|
Now Quant-ing. So far so good. Its appearance is not quite as snappy as Google, but other than that it is pretty good and without all the manipulation.
|
|
Also, Privacy Badger and uBlock Origin are working out well.
|
|
And FBP on the PC and Swipe on the Phone.
|
>> And FBP on the PC and Swipe on the Phone.
>
Where did you find Swipe for your phone.
I tried qwant, it was a bit clunky seemed to struggle with sites like twitter. Other things like having to press links several times to get them to work. OK but not great on my phone.
Brave is supposed to be good, anyone used it?
|
>> >> And FBP on the PC and Swipe on the Phone.
>> >
>>
>> Where did you find Swipe
Sorry, I missed this. It is in the Google Play Store. At least here it is, I suppose it is in Europe.
Will have a look at Brave.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sun 7 Feb 21 at 23:05
|
|
I'm trying out Qwant as well.
|
|
Sorry, Qwant as you say, not Quant. Auto correct hates me.
|
"7 Alternative Search Engines to Google (Tried & Tested)"
I typed "restaurants near me" into the search engines.
Three knew where I was;
StartPage
Bing
Yahoo
So that's them off my starting list. I can type "in Santiago" if I feel it is relevant.
DuckDuckGo does save searches though it says it anonymises them. So that's off.
Ecosia saves searches and shares information with Bing. Gone.
Swisscow censors. Ok I don't care about it censoring porn, but I don't want anyone deciding what is too violent, or messy or whatever in the news for me to see. Off.
Qwant censors, records and/or saves nothing. So that's what I'm going with for now.
|
Sorry if I haven't been paying attention.
Why? What's the point?
What's wrong with Google?
Or even perhaps Bing, as Microsoft seem to want me to do?
|
>>
>> Why? What's the point?
>>
>> What's wrong with Google?
I could write an essay, but others have done it better.
The starting point is this - if you aren't paying for the product, you are the product.
|
Unless people are prepared to pay a subscription for a search engine then that will always apply.
Personally not too fussed about it. In fact targeted advertising has been useful on occasion.
|
The problem is a little wider than targetted advertising. The answers that you see are customised for you, not just for your shoppping. Two people doing the same search will see different things depending on what Google decides to show you. And their reasons for changing what you see are dependent on their goals, not yours.
That doesn't suit me.
But if you're not fussed, then there is no issue for you.
|
'The answers that you see are customised for you, not just for your shopping. Two people doing the same search will see different things depending on what Google decides to show you. And their reasons for changing what you see are dependent on their goals, not yours."
In the real world what is that going to amount to? Can you give me some example of a search results where Google's goals might differ to mine and as a consequence I don't get the information I seek?
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sat 6 Feb 21 at 14:52
|
>> In the real world what is that going to amount to?
I know you didn't ask this one of me, CG, so pardon the intrusion. You might find this Quora discussion of at least some passing interest?
www.quora.com/Does-Google-censor-search-results
|
>> I know you didn't ask this one of me, CG, so pardon the intrusion. You
>> might find this Quora discussion of at least some passing interest?
>>
>> www.quora.com/Does-Google-censor-search-results
I would find it of more interest if the writer could spell.
|
>> In the real world what is that going to amount to? Can you give me
>> some example of a search results where Google's goals might differ to mine and as
>> a consequence I don't get the information I seek?
At a very simple level the first results are ads; paid for leads.
If you want debt advice and search specifically for National Debtline one of the main debt charities) it won't be the first result. What come first are paid for ads for commercial debt companies; their advice is coloured by fees for, typically, Individual Voluntary Arrangements.
|
Yes I cans see that could be an issue although if you search for "National Debtline charity" it will appear at the top.
Isn't the problem just as much to do with companies manipulating search results as it is with Google itself?
|
>> Yes I cans see that could be an issue although if you search for "National
>> Debtline charity" it will appear at the top.
People don't add 'charity' to the search unless they're in the know. I'm sure the companies manipulate but I've just searched National Debtline. The first four results are ads, at least one looks as though it's intended to deceive.
StepChange comes up second after an ad.
I don't believe Google are not in a position to do more about this.
I don't do debt advice but I do provide benefit advice to people in debt. I usually send them links....
|
|
But wouldn’t that mean manipulating their search to get a desired result? The very thing people are accusing them of.
|
I'm not really concerned about my search results, Google usually gets me what I need. Probably more of a factor in the remarkable ignorance of people who use the internet for their news is the way Youtube and FB, et al, work.
How does a person like Marjory Taylor Greene come to believe in Qanon, that the California wild fires were started with a space laser controlled by Jewish conspirators including the Rothschilds, that school shootings were staged, and that Hillary Clinton is involved in paedophilia?
|
|
...she's been watching BBC News....
|
If you're genuinely interested then watch the documentary recommended by Manatee - The Social Dilemma.
It's not the greatest bit of TV ever, and it's probably 30 minutes too long, but nonetheless it is very much worth the watch.
In short, it* specialises in creating echo chambers which can distort your overall view. Only you can know if and/or how much you are bothered by it.
For me, I don't like to direction of travel.
*All social mediaefia, search engines, messaging etc.
|
|
I'll take a look at the video
|
After a few days I have come to a preliminary conclusion.
One needs to have different approaches for different things. I think, for me, that is Google when I am looking for shopping / suppliers / etc. etc and Qwant when looking for information, news etc..
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sun 7 Feb 21 at 20:04
|
On the subject of general trackery, I was just taken aback slightly when I read the latest news on the BBC website about the NHS now wanting you to proactively ask them for a jab, if you are over 70.
In the article is a link that appears to be the nhs website for booking. All well and good, but when I clicked it my system blocked it, because it was actually trying to go to tracking.vuelio.co.uk, which does exactly what you might think.
Vuelio say: "Vuelio Political Services give you the tools to identify, understand and engage with the people and policies that make a difference", whatever the heck that means in this context.
I don't why that left a slightly sour taste, but I just didn't expect the BBC to hide what they are doing there.
So this link in the text, (quoted below) doesn't go where you think it's going to at all:
"The NHS says the easiest way to arrange a vaccination is through the national booking service which can be accessed at www.nhs.uk/covid-vaccination"
|
No longer Googling..... - No FM2R
