Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #232988 > unrolled thread

Re: Social-media antipathy (was Re: How i can optimize my

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Re: Social-media antipathy (was Re: How i can optimize my Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@surfnaked.ca> - 2021-03-13 20:30 +0100
    Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2021-03-13 21:50 +0100
      Re: Google vs. DDG Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-13 22:00 +0100
        Re: Google vs. DDG Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2021-03-13 22:30 +0100
        Re: Google vs. DDG <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-13 23:30 +0100
          Re: Google vs. DDG ellanios82 <ellanios82@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 00:10 +0100
            Re: Google vs. DDG Jeremy Ardley <jeremy@ardley.org> - 2021-03-14 00:40 +0100
              Re: Google vs. DDG deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 10:10 +0100
                Re: Google vs. DDG Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2021-03-14 10:20 +0100
                  Re: Google vs. DDG deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 15:00 +0100
                    Re: Google vs. DDG Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2021-03-14 21:50 +0100
            Re: Google vs. DDG Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2021-03-14 00:50 +0100
              Re: Google vs. DDG ellanios82 <ellanios82@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 01:00 +0100
                Re: Google vs. DDG <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-14 10:00 +0100
      Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> - 2021-03-13 22:10 +0100
      Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-13 22:40 +0100
        Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 00:00 +0100
          Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-14 10:10 +0100
            Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 11:00 +0100
              Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-14 11:20 +0100
                Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 12:20 +0100
                  Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-14 12:50 +0100
            Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 14:50 +0100
              Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-14 15:10 +0100
                Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-16 14:50 +0100
                  Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-16 15:10 +0100
                    Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-16 15:50 +0100
                      Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) tomas@tuxteam.de - 2021-03-16 16:10 +0100
                      Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-03-16 21:50 +0100
                        Re: Google vs. DDG ellanios82 <ellanios82@gmail.com> - 2021-03-16 22:10 +0100
                        Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-16 22:50 +0100
                          Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-03-17 00:20 +0100
                        Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) ghe2001 <ghe2001@protonmail.com> - 2021-03-16 23:30 +0100
                          Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-03-17 00:20 +0100
                            Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-17 09:20 +0100
                    Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-04-28 17:10 +0200
                      Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) tomas@tuxteam.de - 2021-04-28 17:40 +0200
                      Re: Google vs. DDG Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-04-28 17:50 +0200
                        Re: Google vs. DDG <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-04-28 18:10 +0200
                        Re: Google vs. DDG Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-04-28 18:10 +0200
                          Re: Google vs. DDG Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-04-28 18:30 +0200
                            Re: Google vs. DDG Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-04-28 18:50 +0200
                              Re: Google vs. DDG Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-04-28 22:00 +0200
                      Re: Google vs. DDG <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-04-28 18:20 +0200
                      Re: Google vs. DDG Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-04-28 18:50 +0200
                      Re: Google vs. DDG Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-04-28 20:10 +0200
                      Re: Google vs. DDG davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2021-04-28 22:00 +0200
                      Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) riveravaldez <riveravaldezmail@gmail.com> - 2021-04-29 02:00 +0200
                        Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Yitzhak Grossman <ygrossman@gmx.com> - 2021-04-29 04:30 +0200
                          Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-04-29 09:30 +0200
                            Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-04-29 16:10 +0200
                              Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-04-29 17:10 +0200
                      Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-05-02 13:00 +0200
                        Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2021-05-02 13:30 +0200
                          Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Eike Lantzsch ZP6CGE <zp6cge@gmx.net> - 2021-05-02 14:00 +0200
                          Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-05-02 14:10 +0200
                            Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-05-02 18:00 +0200
                              Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-05-02 18:20 +0200
                        Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-05-02 14:30 +0200
                          Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2021-05-02 14:50 +0200
                            Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-05-02 15:20 +0200
                              Re: Google vs. DDG Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-05-02 15:30 +0200
                        Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2021-05-02 14:30 +0200
                          Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy) Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2021-05-02 16:00 +0200
                        Re: Google vs. DDG Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-05-02 15:10 +0200
                          Re: Google vs. DDG <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-05-02 15:20 +0200
                          Re: Google vs. DDG deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-05-02 17:50 +0200
                            Re: Google vs. DDG Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-05-02 20:20 +0200

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#233038 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Du, 14 mar 21, 11:11:25, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 11:58:32AM +0200, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > 
> > With DDG I can easily specify whether I want "local" results and for 
> > which country.
> 
> Ruoghly yes, but what I was aiming at is slightly more subtle.

And I was adding another use case ;)

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233045 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 01:16:02PM +0200, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Du, 14 mar 21, 11:11:25, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 11:58:32AM +0200, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > > 
> > > With DDG I can easily specify whether I want "local" results and for 
> > > which country.
> > 
> > Ruoghly yes, but what I was aiming at is slightly more subtle.
> 
> And I was adding another use case ;)

Thanks, got it now.

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233053 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> This is nonsense. "The best" without any context is just meaningless.
> 

Come on, you yourself write below why.

> Let me put an example: a friend of mine is doing biological research
> (mRNA and that kind of stuff).
> 
> She relies totally on Google to keep the research papers she's reading
> in order. Whenever she needs a paper, Google is the entry point. One
> or two words, and presto, the paper she needs is whithin the first
> three hits.
> 
> Once she was working at home and tried the same. No luck. Cooking recipes,
> whatever you want, no bio research papers.
> 
> I think by now every avid reader will have an idea of what's going on.
> The whole fuzzball of metadata you share with Google (your IP address,
> your browser version, the whole compost heap of cookies, browser metrics
> prior search history with Google and affiliates -- all of that kaboodle
> is part of your search query, without you knowing it.
> 

Exactly - this is the best in case you want to get advantage of the metadata
collected.
I am not expert on Google, but AFAIR you better use your account - this way
it doesn't matter what is the IP.
The IP would matter if you are not logged in.

> If you /want/ to get back part of that control, you have to understand
> that. When you search with DDG, you have to ask yourself: "since they
> don't know, how can I narrow the search context?".
> 
> After a while, this becomes second nature, and DDG results start being
> more or less as good as Google's.
> 
> I know because I tried.

Me too - doing the same - but as you say "more or less as good as
Google's" - it is not as good, because of the metadata.

Now, I wouldn't even think of using DDG, if I was not suspecting Google
abusing privacy. Here DDG comes very handy.
Everything that has to do with technical stuff - goes through Google. The
stuff is neutral. The rest through DDG.
I guess in Google's eyes I will be becoming a geek soon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233056 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 02:47:23PM +0100, deloptes wrote:
> tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> 
> > This is nonsense. "The best" without any context is just meaningless.
> > 
> 
> Come on, you yourself write below why.

[...]

> Me too - doing the same - but as you say "more or less as good as
> Google's" - it is not as good, because of the metadata.

Again, context. If you learn to provide the necessary context (e.g.
by adding in disambiguating search terms, etc.), your DDG results
will be as satisfactory as those with Google.

Bonus point: you learn something in the process, instead of Google
learning something "for you".

> Now, I wouldn't even think of using DDG, if I was not suspecting Google
> abusing privacy. Here DDG comes very handy.
> Everything that has to do with technical stuff - goes through Google. The
> stuff is neutral. The rest through DDG.
> I guess in Google's eyes I will be becoming a geek soon

To each his/her own. After a transition period (where I double-checked
the results with google.ca [1]), I didn't miss Google anymore -- technical
or not.

Cheers

[1] Funnily enough, it's the only one which didn't redirect me to
   my local language, based on (possibly) my IP geolocation. Perhaps
   some canadian local law, I don't know.

 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233152 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 15:05:44 +0100
<tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 02:47:23PM +0100, deloptes wrote:
> > tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > 
> > > This is nonsense. "The best" without any context is just meaningless.
> > > 
> > 
> > Come on, you yourself write below why.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Me too - doing the same - but as you say "more or less as good as
> > Google's" - it is not as good, because of the metadata.
> 
> Again, context. If you learn to provide the necessary context (e.g.
> by adding in disambiguating search terms, etc.), your DDG results
> will be as satisfactory as those with Google.
> 
> Bonus point: you learn something in the process, instead of Google
> learning something "for you".

You've been making some very interesting points here about the key
being context, but I'm not sure I totally buy it. DDG simply doesn't
work well for me in certain areas of interest to me. Perhaps I'm simply
not sufficiently skilled at disambiguation (my "DDG fu" needs
improvement?), but I'm simply much less productive with DDG than with
Google. And I do usually access Google without being logged in, with
most cookies blocked, NoScript, etc., so in general it has much less
(not zero, of course) "context" with regard to me than it does in
general.

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233153 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 09:46:53AM -0400, Celejar wrote:

[...]

> You've been making some very interesting points here about the key
> being context, but I'm not sure I totally buy it. DDG simply doesn't
> work well for me in certain areas of interest to me. Perhaps I'm simply
> not sufficiently skilled at disambiguation (my "DDG fu" needs
> improvement?), but I'm simply much less productive with DDG than with
> Google. And I do usually access Google without being logged in, with
> most cookies blocked, NoScript, etc., so in general it has much less
> (not zero, of course) "context" with regard to me than it does in
> general.

Hm. Good point. Of course, Google has a lot more resources than DDG.
My hypothesis is that the advantage from that is rather marginal and
that they get most of their advantage from search context. Of course,
I may be wrong (as nearly always ;-)

Could you give an example where DDG fails and Google succeeds?

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233154 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:02:19 +0100
<tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 09:46:53AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > You've been making some very interesting points here about the key
> > being context, but I'm not sure I totally buy it. DDG simply doesn't
> > work well for me in certain areas of interest to me. Perhaps I'm simply
> > not sufficiently skilled at disambiguation (my "DDG fu" needs
> > improvement?), but I'm simply much less productive with DDG than with
> > Google. And I do usually access Google without being logged in, with
> > most cookies blocked, NoScript, etc., so in general it has much less
> > (not zero, of course) "context" with regard to me than it does in
> > general.
> 
> Hm. Good point. Of course, Google has a lot more resources than DDG.
> My hypothesis is that the advantage from that is rather marginal and
> that they get most of their advantage from search context. Of course,
> I may be wrong (as nearly always ;-)

It's certainly hard to know how the search engine black boxes really
work inside, but it's also possible that all the money / engineers that
Google has to throw at the problem of search actually add value to its
solutions ;)

> Could you give an example where DDG fails and Google succeeds?

I'll keep an eye out. My primary issue was with certain foreign language
content - and not one of the top thirty on this list:

https://www.vistawide.com/languages/top_30_languages.htm

I just checked my browser settings, and I discovered that somehow my
privacy settings have slipped and gotten much laxer. I've just
corrected that, though, so we'll see how things go going forward.

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233155 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 10:49:10AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:02:19 +0100
> <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 09:46:53AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > > [...] And I do usually access Google without being logged in, with
> > > most cookies blocked, NoScript, etc., so in general it has much less
> > > (not zero, of course) "context" with regard to me than it does in
> > > general.
> > 
> > Hm. Good point [...]

> It's certainly hard to know how the search engine black boxes really
> work inside, but it's also possible that all the money / engineers that
> Google has to throw at the problem of search actually add value to its
> solutions ;)
> 
> > Could you give an example where DDG fails and Google succeeds?
> 
> I'll keep an eye out. My primary issue was with certain foreign language
> content - and not one of the top thirty on this list:
> 
> https://www.vistawide.com/languages/top_30_languages.htm

I see. Unfortunately, all the languages I know a bit about are
in there :-(

> I just checked my browser settings, and I discovered that somehow my
> privacy settings have slipped and gotten much laxer. I've just
> corrected that, though, so we'll see how things go going forward.

Browsers do that. They are like this :-/

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233158 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

Celejar wrote:

>> Hm. Good point. Of course, Google has a lot more resources than DDG.
>> My hypothesis is that the advantage from that is rather marginal and
>> that they get most of their advantage from search context. Of course,
>> I may be wrong (as nearly always ;-)
> 
> It's certainly hard to know how the search engine black boxes really
> work inside, but it's also possible that all the money / engineers that
> Google has to throw at the problem of search actually add value to its
> solutions ;)

It is not only resources, it is the algorithm and the personal data in
question. They link and rate and provide (personalized) results. This way
it is unlikely two different persons searching the same string would get
same results.
This was in the beginning. Then it became business and now it is political
and I am not sure anymore if this is exactly what I want, but as said
technical stuff is more or less neutral and in this case acceptable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233159 — Re: Google vs. DDG

On 3/16/21 10:42 PM, deloptes wrote:
> It is not only resources, it is the algorithm and the personal data in question


  - today's news included reference to "privacy labels" :


"DuckDuckGo uses App Store privacy labels to call out Google for 
‘spying’ on users"


  <https://9to5mac.com/2021/03/15/duckduckgo-google-app-store-privacy/>


.....

  regards

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233161 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:42:48 +0100
deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> wrote:

> Celejar wrote:
> 
> >> Hm. Good point. Of course, Google has a lot more resources than
> >> DDG. My hypothesis is that the advantage from that is rather
> >> marginal and that they get most of their advantage from search
> >> context. Of course, I may be wrong (as nearly always ;-)  
> > 
> > It's certainly hard to know how the search engine black boxes really
> > work inside, but it's also possible that all the money / engineers
> > that Google has to throw at the problem of search actually add
> > value to its solutions ;)  
> 
> It is not only resources, it is the algorithm and the personal data in
> question. They link and rate and provide (personalized) results. This
> way it is unlikely two different persons searching the same string
> would get same results.
> This was in the beginning. Then it became business and now it is
> political and I am not sure anymore if this is exactly what I want,
> but as said technical stuff is more or less neutral and in this case
> acceptable.
> 

It may not be long before vendors are ranked or even excluded according
to their virtue-signalling activities rather than their products.

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233163 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

Joe wrote:

> It may not be long before vendors are ranked or even excluded according
> to their virtue-signalling activities rather than their products.

Yes, I also think this might be the next step ... cause no one is biting on
the adds anyway and there are also too many people trying to manipulate
Googles ranking.

There are some "trust" initiatives and hopefully one of them will succeed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233162 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256



‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 2:42 PM, deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> wrote:

> This was in the beginning. Then it became business and now it is political
> and I am not sure anymore if this is exactly what I want, but as said
> technical stuff is more or less neutral and in this case acceptable.

How about DDG as the default, and Google when necessary.

And when hitting Google, use TorBrowser -- when I was using Gmail, they thought I was a Windows box in Paris.  Suck info to your heart's content.  And sell it to FaceBook.

--
Glenn English


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: ProtonMail

wsBzBAEBCAAGBQJgUS/yACEJEJ/XhjGCrIwyFiEELKJzD0JScCVjQA2Xn9eG
MYKsjDIBYQf8CLCcMjXJvpHygJDqvVhDceDqqBaLQugCU+CG97QmYwigjs+z
meGrU+iCsXKf0WIv6ISUJinzb+0e7EpEUo72LjehLw3RiTyrl3gdVEfA1BdI
/0tjcr/lg4lGiCKdcq8jenRzct7AfLvdJ0xURvwOHSCgWavgKgMePudCugM0
XGxq4/KqG2XZaNpFOvVo5Slzzhwm+bf7jPWBCyjL7GgjGB1CPu7J6CemD6ZZ
P7sih/2zCYEtZNHa8qCugim7kiSVBNtf/RjD1Az3PAE//V1rgxlYXV7nCmVa
6xi3kcWnFyh1URz3zXmEkeY6ar/bxlPm3GWxkzvOrrfppyNoKwmrWw==
=yfvs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233164 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

ghe2001 wrote:

> How about DDG as the default, and Google when necessary.

yes - this is the present setting here

Things I found yesterday in Google, I can not find today and DDG anyway :)

I guess Google has already lost track of the data and may be algorithm long
time ago, but it's still working better.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#233167 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 12:09:54AM +0100, deloptes wrote:

[...]

> Things I found yesterday in Google, I can not find today and DDG anyway :)

Pics or it didn't happen ;-)

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#234576 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:02:19 +0100
<tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 09:46:53AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > You've been making some very interesting points here about the key
> > being context, but I'm not sure I totally buy it. DDG simply doesn't
> > work well for me in certain areas of interest to me. Perhaps I'm simply
> > not sufficiently skilled at disambiguation (my "DDG fu" needs
> > improvement?), but I'm simply much less productive with DDG than with
> > Google. And I do usually access Google without being logged in, with
> > most cookies blocked, NoScript, etc., so in general it has much less
> > (not zero, of course) "context" with regard to me than it does in
> > general.
> 
> Hm. Good point. Of course, Google has a lot more resources than DDG.
> My hypothesis is that the advantage from that is rather marginal and
> that they get most of their advantage from search context. Of course,
> I may be wrong (as nearly always ;-)
> 
> Could you give an example where DDG fails and Google succeeds?

Here's a sort of example I just ran into. When trying to find
information about Thetis hardware security keys, DDG simply couldn't
find the company's website: searching DDG for "thetis key" turns up (in
the first page of hits) a bunch of Amazon listings, and a bunch of
reviews of, and articles about, security keys that mention Thetis.
Searching for the same thing on Google, OTOH, returns the company's
website (https://thetis.io) as the first hit (along with a convenient
list of pages on the site).

At least, this is what I get here. Who knows what you'll see ...

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#234577 — Re: Google vs. DDG (was: Social-media antipathy)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 11:05:54AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:02:19 +0100
> <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:

[...]

> > Could you give an example where DDG fails and Google succeeds?
> 
> Here's a sort of example I just ran into. When trying to find
> information about Thetis hardware security keys, DDG simply couldn't
> find the company's website: searching DDG for "thetis key" turns up (in
> the first page of hits) a bunch of Amazon listings, and a bunch of
> reviews of, and articles about, security keys that mention Thetis.
> Searching for the same thing on Google, OTOH, returns the company's
> website (https://thetis.io) as the first hit (along with a convenient
> list of pages on the site).
> 
> At least, this is what I get here. Who knows what you'll see ...

Interesting example indeed. Thanks

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#234578 — Re: Google vs. DDG

> Here's a sort of example I just ran into. When trying to find
> information about Thetis hardware security keys, DDG simply couldn't
> find the company's website: searching DDG for "thetis key" turns up (in
> the first page of hits) a bunch of Amazon listings, and a bunch of
> reviews of, and articles about, security keys that mention Thetis.
> Searching for the same thing on Google, OTOH, returns the company's
> website (https://thetis.io) as the first hit (along with a convenient
> list of pages on the site).

FWIW, I'm pretty sure that such anectodal evidence is of no importance
because you can also come up with examples where the situation
is reversed.

This is simply because the subset of the internet that is indexed by the
two search engines is not simply in a subset relation.  So the question
is not whether such things happen, but how often they happen for your
use-case one way compared to how it happens for your use-case the
other way.

And of course this question is only relevant as one of the properties
distinguishing the two search engines.  Obviously, the purpose of DDG is
not to give better search results.

BTW, as far as I know, DDB doesn't do its own indexing but it relies
internally on Bing, so in the above is explained by the difference
between Bing and Google.  Technically they could probably just as
well rely on Google (or on both).


        Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#234579 — Re: Google vs. DDG

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 11:45:59AM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > Here's a sort of example I just ran into [...]

> FWIW, I'm pretty sure that such anectodal evidence is of no importance
> because you can also come up with examples where the situation
> is reversed.

Still it might tell us something by "backscatter" :)

For example, I forced now DDG's hand by doing some "foo site:blah.blah".
Tomorrow I'll check again and see whether that site is in the index.

> This is simply because the subset of the internet that is indexed by the
> two search engines is not simply in a subset relation.  So the question
> is not whether such things happen, but how often they happen for your
> use-case one way compared to how it happens for your use-case the
> other way.

Yes, of course. Nobody can index the whole Internet these days ;-)

> BTW, as far as I know, DDB doesn't do its own indexing but it relies
> internally on Bing, so in the above is explained by the difference
> between Bing and Google.  Technically they could probably just as
> well rely on Google (or on both).

They do have an own crawler [1]. No idea of how much it contributes
to their data set, though.

Cheers

[1] https://help.duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/duckduckbot/

 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#234580 — Re: Google vs. DDG

On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 11:45:59 -0400
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:

> > Here's a sort of example I just ran into. When trying to find
> > information about Thetis hardware security keys, DDG simply couldn't
> > find the company's website: searching DDG for "thetis key" turns up (in
> > the first page of hits) a bunch of Amazon listings, and a bunch of
> > reviews of, and articles about, security keys that mention Thetis.
> > Searching for the same thing on Google, OTOH, returns the company's
> > website (https://thetis.io) as the first hit (along with a convenient
> > list of pages on the site).
> 
> FWIW, I'm pretty sure that such anectodal evidence is of no importance
> because you can also come up with examples where the situation
> is reversed.

Can you? I'm interested in examples of such cases.

> This is simply because the subset of the internet that is indexed by the
> two search engines is not simply in a subset relation.  So the question
> is not whether such things happen, but how often they happen for your
> use-case one way compared to how it happens for your use-case the
> other way.
> 
> And of course this question is only relevant as one of the properties
> distinguishing the two search engines.  Obviously, the purpose of DDG is
> not to give better search results.
> 
> BTW, as far as I know, DDB doesn't do its own indexing but it relies
> internally on Bing, so in the above is explained by the difference

Incorrect (or at least outdated):

DuckDuckGo gets its results from over four hundred sources. These
include hundreds of vertical sources delivering niche Instant Answers,
DuckDuckBot (our crawler) and crowd-sourced sites (like Wikipedia,
stored in our answer indexes). We also of course have more traditional
links in the search results, which we also source from multiple
partners, though most commonly from Bing (and none from Google).

https://help.duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/sources/

> between Bing and Google.  Technically they could probably just as
> well rely on Google (or on both).

FWIW, Bing doesn't find the Thetis homepage either, so that supports
your point.

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web