Baker’s testimony shows that Mozilla depends so much on its deal with Google for revenue that “the biggest loser of a DOJ win in the Google case would be Mozilla.”

  • PlexSheep@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Im also not convinced. If it were a DDG default it would just make the browser better.

    To be clear, I’m not even using DDG as my main search.

    • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      DDG is just Bing on the backend. Why is the megacorp Microsoft preferable to the megacorp Google?

      • PlexSheep@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d also be fine with Startpage, want, whatever. They have to use something and they can’t exactly make some poor selfhosters searing instance the Firefox default

      • ZephrC@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s not really true. It uses multiple sources, including their own search engine, to give results. Basically the only thing they don’t include is Google. In practice Bing often produces the majority of the results, but it’s not “just Bing on the backend”. I mean, DDG is older than Bing after all, so it would be a little weird if they didn’t have their own search engine.

        Even if it was just a frontend for Bing that wouldn’t really be a bad thing. Ecosia is, and that’s a pretty good search engine. Being one of millions of users all privately receiving the same anonymized results already makes Bing much less problematic.

        • kenbw2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          DDG is older than Bing after all

          Bing as a brand, sure. But Bing was just a rebranded Windows Live Search, which was a rebranded MSN Search

          • ZephrC@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sure, but nobody seriously thinks Duckduckgo was originally based off Windows Live Search, because it wasn’t. Nobody cared about Windows Live Search, because it sucked. They rebranded when it became halfway competent. I don’t think the ancient history of Microsoft search engines is really relevant to the point I was making.

        • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So what if it didn’t use Bing at launch? It wasn’t privacy-focused then, either. I’m talking about the present, not the past. Even in their own FAQ they acknowledge that results are mostly Bing.

          Do you have a response to my point that the data is just going to different megacorp?

          • ZephrC@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Did you even bother to read most of my post? I literally acknowledged that most of their results are from Bing in it, and also pointed out that I would care if that was actually all they did.

            The actual point I was trying to make that you completely ignored is that I care about preventing the harm of information collection, not preventing anyone from learning anything out of pure spite.

            I don’t trust Microsoft as far as I could throw them, but being one of millions of people sending them information that has been anonymized before they receive it doesn’t actually harm anyone, so I don’t think it’s a bad thing. You can be privacy conscious without being completely paranoid and closed off from the world.