Let’s DuckDuckGOOOOOOO!
For now.
DDG gets search results from Bing, owned by Microsoft. And I wouldn’t be surprised if the later did the same as Google did.
That’s technically true, but it’s as misleading as saying they get their search results from Yandex. Their results are aggregated from several search engines, not just Bing. They also have their own web crawler, DuckDuckBot, which absolutely respects RobotRules.
Edit: I’m told my information is out of date. No more Yandex because of Uncle Sam. Yahoo is just Bing now, so that index doesn’t count anymore. The bulk of the rest of their sources are largely inconsequential specialized search engines. Their sources page states that they “largely source from Bing”.
Fair point.
Where is your evidence for that? It used to be Bing and Yandex, but now it’s just Bing. They use other non search engine APIs and do a small amount of crawling AFAIK. Details of who uses what here: https://seirdy.one/posts/2021/03/10/search-engines-with-own-indexes/
I read it on their sources page at some point, but it looks like that page has changed since last I looked.
There’s an article from this spring’s 2600 magazine that claims it’s all Bing results. I haven’t dug through their Python code and I’m definitely no expert anyway, but I’d also prefer not to post an article from a small independent magazine like that to let the people on Lemmy who do know more than me take a look.
We’re at a point where not only should the Internet be classified as a utility, so should Search.
Yeah, it’s not just e.g. water that is the utility, pipes and pumping stations are part of it. Otherwise you have water…uh…somewhere, go get it yourself.
Oh look, more anticompetitive shenanigans.
Break Google up. Bring the full force of antitrust down on them.
Anything else is an unmitigated disaster waiting to happen.
Been on ddg for a few months now. Doesnt look like i need to go back either
Ddg are shit too, search a name and they will relate it you locally even if you turn off regional results.
Click a link and go back to results and they have changed.
Ddg is enshittifying.
Well it gets me here and to .ml so i cant complain
I found ecosia faster and better results. Just letting you know in case you want to try
I would try it but its tied to microsloths bing for results
Isn’t DDG also tied to Bing? I could be mistaken.
Dont think so. Havent examined the code though
Just looked it up to confirm. From DuckDuckGo’s page on the topic:
Most of our search result pages feature one or more Instant Answers. To deliver Instant Answers on specific topics, DuckDuckGo leverages many sources, including specialized sources like Sportradar and crowd-sourced sites like Wikipedia. We also maintain our own crawler (DuckDuckBot) and many indexes to support our results. Of course, we have more traditional links and images in our search results too, which we largely source from Bing. Our focus is synthesizing all these sources to create a superior search experience.
Edit: That said, I’d rather use DDG than Bing because DDG eats Bing’s tracking for me, as I understand it.
O well. Its just not possible get totally away from the big dogs
Bing’s results are superior to Google these days ime. Has been for a good while too.
So how do I actually opt out? My website is just some personal hobby stuff on wordpress that only friends and family look at, I don’t need seo.
You should put these entries into your robots.txt file.
To block the Google search crawler use for all of your site:
User-agent: Googlebot
Disallow: /
To block the Google AI crawler use:
User-agent: Google-Advanced
Disallow: /
You rock, thank you!
What if I made a static site using Github pages hosting? Will having a robots.txt in my root folder ward off Google bhoots (devils)?
Yes.
If I say no and revoke my consent, and they do it anyway …
Can you afford enough lawyers to prove it?
Justice is the original pay to win game. Seems its out of our budget though.
We do really need to figure how to make some kind of decentralized search engine.
Some discussion on that here: https://lemmy.world/comment/11859761
I hope it happens one day, but that’s an almost insurmountable task given the scale.
Take the entirety of the fediverse, and it’s entire history, and you’re probably talking a days worth of search engine indexing compute & storage.
The scale is large and the fediverse is incredibly small. Keeping my fingers crossed, but definitely not holding my breath.
In the meantime, I’ll use Kagi.
I’ve switched from DuckDuckGo to Ghostery Private search. I’ve been happier with the results than DDG.
I’m using SEARXNG. It’s a search engine aggrigate and you can mix and match where you want your results to come from. It’s like using Google from a decade ago.
Interesting. That seems a fairly heavy duty search and possibly more than most users would want to go about installing. But it’s something to keep in mind if needed.
There are hosted versions you can just use without installing at home.
I’m going to bookmark that and give them a try.
I remember discovering MetaCrawler in the 90s (before Google was even founded) and it quickly became the go-to search engine because its aggregate results were superior to any of the other options at the time. I don’t think its source mix was tunable, but that sounds like appropriate progress for 30 years.
Nice thanks for this
Google is genuinely bad now. I switched to Ecosia which is just Bing with a simpler front end and they use their profits to plant trees. I don’t think Ecosia is particularly special though. Duck Duck Go, Bing whatever, they’re all better than Google.
Whenever I set up a new computer then search for something, I’m always surprised at first seeing the awful layout and quality of the search results before I realize that I haven’t changed the default search from Google. It’s awful now. Seriously, how are people using it?
My new favorite way to search is perplexity.ai. It’s an AI search tool that summarizes the loads of crap out there so you don’t need to read through the junk that people write. It provides sources, unlike using ChatGPT, which is incredibly valuable. All AIs make shit up, so having links to double check it is a must. Unlike Bing Chat, or whatever Microsoft calls it this week, you can ask follow up questions to home in on what you want.
Google: “Making AI helpful for everyone…” (…mostly us!)
As I understand it, this is only about using search results for summaries. If it’s just that and links to the source, I think it’s OK. What would be absolutely unacceptable is to use the web in general as training data for text and image generation (=write me a story about topic XY).
If it’s just that and links to the source, I think it’s OK.
No one will click on the source, which means the only visitor to your site is Googlebot.
What would be absolutely unacceptable is to use the web in general as training data for text and image generation.
This has already happened and continues to happen.
No one will click on the source, which means the only visitor to your site is Googlebot.
That was the argument with the text snippets from news sources. Publishers successfully lobbied for laws to be passed in many countries that required search engine operators to pay fees. It backfired when Google removed the snippets from news sources that demanded fees from Google. Their visitors dropped by a massive amount, 90% or so, because those results were less attractive to Google users to click on than the nicer results with a snippet and a thumbnail. So “No one will click on the source” has already been disproven 10 or so years ago when the snippet issue was current. All those publishers have entered a free of charge licensing agreement with Google and the laws are still in place. So Google is fine, upstart search engines are not because those cannot pressure the publishers into free deals.
This has already happened and continues to happen.
With Gemini?
The context is not the same. A snippet is incomplete and often lacking important details. It’s minimally tailored to your query unlike a response generated by an LLM. The obvious extension to this is conversational search, where clarification and additional detail still doesn’t require you to click on any sources; you simply ask follow up questions.
With Gemini?
Yes. How do you think the Gemini model understands language in the first place?
The context is not the same.
It’s not the same but it’s similar enough when, as the article states, it is solely about short summaries. The article may be wrong, Google may be outright lying, maybe, maybe, maybe.
Google, as by far the web’s largest ad provider, has a business incentive to direct users towards the web sites, so the website operators have to pay Google money. Maybe I’m missing something but I just don’t see the business sense in Google not doing that and so far I don’t see anything approximating convincing arguments.
Yes. How do you think the Gemini model understands language in the first place?
Licensed and public domain content, of which there is plenty, maybe even content specifically created by Google to train the data. “the Gemini model understands language” in itself hardly is proof of any wrongdoing. I don’t claim to have perfect knowledge or memory, so it’s certainly possible that I missed more specific evidence but “the Gemini model understands language” by itself definitively is not.
I’m not sure of the advantages of showing up in Google search results. It seems like something that I wouldn’t want to happen anyway.
