>>52296771 >startpage, which gives you the same exact results as google
It doesn't though. It claims to, but try actually searching via both for a few things. Whatever Google is serving up to them, it's not the same as you get by going direct. Lots of results are plain missing.
Quick example attached. There are more missing just down the page too.
>>52296840 yes, that's the point. ddg fags often say, they use ddg for their 'bangs', which is basically the keyword search, but all the traffic gets routed through ddgs us based servers. many people don't know that ff and chrome have this functionality built in, i posted the picture so the bangsfags don't even start mentioning this shit.
>>52296941 No they don't, you fucking retard. It'd take you less time to go confirm that I'm right for yourself and come back with your tail between your legs than to keep making yourself look like a moron.
But hey, just for you, I downloaded a browser that I've never used before AND changed my VPN to a different country, just to make sure I'm not being magically tracked by Google.
Oh look, the same results. I guess they're tracking me via the camera they have in my room and are serving up personalised results based off of that. :^)
>>52297284 Yeah right, not buying it. You just don't want to use any alternatives because you're too used to Google, which you've grown to 'hate' over the years due to peer pressure on /g/. DuckDuckGo, Ixquick and Startpage give plenty of good search results, but you're just too stubborn to change and try to reason your way out of it.
>>52297355 Yeah, sure. I can also edit documents in wordpad, but it's not comparable to MS word.
The alternatives are inferior. There is no point in arguing against it. They perform worse, plain and clear. The only argument against google is the harvesting of information, but when I search for something, its more important I get the best results, not some stupid neckbeard principles on privacy which are broken by ISPs and whatever else get their hands on your data.
>>52297420 >The alternatives are inferior. There is no point in arguing against it. They perform worse, plain and clear. There is, because this assertion lacks an *argument*. You haven't pointed towards anything that would suggest their search results are inferior.
>The only argument against google is the harvesting of information, but when I search for something, its more important I get the best results, not some stupid neckbeard principles on privacy which are broken by ISPs and whatever else get their hands on your data. Privacy is closely related but a separate discussion and it isn't pertinent to this discussion concerning search engines and their results. Besides, it's not like there aren't any anonymising networks.
>>52297429 Yours is. Telemetry != botnet. Look up the definition.
>>52297433 It's exactly the opposite. The more people use it, the more anonymous it would be, because at this point it's still too pseudonymous due to a lack of general usage by the public.
Anyone else noticed how bold Google's results had become? For example >look for a problem, say playstation problem or brand review >always results to online shops or price offers This wasnt like that before
>>52297809 Let me cite: http://etherrag.blogspot.de/2013/07/duck-duck-go-illusion-of-privacy.html?m=1
>Every provider needs to be upfront >with saying, “If it is indeed true that >the NSA is monitoring our ingress/>egress traffic, we can make no >guarantee of privacy regardless of >encryption or other efforts on our >part.” > >In the larger picture, this is the crux >of the problem not just for >DuckDuckGo, but the internet as a >whole.Until and unless agencies like >the NSA are forbidden from >conducting dragnet collection and >analysis of data, there can be no >privacy. Privacy is merely an illusion >at this point.
>>52298331 >The search results are shitty. Assertion needs an argument. >All I need is anonymous google search. startpage and ixquick are shit too. This is exactly what Startpage is, matey. >and from what sources DDG are pulling search results anyway? RTFM https://duck.co/help/results/sources
>>52298486 I'm not https://startpage.com/uk/aboutstartpage/?&hmb=1 > When you search with StartPage the Web results are generated by Google. This offers you the search results and search features you may have grown accustomed to.
>>52297433 Are you fucking retarded? If more people use tor, it means more nodes for the NSA to compromise which makes traffic more secure. Also, with more users using tor, its harder for these "three letter agencies" to label people and compromise them just because of using le tor pedo browser
>>52298485 Of course there is. Like the feminist who claims your protest against privilege checking and calls for the castration aren't a protest of feminism because feminism is about equality, you are arguing that something which actively takes all your info and sneaks around doing things you didn't tell it to do isn't a botnet because it doesn't fit the dictionary definition of a botnet.
>>52298565 How is feminism related to search engine results? You just can't argue why the search results are inferior and try to reason your way out of it by starting a whole other discussion.
A botnet is a client-server model with malicious intent. Clients are infected, typically without consent of the owner or him being aware of this, which are called zombies and in turn infected other machines while awaiting for commands from the command & control server. This is fundamentally different than you visiting a certain website, because *you* visit the domain and not something else you're infected by.
But again, this is a separate discussion because you *still* haven't pointed towards *anything* why the search results of alternative search engines are 'inferior'.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.