446

Baker's testimony shows that Mozilla depends so much on its deal with Google for revenue that "the biggest loser of a DOJ win in the Google case would be Mozilla."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

DDG is just Bing on the backend. Why is the megacorp Microsoft preferable to the megacorp Google?

[-] smallaubergine@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

I was under the impression that DDG is pretty private and while underlying search is Bing, bing can't track the searches to individuals

[-] Contend6248@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Maybe not the individual, but you're still training an internet giant, just a different one.

[-] PlexSheep@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

I'd also be fine with Startpage, want, whatever. They have to use something and they can't exactly make some poor selfhosters searing instance the Firefox default

[-] zephr_c@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

That's not really true. It uses multiple sources, including their own search engine, to give results. Basically the only thing they don't include is Google. In practice Bing often produces the majority of the results, but it's not "just Bing on the backend". I mean, DDG is older than Bing after all, so it would be a little weird if they didn't have their own search engine.

Even if it was just a frontend for Bing that wouldn't really be a bad thing. Ecosia is, and that's a pretty good search engine. Being one of millions of users all privately receiving the same anonymized results already makes Bing much less problematic.

[-] kenbw2@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

DDG is older than Bing after all

Bing as a brand, sure. But Bing was just a rebranded Windows Live Search, which was a rebranded MSN Search

[-] zephr_c@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Sure, but nobody seriously thinks Duckduckgo was originally based off Windows Live Search, because it wasn't. Nobody cared about Windows Live Search, because it sucked. They rebranded when it became halfway competent. I don't think the ancient history of Microsoft search engines is really relevant to the point I was making.

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So what if it didn't use Bing at launch? It wasn't privacy-focused then, either. I'm talking about the present, not the past. Even in their own FAQ they acknowledge that results are mostly Bing.

Do you have a response to my point that the data is just going to different megacorp?

[-] zephr_c@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Did you even bother to read most of my post? I literally acknowledged that most of their results are from Bing in it, and also pointed out that I would care if that was actually all they did.

The actual point I was trying to make that you completely ignored is that I care about preventing the harm of information collection, not preventing anyone from learning anything out of pure spite.

I don't trust Microsoft as far as I could throw them, but being one of millions of people sending them information that has been anonymized before they receive it doesn't actually harm anyone, so I don't think it's a bad thing. You can be privacy conscious without being completely paranoid and closed off from the world.

this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
446 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

59414 readers
1121 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS