trust.

(Kagi dev here) Being a paid service means Kagi's incentives are different. Instead of selling your data or profiting from feeding into ad-tech food chain, we are interested in selling you a subscription. We do not associate queries with an account, as a matter of fact we do not save queries at all. You are right that this can not be verified, the question you need to ask yourself is what kind of incentive we have fo…

> Being a paid service means Kagi's incentives are different. Instead of selling your data or profiting from feeding into ad-tech food chain, we are interested in selling you a subscription.

Until your growth slows down and you realize you can get away with doing both.

There are so multiple industries (TVs, Games, Streaming) where paid users are still being monetized to the maximum extend possible by showing them ads, selling their data, etc. that this argument is just dishonest now.

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#464

Post by account42 »

fleddr wrote: post #231
throwaway82652 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no political will in the US to change the copyright system. Aside from some technologists, I haven't seen anybody who actually wants that. You will anger basically everyone else in the information business. Writers, researchers, artists, architects, musicians, composers, filmmakers, actors, podcasters, even a lot of software developers, you name it. These people all depend on copyright enforcement to get pai…

Fully agree. "collateral damage" just means...why can't I just consume everything for free, as if it's some human right?

The natural state is that yes, you can share everything since, for things that are intended to be experienced by humans, there are no technical restrictions that do not succumb to the analog hole. So yes, not being able to consume everything for free is collateral damage from copyright and thus to justify copyright you need to demonstrate that their is more gained in return. This is why initial copyright terms were much shorter than they are now - because the deal has always been to encourage the production of more content that then becomes part of the commons, i.e. eventually can be consumed by everyone for free.

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#465

Post by account42 »

mardifoufs wrote: post #302
autoexec wrote: post #51

It's amazing how much collateral damage is caused by our horrible copyright laws. Mostly just so the MPA/RIAA can protect their roles as gatekeepers of what we're allowed to see and hear. They can put enormous pressure on even the wealthiest and most powerful companies to act as copyright police on their behalf. Even Google is afraid of them. ISPs are forced to spend huge amounts of time and money working for them. N…

I mean even Google did not go this far though. So it sounds like DDG is doing more than the strict minimum required by law.

Google also has more resources to fend of lawsuits as well as existing deals with many big copyright holders. The letter of the law is not the only thing that matters, chilling effects are real.

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#466

Post by account42 »

mormegil wrote: post #93
zodzedzi wrote: post #69

I use DDG as my default search engine, along with NoScript in the browser. Often when I visit a new website, I peruse the (long) list of domains that the site is trying to pull javascripts from. I keep most of those source sites in UNTRUSTED status (including some of the big names in search/ads/etc). But I've always had DDG in the TRUSTED category because I had only seen its javascript before on the main DDG website.…

> (Unfortunately NoScript has a limitation that you can't tell it to "only TRUST javascript from example.com when I'm visiting example.com"). uMatrix (which I'm using in desktop Firefox) works exactly like this. Plus it allows you to forbid/allow cookies, styles, images, scripts, media, XHR, and iframes separately (for each origin/domain).

uMatrix really is the best dead extension. I still hope someone will revive or recreate it (or add the same interface to uBlock or one that is just as good).

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#467

Post by account42 »

Havoc wrote: post #244
freedomben wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I run uMatrix and have noticed some DDG showing up on other sites as well. The sites in question appeared to be (at least ostensibly) using it as a "can I reach the internet" sort of check. If I blocked requests, it would say something to the effect of "no connection detected." I wish I could remember which sites they were, but I do remember seeing at least one call to improving.duckduckgo.com from a 3rd party.

Isn't umatrix dead/unsupported since like a year or so ago?

Unsupported, yes but so far there is no adequate replacement and it remains the best we have.

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#468

Post by account42 »

Kiro wrote: post #437
Brian_K_White wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want whatever I say I want. There is no reason for legitimate filtering not to be voluntary, like the default porn filter that you have the option to disable. I still have access to my spam folder, and unsolicited communication is not the same as search results. If I search for something, then I searched for it. I am THE ONLY person who may judge the value of the results. The search engine's job is only to tell me…

Most spam emails do not even reach your spam folder. You wouldn't want to see those purged emails either.

I do want to see those emails. Which is why I run my own mail server where I control what does and does not get rejected. BTW Google and Microsoft do reject or worse, silently drop tons of legitimate mail for such great reasons as the sending server having a bad actor living on the block some time in the past. Mail filtering is a really bad argument why you wouldn't want to see what is hidden from you by the incumbent providers.

Running my own crawler is unfortunately not as realistic.

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#469

Post by account42 »

babypuncher wrote: post #25
Apreche wrote: post #13

Someone should make a search engine that only indexes sites that Google and DuckDuckgo do not index. It would serve sort of the same purpose as like, lists of banned books.

I appreciate the sentiment but such an index would be 99.9% spam, malware, and phishing.

How do you know or are you just assuming that?

Re: DuckDuckGo Removes Pirate Sites and YouTube-DL from Its Search Results

#470

Post by account42 »

rrdharan wrote: post #158
zarzavat wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except that 99.9% of bans at Facebook, Twitter and the like are completely justified Gonna need a big citation on that. One of my Facebook accounts got banned because I accidentally left my VPN on. Whilst I take responsibility for the terrible opsec, the fact is people get banned all the time for doing things that are anti- Facebook rather than anti- social (anti each other). I would definitely use a social network…

Well for starters 99.9% of Facebook users don’t use a VPN.

We aren't talking of 99.9% of Facebook users, we are talking about 99.9% of banned Facebook users - and a VPN is just one thing that can get a non-malicious user banned.
Post reply on HN