I take it what OP meant is that a lot of the top results are ads - even if they aren’t shown as such. Like how half the crap uploaded by large youtubers these days is pretty much an ad for a specific product, although there’s no way to tell until you click onto it (unless you use sponsorblock)
The ads you see injected in your search result as “sponsored” are not the only way Googles Ad interests affect your search results. They are actively manipulating your search queries to make them point more towards their paying customers wanted result without you noticing.
Not really no.
Kagi has vastly more features. Most are extremely useful. Including privacy.
And the whole “funding a bigot” complaint strikes me as kind of silly. The “partnership” is just them using the Brave search API, no different than they do Google, Bing, and a few others. I even have Brave as one of my sanity check browsers when something doesn’t work on Firefox.
It’s silly to try to avoid doing anything that may, in some way support a bigot. They are literally everywhere. Even Gandhi was racist.
It’s just the payment info, not the searches. And since their users are their only revenue source, because they aren’t selling ads, they have no reason to save searches.
Except Brave as a company has benefited from the sort of people who liked his ideals in particular from day one, partnered themselves with a pay-to-play Wikipedia clone made by a white supremacist, and has engaged in unethical business practices that reflect an overall corporate lack of care of other people’s consent as well.
You might think that under capitalism or something, animal cruelty might be a huge problem too, but I doubt you would buy bullets with the express intent of shooting dogs. (I hope.)
You also didn’t touch the gaping privacy issue.
“They have no reason to save my data” is a poor excuse, as corporations always have a reason to exploit you. The fact you have given them money is also meaningless, as corporations like Apple have taken The money of consumers and turned around and harmed their privacy anyway.
You might think that under capitalism or something, animal cruelty might be a huge problem too, but I doubt you would buy bullets with the express intent of shooting dogs. (I hope.)
This seems like a non-sequitur. I don’t understand your point here.
Here’s the section for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:
=
In 2017, Beale launched Infogalactic, an English-language wiki encyclopedia. The site was a fork of the contents of English Wikipedia which could be gradually edited to remove the influence of what Beale described as “the left-wing thought police who administer [Wikipedia]”. It has been described by Wired and The Washington Post as a version of Wikipedia targeted to alt-right readers.
I haven’t used Google for awhile now. It just became an ad-ridden hellhole.
Do people not have ad blockers anymore?
That’s not what we’re talking about. Ad blockers don’t do anything to fix Google’s search algorithm
I understand the post OP but I’m replying to a comment. Specifically this part…
I take it what OP meant is that a lot of the top results are ads - even if they aren’t shown as such. Like how half the crap uploaded by large youtubers these days is pretty much an ad for a specific product, although there’s no way to tell until you click onto it (unless you use sponsorblock)
The ads you see injected in your search result as “sponsored” are not the only way Googles Ad interests affect your search results. They are actively manipulating your search queries to make them point more towards their paying customers wanted result without you noticing.
Yeah. That’s why i use an ad blocker
that’s not something your adblocker can suppress
It absolutely is.
how would your adblocker affect something going on in googles backend?
That’s why I like Kagi. I do almost anything to avoid ads
For people who are interested in using a search engine that
I’d recommend checking out a community-supported SearX instance instead!
deleted
Not really no.
Kagi has vastly more features. Most are extremely useful. Including privacy.
And the whole “funding a bigot” complaint strikes me as kind of silly. The “partnership” is just them using the Brave search API, no different than they do Google, Bing, and a few others. I even have Brave as one of my sanity check browsers when something doesn’t work on Firefox.
Privacy doesn’t exist without the ability to compile and self host.
So you don’t dispute Brendan Eich is a bigot, you just think it’s silly to point out that fact to potential buyers of their platform?
Can you explain to me how a service that ties all of your searches, and payment info, to a single account is more private than one that does not?
It’s silly to try to avoid doing anything that may, in some way support a bigot. They are literally everywhere. Even Gandhi was racist.
It’s just the payment info, not the searches. And since their users are their only revenue source, because they aren’t selling ads, they have no reason to save searches.
Except Brave as a company has benefited from the sort of people who liked his ideals in particular from day one, partnered themselves with a pay-to-play Wikipedia clone made by a white supremacist, and has engaged in unethical business practices that reflect an overall corporate lack of care of other people’s consent as well.
You might think that under capitalism or something, animal cruelty might be a huge problem too, but I doubt you would buy bullets with the express intent of shooting dogs. (I hope.)
You also didn’t touch the gaping privacy issue.
“They have no reason to save my data” is a poor excuse, as corporations always have a reason to exploit you. The fact you have given them money is also meaningless, as corporations like Apple have taken The money of consumers and turned around and harmed their privacy anyway.
This seems like a non-sequitur. I don’t understand your point here.
Here’s the section for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:
= In 2017, Beale launched Infogalactic, an English-language wiki encyclopedia. The site was a fork of the contents of English Wikipedia which could be gradually edited to remove the influence of what Beale described as “the left-wing thought police who administer [Wikipedia]”. It has been described by Wired and The Washington Post as a version of Wikipedia targeted to alt-right readers.
to opt out, pm me ‘optout’. article | about
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Instead of quoting the text where there was a link, try clicking the link
deleted
deleted by creator
deleted