You can't find many things that Russian government deems inappropriate in Yandex. Yandex, Google and Bing(DDG is basically Bing proxy) just have different sets of biases.
I don't see how this is something to be applauded. The company is successfully worming it's way into common vernacular. Meta, Apple, Block, etc. Pretty soon you won't be able to speak a sentence without invoking 6 different brands' free advertising.
How about a 3-column search that's Google, DDG (so, Bing), and Yandex, with a single search field for all three? Bonus points for syncing it up so if I click, say, the "Images" tab on one of them, it switches the others over, too.
Owned by an Ad company these days. But yes they do promise "We'll never do evil". They belong in the grey area. But at least they haven't been caught with their hands in the cookie-jar multiple times like Brave so they got that going for them. I'd stay clear.
> You can't find many things that Russian government deems inappropriate in Yandex
What are those things that Yandex can't find? It seems to me it shows pretty relevant results for "putin's golden toilet" [1], "putin's blasting houses" with US State Department / Soros funded web-site as one of the top results [2]. A query with "navalny's statement" shows both his twitter and his web-site on the first page.
When comparing to google, "gab" in yandex shows the web-site's link as the first result. Google doesn't show it at all, there is only CNN, wikipedia, some woke dictionaries all telling you gab is not something you should search.
So, who's got totalitarian system with censorship after all?
What does "us election fraud" shows, any web-sites that are not in line with "the correct" narrative? For me google shows one side, yandex both of them.
Now, "голосование на пеньках" (voting on stomps) is a mockery of Putin's constitution referendum by opposition. When searching this phrase in Google the front page is again Putin controlled media: tass, rbc, kommersant, rg.
Yandex apart from the aforementioned web-sites has US State Department / Soros funded meduza and svoboda.org, liberal (in American sense) tjournal, Deutsche Welle.
It seems Yandex gives preference to the most relevant sites when Google decides what's good ("credible") for you.
I'm just checking a claim I thought was implausible and also easily verifiable.
It'd be weird for Google to bury bad think only for non-American IP addresses but allow it for Americans if it was on some woke crusade for the benefit of the US government. Now, I'm not sure why it's removed from your results, but my point is that what you cited as a piece of evidence for malign intent on Google's part isn't actually supporting evidence.
> my point is that what you cited as a piece of evidence for malign intent on Google's part isn't actually supporting evidence
It's worth noticing that it's pointless to censor requests like "gab.com" anyway (though that happened in my case). A person typing them already knows what they want. Now, try "right wing social media", "free speech media", "social media without censorship", etc. For me it doesn't show anything relevant but the links to the "correct" think tanks. Does this fact prove the malign intent of Google? No, but it's still there and you know it (except they consider this a virtue).
> when Google decides what's good ("credible") for you.
One of the problems is that black hat SEOs (among other people) have huge economic incentives to spread misinformation, including about the election. This is of course, an eternal cat and mouse game. This is not new, I remember when gmail started filtering chain letter scams more than a decade ago.
They are mandated to remove everything that Roskomnadzor blocks from search results. That happened to Smart Voting in September, for example. And it's extremely easy for them to block any website they want.
Thanks God neither Google nor Apple complied because "it's extremely [difficult] for them to" do so. Oh, wait, they did comply, too. Different jurisdiction, no HQs in Russia and yet both succumbed to the authoritarian regime. Not a good argument in the context of comparing the two search engines.
