If I use !g with DuckDuckGo, I lose muh privacy. Amirite?
>encrypted.google
>encrypted
I'd assume not
>>54998386
not if you're not logged in and if you delete cookies every once in a while
DuckDuckGo doesn't respect your privacy, they started logging the results you open since ~2 years ago
>>54998386
You don't have any privacy with cuckcuckgo in the first place
>>54998494
Sauce?
>>54998520
If you have basic knowledge of how links and http works you'll see that when clicking on a result, you'll first be sending what link you picked to them, and after that you'll be redirected to the link itself. Exactly what Google does.
it wasn't like this at first, and the change never got announced nor explained
>>54998628
the fuck am i supposed to use then for fuck sake
>>54998682
Startpage
>>54998682
>>54998386
Yes. And you tell two companies what you are searching for instead of just one.
>>54998708
really?
what the fuck do I have to use then this is really annoying already
>>54998990
Searx.me
>>54998628
>Exactly what Google does.
Not literally though :
- DDG doesn't store your IP linked to the search you did with a timestamp.
- It doesn't share the search term with the website you click on.
- It doesn't customize the search results based on your history
- There is no evidence from Snowden leaks that they have a literal personal profile on you searchable by custom internal NSA search engines.
DDG may respect your privacy a little more than the big G; but holy shit their search results are severely lacking.
>>54998682
VPN
>>55000288
Which is why you use !g for stuff you know it doesn't do well with like ultra specific troubleshooting quesitons and really fresh news.
>>54998682
YaCy dumbass.
>>55000294
VPN's aren't made for anonymity.
Every provider that tells you that is scam.
>>54998386
privacy is for degenerates.
>>55003190
>providers don't want you hiding what you're using their service for
surprise surprise retard
>>55000181
Prove it. If not all this is just security theatere.
>>55000181
>claiming to know what closed source software does on a black box.
You have to send all that information to make http requests, you have no idea if that information is being stored.
I don't use DDG because I think for a single second they care about my privacy any more than Google, I use it because Google has become a shitty megacorp.
>>54998386
Just use !s
>>54998682
Searx
The only thing DDG is good for is bangs.
>>55005419
This, and that's enough
>>55003783
>prove it
>- DDG doesn't store your IP linked to the search you did with a timestamp.
This is their claim, you're right for this point. It's hard to prove without having physical access to their data centres. Although I don't see a reason to doubt it at the moment.
And someone claimed here >>54998494
that it DID log search and he failed to prove it.
>- It doesn't share the search term with the website you click on.
>- It doesn't customize the search results based on your history
These two points are easily provable by the experience of any user. Simple facts.
>- There is no evidence from Snowden leaks that they have a literal personal profile on you searchable by custom internal NSA search engines.
This is a fact too. It is an open source info. I think you can joogle it.
>>55003814
>I can't know any of the externalities, behaviour or consequences of using a software unless I have full access to it's source.
Yeah, don't base your entire online privacy solely on the choice of your search engine. I think you're doing fine.
>>55005419
>>55005642
>tfw most of the private trackers I'm on have bangs on ddg
