Slashdot Mirror
Pro-Privacy Search Engine DuckDuckGo Hits 30 Million Daily Searches, Up 50% In a Year (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Some nice momentum for privacy-focused search engine DuckDuckGo which has just announced it's hit 30 million daily searches a year after reaching 20 million -- a year-on-year increase of 50%. Hitting the first 10 million daily searches took the search engine a full seven years, and then it was another two to get to 20 million. So as growth curves go it must have required patience and a little faith in the run up. It also recently emerged that DDG had quietly picked up $10 million in VC funding, which is only its second tranche of external investment. The company told us this financing would be used to respond to an expanding opportunity for pro-privacy business models, including by tuning its search engine for more local markets and expanding its marketing channels to "have more of a global focus."
On the network I manage, all requests for google.com resolve to duckduckgo.com.
I would have been up for that.
Google's poor results (some due to censorship) are as likely a cause for people seeking other search engines as privacy. I don't seen any indication that DuckDuckGo is above censorship either. We need a flagship open search engine, like a Firefox or a Linux, but for search. Although it does seem like the censors are invading those projects as well.
I love the duckduckgo browser app for my phone!
People don't trust the creepy haters at Google.
Some nice momentum for privacy-focused search engine DuckDuckGo which has just announced it's hit 30 million daily searches a year after reaching 20 million -- a year-on-year increase of 50%.
To provide perspective Google does 1.2 trillion searches per day. Good progress but pretty much a rounding error compared to the big boys.
The company told us this financing would be used to respond to an expanding opportunity for pro-privacy business models, including by tuning its search engine for more local markets and expanding its marketing channels to "have more of a global focus."
Having trouble parsing this sentence. It's so vague as to be effectively meaningless.
I've seen what DuckDuckGo's business model is supposed to be and I'm rather dubious how much it can scale because advertisers and retailers don't generally give a shit about your privacy and in fact your privacy is somewhat at odds with their incentives. Furthermore Google and Bing and the others get all the network effects so advertisers and retailers aren't generally going to flock to a small search engine that isn't going to give them as much data or reach as many potential customers. If DuckDuckGo is really doing what they say they are trying to do I wish them well but it's not going to be an easy battle.
I think more people are getting fed up of Google as a whole, myself included. While I still have gmail and an android phone, I don't use gboard as the default keyboard, I dumped Chrome v69 for Firefox, no longer use Google News since they destroyed the UI and use DuckDuckGo as my primary search engine. I still use Google search for the odd few things, but only a few things DDG struggles with. I now find myself consciously trying to find alternatives to Google's products.
It would be really nice to see an extremely advanced search where you could feed it a list of sites to search or exclude a list of sites from the results. Or maybe even flat out have a check box or something to exclude results from X from now on. Almost like Safe Search.
Google's new "be evil" mantra pissed me off enough, I use it as default, too, only revert to google if I can not find someitng, e.g. obscure open source bits & such.
This is probably a microsoft project to try to get some more search hits. You do know that 90% of all duck duck go searches are run through microsoft servers even when it links to google. This was and always has been a project to get more bing searches. That is why i said it is probably run by microsoft just with a decentrilised management and office. EEE ever heard of it? If your under 35 probably not and you are really really ignorant of microsofts motives and dont really understand tech.
I'm sure this is a troll but 97% or thereabout of corporate media coverage on Trump is negative so... I'd expect any search engine to reflect that whatever that companies particular political affiliation.
As a former Google engineer, I am so happy to hear this. I am currently phasing Google out of every part of my life. The last thing I have, that I don't know if I can ever really get rid of, is my Gmail. That said, most of my personal emails have cut over to another already, and I do everything I can to keep my access to it isolated to avoid giving Google any freebies when it comes to tracking. I am not anti-ad (though I am anti invasive/malicious ad), as ads thanklessly power the free internet that everyone expects that they should be handed for free, but the threat Google and the other massive multinationals pose in terms of censorship, spying, and information control is unforgivable. They should all be regulated as publishers and utilities.
This is a perfect example of the influence of the tech community. Many on Slashdot take a dim view of our ability to impact the wider discussion but we do. It is the small army of people like us who drive things like this. No one would be using DuckDuck without the influence of the privacy aware tech community. Same thing happens with browser choice. I attribute this to word of mouth. Track that shit Facebook.
Just like they will with any alternative to Big Tech.
Did you notice a lot of people in the media are the same tribe as the guys who run Google and Facebook? Weird!
An admission that the corporate media is biased against Trump on slashdot?Interesting.
Unless Duck-Duck-Go releases who has been using the service.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
It was for a publishing house, but live public search. It was half ad robots licensed to crawl the data, but the other half was real integrated live queries from their 1000's of magazine/journal readers and the sites were all A-OK in response. Also, all the 1000's of relevant news silos were guaranteed by my feeder to be live in under 15 minutes. I was the ops guy, it was my architecture, pipeline, etc.. It always amazes me how boring and shit public search still is today.
I love duckduckgo's perl based meta search and I am happy they are profitable, but that is still tiny.
Biased in favour of letting him speak for himself so that any thinking person can see he's incompetent, petty, corrupt, and not really very bright?
That kind of "biased", yes.
Just curious for those who have been using DuckDuckGo - how's the quality of the search results?
Better known as 318230.
If you use a VPN and not the Chrome browser Google search will sometimes do a captcha check where you have to click on all the images of cars or storefronts or crosswalks. Because of this it makes DuckDuckGo the default choice for those users.
You can verify yourself by using Opera on a VPN after you clear Opera's cache and cookies
Calvin:Do you believe in the devil? Hobbes:I'm not sure man needs the help.
This is a good thing.
It is neither a good thing nor a bad thing. What it does tell us is that it is not a popular thing. Increasing a tiny number by 50% is not actually very impressive compared to growing a big number by a smaller percentage. For Apple computer to grow by just 10% next year they will have to generate more business than the entire revenue of eBay over the same period. That is FAR more impressive than DDG growing 50% from close to zero.
I dunno about you, but I much prefer to use less "popular" things in life.
I don't give a shit if something is popular or not. I care if it does what I want/need and provides good value. The only reason I consider something's popularity is to evaluate whether that popularity or lack thereof will cause me problems. For example if a product is unpopular chances are that service and support for it are going to be hard to find in the future. Similarly I sometimes avoid something popular because of excessive crowds or because the popularity of it will cause my needs to be dismissed as unimportant.
I prefer the National Hockey League to the NFL, and DDG to Google, both on it's privacy model, as well as knowing that huge amounts of money drive corruption.
If you prefer the NHL to the NFL because hockey is your particular brand of vodka then that's fine, although calling the NHL unpopular is objectively kind of ridiculous. If you prefer it solely because it is less popular it means you are a hipster. You be you and use what works for you but I am not impressed by anyone who chooses something just because it is popular or explicitly because it is not.
Incompetent? Can you please tell me the level of Unemployment prevailing at this moment?
The media isn't biased against Trump?
You learn something new everyday.
Presidents sign bills Congress passes - or not. They also do some foreign policy stuff and supposedly manage the executive office via the cabinet and a few other things. Nothing that they do really touches unemployment (unless they start a war and institute a draft or increase work to replenish used up weapon stores).
Most of the legislation Trump has signed he provided little constructive help on that any other Republican president couldn't have done better. Mostly his mouth and Twitter feed have been in the way of doing constructive work and have caused a lot of damage.
As a Republican, I hope we do better next time in picking a candidate and managing the primary process to keep rich tycoons from buying an office. If we hold either house of Congress in November it will be amazing considering all the ammunition Trump and the Supreme Court nomination process has given the Democratic party. The market meltdown due to tariffs, interest rates (which he can't do anything about either) and worry over a blue Congress undoing everything the red Congress has done don't help either.
"disgusting tanned leathery orange skin"
Trump's a racist!
What are you talking about?
Trump pulled your party back from the brink of irrelevancy.
It'd be sooo disheartening if these folks make a dent in the market, only to be sold to the censoring, leftist, anti-free speach, hypocritical Nazis that Google has become.
If I were the VCs or the management there, it'd be really hard to stand on principle if all the founders were paid say $100M - I'd sell.
NPC No. 15367A: "orange man indeed bad!"
Biased in favour of letting him speak for himself so that any thinking person can see he's incompetent, petty, corrupt, and not really very bright?
That kind of "biased", yes.
Obama left office almost two years ago.
Please try to keep up.
Obama, 2015: "Those jobs are never coming back."
<Trump wins, those jobs start coming back...>
Obama, 2018: "I built that! And remember, if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor."
Fucking "progressive" idiots. How deranged are you going to get when Kanye and others help enough blacks off the Democrat's thought plantation that the 95% stranglehold Democrats have on the black vote in the US is gone and Democrats won't be able to win anywhere?
It's already starting to happen.
You mean the economy he inherited from the previous government and is proceeding to ruin?
Pretending to be GOP has been his best acting job yet!
3.5 billion searches per day. So DDG is an infinitesimal bump on googles ass?
> leftist ... Americans.
> Any corporation ever being leftist
Wow, just wow. Americans are so fucking stupid, that I can't believe how stupid they are.
What are the chances that a corporation would support actual left values (as in trade unionism, workplace democracy) rather than whatever the fuck you think that word means.
Wew
Incompetent? Can you please tell me the level of Unemployment prevailing at this moment?
Trying to use the unemployment rate as an example of Trump's competency doesn't make a very good argument.
... or can we?
Just look at the 10 year graph of the unemployment rate https://tradingeconomics.com/u...
All Trump managed to do is not screw up the trend that very clearly was established under the previous president.
And it's the same for wage growth: https://tradingeconomics.com/u... although when you compare/contrast vs inflation https://tradingeconomics.com/u... real world wage growth has actually decreased the last two years vs the previous two years.
You can try arguing GDP next, but, https://tradingeconomics.com/u... https://tradingeconomics.com/u... again we're mostly still seeing the same kind of numbers/trends that began in mid/late 2010.
Now, lets have a look at something that did drastically change under Trump, Health Insurance. https://tradingeconomics.com/u...
See that big giant increase in the price index at the end of 2017 compared to the rest of the graph? That's the result of the GOP gutting parts of the ACA and Trump refusing to pay out the by law guaranteed Medicare/Medicaid subsidies.
Okay, I'm sure you want something to criticize the previous president for, so here we go: https://tradingeconomics.com/u...
Those are some pretty bad deficit numbers under Obama's first few years. The country hadn't run that big an annual deficit since WW2. On the other hand, he used that deficit to drag the country out of a pretty bad economic recession left behind by the W Bush administration and managed to decrease it back down to 2008 levels by the end of his term. Unfortunately, instead of the deficit continuing to go down under Trump, it's gone up instead thanks to a massive tax give away to the rich and corporations. https://tradingeconomics.com/u...
My bad, I guess that wasn't as much of a criticism of the last guy as the graph initially made it out to be.
Ok, here's one we can really criticize Obama for, excessively increased military spending: https://tradingeconomics.com/u...
Oops, sorry. I guess it was actually Bush who decided to start a war in Iraq in 2003 that didn't end until they hauled out Bin Laden in 2011. Oh, let's not forget the War on Terror in Afghanistan from 2001-2014 either, that at least in was in response to us being attacked first on 9/11. Except, 15 out of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia...
I don't think an ideological safe search feature would do anything other than make echo chambers sound proof...
That is because last year this quarter they sold some 300 cars, and this quarter they sold 53000. Percentage growth year over year could be very misleading when you start from very small base.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Nice try but https://tradingeconomics.com is liberally biased.
Everybody take a drink
Conspiracy theories running rampant on the right, business as usual.
That claim about a search engine that filters everything through Yandex, the openly Russian intelligence service scoop, is idiotic.
and as such it is subject to U.S. law and U.S. court orders, the type that f.ex. say "hand over all search terms originating from this IP starting today".
If you want a a search engine that is private and secure, for real, then you use the European alternatives, biggest and most popular being startpage.com, preferably configured to strictly use EU servers.
That is called google with search operators. It works very well for removing the poor quality links like ask-dumbass or wiki-junk spammed throughout and ruining otherwise useful results. You can modify them to filter anyway you like though, and even combine multiple operators.
For that AMAZING statistic, you pretty much HAVE TO capitalize "Up".
One exclamation mark for the price of none. Who would ever turn that offer down?!!
But then, what do you do with "in"?
Lower cased, after the gleeful orgasm, it has a conspicuously deflationary appearance.
So UP it goes TOO.
No, it just displays data. Reality will have a "liberal bias" when it is correct.
What are you talking about?
Trump pulled your party back from the brink of irrelevancy.
Can't argue that one.
Also, just to make this clear, 93.57% of all statistical claims on social media are entirely made up.
based and redpilled desu
Search operators used to be great until Google decided to handle them as an ignorable suggestion.
when you accept the absolute and total bullshit spouting out of chief toupee's mouth or twitter or one of his other soap boxes as fact, you are part of the problem.
You must type them precisely as written. Capital or lower case, and with colon where it is used.
Data and facts do seem to be liberally biased these days. Facts are pesky things.
News flash buddy, it still ignores them.
Data and facts do seem to be liberally biased these days. Facts are pesky things.
Funny, when the other side points out that a particular demographic that accounts for 6.5% of the general population commits 50% of the violent crime, liberals usually come unglued.
It would be nice to have a search engine that WORKED! None of them do.
I search with terms like "+WORD" which means "do NOT show me any search results that don't have WORD in it" and I get a million results and NOT ONE of them have "WORD" on it.
Web search is useless and broken.
J
Trump really is bad. Reporting that he is bad is not bias, it's truth.
Try "Word" without the plus.
If the corporate narrative were true you'd expect there to be no increase in privacy-focused search engine proxies, after all people just don't care (or so we're told). It's interesting how this contradicts the (almost entirely) corporate tech press narrative often repeated here: that people don't value their privacy. We're told some variation of that establishment-defending excuse on corporate repeater sites like this one whenever someone finds it necessary to stress a privacy-preserving alternative not found in the corporate media (such as bringing up the freedom to run, inspect, share, and modify published computer software, or valuing free software for its own sake as well as the practical outcomes such as helping users preserve their privacy and more fully control their own computers).
This strikes me as another example of how hard it is for the corporate media, their sycophants, and their stooges on sites like these to promote the fiction that non-freedom and its consequences are good for us. That we should think of proprietary software on (what are ostensibly) our computers and the amount of data we give services as right and proper. That we're better off understanding things in terms of short-term values like financial cost and convenience, and that anyone who dares to raise any other values is rightly outside the bounds of allowable debate.
Digital Citizen
Recursive acronym: Bing Is Not Good.
Frequent comment: People who have Bing as their default search engine use Bing to search for Google.
Since it won't be discussed on CNN, you'll probably be a bit shocked and start ranting about conspiracies and plots when you see how many Latino people will be voting for him next time around. It's quite a thing how enacting policies that result in you getting jobs that wasn't available to you in the last administration can have that effect, and that's what happened for a looooooot of Latinos, and actions speak louder than words.