FWIW though, I think that agreement no longer applies. I getchu though, on the principle of the matter, assuming they actually lied about it. E.g., if they said, “we don’t let any tracking through,” without mentioning their deal with Microsoft. If they just said, “we block most trackers,” and let people hype it up in their heads though, that’s kind of a gray area IMHO.
DDG also curates/censors/biases the results though.
And even if the company thinks it’s for a good reason, they’ve set themselves a precedent and now we don’t know what else they could be curating, censoring or biasing in their search results.
tbf I didn’t know about the agreement no longer being relevant, but yeah, like you say it’s a grey area and weakens the trust at least some.
If I don’t find any better alternative I guess its back to the duck I go…
FWIW though, I think that agreement no longer applies. I getchu though, on the principle of the matter, assuming they actually lied about it. E.g., if they said, “we don’t let any tracking through,” without mentioning their deal with Microsoft. If they just said, “we block most trackers,” and let people hype it up in their heads though, that’s kind of a gray area IMHO.
DDG also curates/censors/biases the results though.
And even if the company thinks it’s for a good reason, they’ve set themselves a precedent and now we don’t know what else they could be curating, censoring or biasing in their search results.
tbf I didn’t know about the agreement no longer being relevant, but yeah, like you say it’s a grey area and weakens the trust at least some.
If I don’t find any better alternative I guess its back to the duck I go…
That’s the reality of the situation unfortunately. No infallible heroes, just fifty shades of grey.
Looks like it. Still gonna keep my eye out for an alternative though…