Anonymous wrote:I don’t even bother with search engines anymore. I just use grok.

Oh what a great idea, wcgw?

I don’t even bother with search engines anymore. I just use grok.

Ecosia is the best of the independents.

Is DuckDuckGo owned by Google or any other entity?

No, we are not and have never been owned by Google or any other entity. We have been an independent company since our founding in 2008. You may notice content originally from Google, such as YouTube videos, in our search results. Even though Google has a monopoly on access to this content, we are able to get it anonymously via indirect sources. This ensures we still offer quality search results without needing to rely on Google directly for any of it. We also offer an extension for Google Chrome and a Google Android app, but these are not in partnership with Google — and actually aim to protect you from Google’s online trackers.

Anonymous wrote:Google owns duck duck go so don’t care if you switch

Totally 100% False.

You can type “-ai” after your query, but it’s annoying to have to do that every time

Google owns duck duck go so don’t care if you switch

Anonymous wrote:How are your general results (without the AI) on DDG? Relevant?

Useful. Not exactly the identical order as Google, but 90+% the same set of (non-AI) results.

The only Google search that I still use is Google Scholar — but that is only for work while in my university office.

How are your general results (without the AI) on DDG? Relevant?

My one issue with Safari is there is no way to prevent a website from storing data on one’s system. Such data is used by websites to track you, Yes, stored data can be cleared manually in Safari, but its a hassle.

Other than that quirk, Safari really is better about privacy than almost all other browsers.

We have used DuckDuckGo for years for privacy reasons. We also use “Firefox Focus” on our iPhones and iPads - instead of whatever else - for privacy reasons. We almost never get crap search results and we don’t get “tailored ads” relating to any search.

For people not using Apple, either MS Edge or Firefox are much easier to configure for privacy. Edge and Chrome use closely related under-the-hood software. However, Chrome exists basically to exfiltrate and sell your data, and it lacks many of the privacy configuration options available in other browsers.

Funny. I also just switched to duck duck go after the latest update started adding all those unwanted crap on my Google home page… mostly related to AI. I dont like ddg ad much but I got tired of wasting time trying to make my home screen look the way I want only to go thru an update and add all the stuff back and more.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just switched all of my search engines to Duck Duck Go. The Google AI overview has been driving me crazy. Since I couldn’t figure out a way to shut off the overview, I just switched to Duck Duck Go. This feels like a “New Coke” moment. I really don’t get why a room full of people decided that providing information to people that they acknowledge is probably at least partly incorrect is a good strategy. Because so many of my searches included information that I know is incorrect, I realized that I couldn’t trust any of the results— especially when they concern topics that I don’t know enough about to thoroughly assess, and, of course, that defeats the purpose of using a search engine.

First we have “news” that’s really entertainment, now we have “results” — top, front, and center— that are openly inadequate. Back to books. I’m old enough to remember the “Don’t be evil” days. I’m also old enough to remember being skeptical of Wikipedia— which is now quite reliable. Progress?

Wikipedia can be terrible; even one of the founders no longer suggests using it. You still need to be very careful when using it, especially for things that have polarized people. It very seldom covers those issues well. If you want to research the Merovingian dynasty you’re probably safe.

Thanks for the warning. I tend to use it for things like: “Is there a part of Russia that’s not physically attached to the rest of Russia?; “Family tree - British Royal Family”; and “What year did (X ) happen”. So, stuff that is independently verifiable if I (unlikely) decide that it’s important enough to me to do the work. Lol: I’ve never heard of the Merovingian dynasty, so that will probably be one of the next things that I look up.

Anonymous wrote:I just switched all of my search engines to Duck Duck Go. The Google AI overview has been driving me crazy. Since I couldn’t figure out a way to shut off the overview, I just switched to Duck Duck Go. This feels like a “New Coke” moment. I really don’t get why a room full of people decided that providing information to people that they acknowledge is probably at least partly incorrect is a good strategy. Because so many of my searches included information that I know is incorrect, I realized that I couldn’t trust any of the results— especially when they concern topics that I don’t know enough about to thoroughly assess, and, of course, that defeats the purpose of using a search engine.

First we have “news” that’s really entertainment, now we have “results” — top, front, and center— that are openly inadequate. Back to books. I’m old enough to remember the “Don’t be evil” days. I’m also old enough to remember being skeptical of Wikipedia— which is now quite reliable. Progress?

Wikipedia can be terrible; even one of the founders no longer suggests using it. You still need to be very careful when using it, especially for things that have polarized people. It very seldom covers those issues well. If you want to research the Merovingian dynasty you’re probably safe.

I just switched all of my search engines to Duck Duck Go. The Google AI overview has been driving me crazy. Since I couldn’t figure out a way to shut off the overview, I just switched to Duck Duck Go. This feels like a “New Coke” moment. I really don’t get why a room full of people decided that providing information to people that they acknowledge is probably at least partly incorrect is a good strategy. Because so many of my searches included information that I know is incorrect, I realized that I couldn’t trust any of the results— especially when they concern topics that I don’t know enough about to thoroughly assess, and, of course, that defeats the purpose of using a search engine.

First we have “news” that’s really entertainment, now we have “results” — top, front, and center— that are openly inadequate. Back to books. I’m old enough to remember the “Don’t be evil” days. I’m also old enough to remember being skeptical of Wikipedia— which is now quite reliable. Progress?