
Make DuckDuckGo your Chrome default search engine - evolve2k
http://help.duckduckgo.com/customer/portal/articles/216440-chrome#manual
======
dpcan
OK, but tomorrow when I've forgotten that I've done this and I do a quick
search, if the very first thing that comes up isn't what I want, I bet I
switch right back.

~~~
psbp
Hacker news forgets that people need to get shit done, and all of this
bullshit marketing is just a distraction.

~~~
KirinDave
Strong words coming from someone meta-commenting on a hacker news story
instead of "getting shit done."

~~~
TeMPOraL
You have to do something on your Pomodoro breaks...

------
pilooch
DDG is nice initiative. The problem is that it does not solve any problem
related to privacy because it is based on a matter of trust.

Distributed search, similar to bittorrent, DHT-based designs and the like are
notoriously difficult.

I've participated in such efforts, like the Seeks Project [1], Yacy [2], and
related initiatives like Unhosted [3], and it takes a certain amount of
dedication (and suffering ;) ).

However, I believe it is not entirely impossible that we see a true
alternative sometimes. From what experience, what is needed is a slightly
better set of distributed algorithms, a business model with the ability to
sustain such a technical effort, and a range of features that no search engine
can yet offer (because centralized).

[1] [http://www.seeks-project.info/](http://www.seeks-project.info/) [2]
[http://www.yacy.net/](http://www.yacy.net/) [3]
[https://www.unhosted.org/](https://www.unhosted.org/)

~~~
ippisl
Which of those is the best for the average joe?

~~~
pilooch
Probably none yet, unfortunately. Seeks is usable because it relies on Google
or any other engine in the background, when no results are available among
peers.

Yacy is more advanced, uses a DHT, but does not really work for daily use, the
accuracy being too low.

Unhosted is distributed architecture on top of the Web really. I've mentioned
it because it may be useful and/or an inspiration to whoever interested in
these matters.

~~~
ippisl
I've tried to download seeks, but it's linux only. This makes it much harder
to build a large user community and to develop a decent business model.

~~~
pilooch
Right, one way is to share one instance with someone you trust (and who runs a
linux server), and to use it remotely.

------
joeblau
I love DDG and I used it for 6 months but the problem I had is that when I was
looking for things related to coding or Linux--it fell short. I would type in
an error from Objective-c, Node.js, Java, JavaScript or Scala and nothing
helpful would return. This forced me to return to Google which I ended up
doing so often that I switched my default search engine back :(.

~~~
hkmurakami
have you checked out some of the !bang options available? I just took a look
and here is a sampling of what you have available.

Sysadmin: !apache !awesome !bsd !chef !codeweavers !cookbook !cve !datasheet
!distro !distrowatch !eventid !everymac !exex !exploitdb !filext !fsf !fsfe
!funtoo !gdiag !gnomebugs !gnu !howtoforge (!htf) !ip !irp !iso !linode
!linuxfr !linuxhcl !linuxmint !lxr !mysql !nginxwiki !openbsd !openbsdmisc
!opensuse !oracle !osvdb !parabola !peppermintos !playterm !postgresql !psql
!puppet !qth !salix !salixforums !sectube !senderbase !spice !splunk !sqlite
!susebug !susepkg !technetlib !timestamp !tldp !trisquel !use !vmkb !vol !wog
!zahe

Sysadmin (debian): !debbug (!dbugs) !debian !debianforums !debianfr !debml
!debmla !debwiki !dfiles !dman !dpackages (!dpkg !dpts) !dtag !fanch

Sysadmin (FreeBSD): !bsdman !fports !freebsd !freshports !fxr

Sysadmin (Gentoo): !gbugs !gentoo !gentoowiki !gpackages !gwiki

Sysadmin (RedHat): !rbugs

Sysadmin (Solaris): !sunpatch

Sysadmin (Ubuntu): !askubuntu !docubu !docubufr !omgubuntu (!omgu) !ppa !puc
!ubottu !ubuntuforums (!ubuntuf) !ubuntuusers !uman !upackages !upkg !uu !uude

[https://duckduckgo.com/bang.html](https://duckduckgo.com/bang.html)

~~~
johnpmayer
Part of me thinks those are cool, but the rest of my shouts "why should I have
to do that?!".

~~~
Makkhdyn
Because Google learns what your preferences are, DDG don't. This is why there
is no "search bubble", unfortunately it comes at a price.

~~~
bconway
That would be reasonable, except that on all my searches that DDG fails on,
Google works perfectly fine in private browsing from a different IP.

------
mtgx
I can support this, but only if it offers real safety as opposed to Google.

So does it? Or is it safe only because NSA hasn't bothered to go to DDG yet,
or do whatever they are doing to get Google's search data (cable splitters or
whatever)?

~~~
edge86
They claim not to record any data, so there's no worry about gov't requests.
[http://donttrack.us/](http://donttrack.us/)

~~~
jebeng
Oh wow. I didn't know this.

Interesting. This could become a real competitive advantage for them.

~~~
yesplorer
No, actually it will not.The vast majority of people using Google do not care
whether their data search data is being recorded or not. Heck, most even do
not know how Google search engine works from 'behind' let alone worry about
the difference between Google and DDG.

So they will really need something more compelling to get the average Joe (who
make up the vast majority mentioned earlier), who always get his results from
Google's first page, to switch from Google to DDG.

Yet, in the context of search engines, I don't see anything that could be more
compelling than always getting the most relevant search results.

------
jafaku
What kind of joke is this? You are telling us to use a US-based search engine
in a propietary browser made by a US-based company that we already know has
given direct access to the NSA? What the fuck.

~~~
cromwellian
We don't "know" anything such thing about direct access. We have no evidence
other than interpretations of a vague slide that fly in the face other claims.

~~~
alan_cx
Do you need yet another individual to become a "traitor" to the US government
on this specific assertion before you decide its good enough to "know"?

------
rpearl
...and you trust Chrome? Not even Chromium, but... Chrome. Google makes
Chrome, you know.

~~~
comex
Yes, I trust that Google has not shipped a binary modification to their open
source software to track search terms, which would be (a) illegal, (b) easily
detectable enough that someone would notice it eventually, and (c) pointless,
since they're already getting the vast majority of users' search terms
legitimately. Then again, I work for them, but I would have said the same
thing a month ago...

~~~
ta223
Agreed. I just searched "PRISM" on DDG, and 8 out of top 10 results had some
element loaded from a Google server (GA, fonts, jquery, search box, embedded
youtube, etc.) Are you using Google's DNS server? Google owns the web. Face
it.

------
laureny
Pretty lame of DuckDuckGo to use this controversy to gain some cheap exposure.

Besides, there are zero guarantees that they are immune to the kind of
accusation currently aimed at Google and co.

~~~
manojlds
It is just linking to the DuckDuckGo support page. You are talking as though
they made a blog post saying "PRISM!! Use DuckDuckGo instead of Google" and
posted it on HN.

~~~
Frostbeard
On the other hand, they have been contacting bloggers and media in exactly
such a manner.
[https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/5X7nHcjijsC](https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/5X7nHcjijsC)

------
kryten
Why would you use Chrome if you have privacy concerns and want to use
DuckDuckGo? Google isn't exactly known for respecting privacy.

Install Firefox instead.

~~~
dredmorbius
Chrome (or Chromium, if you prefer to have someone else run your builds) is
open source. It's subject to inspection. It's got some known privacy issues
(e.g., safe-browsing mode sends a file URL and hash which is stored with your
IP for two weeks, then your IP is stripped).

But if there's anything really untoward going on and people learn about it,
it's going to look _extremely_ bad for Google.

While I wouldn't say that's impossible, it's not a high-likelihood event in my
book.

Of course, you're free to use alternative browsers.

Just ... keep in mind that if you're using a WebKit browser you're trusting
Apple, and if it's WebCore, you're still trusting Google.

Mozilla's Gecko is still independent, however.

~~~
kryten
So basically it's got known privacy problems, requires trust of Google and
you're winging it.

Lets also add that Chrome!=Chromium. Chrome is based on Chromium. Not all of
it is open and it is not compiled in the public eye.

No thanks.

~~~
dredmorbius
_So basically it 's got known privacy problems_

Most of which can be addressed. There's also a UUID in each build. Privoxy can
remove that AFAIU. I don't use Chrome myself, but Chromium.

As I said: you're arguing in the absence of evidence on a pretty widely
available and analyzed application. Rather than simply throwing out
hypotheticals, a more interesting exercise would be to do some research of
posted information to see if there are known issues. Might even make for an
interesting HN submission.

I might do that myself.

------
bifrost
I switched to DDG about 2 years ago and haven't looked back. My take is they
have pretty good clue, are appreciative of security, and they use FreeBSD :)

~~~
afsina
And Bing.

------
proex
DDG is a nice search engine for simple research, but I don't use it as much
for its search purpose as for its !bang utility.

Being able to search on almost any website by adding a simple keyword is a
real plus and I will go even further and say that sometimes it accelerates the
search process (say you know you want to search on wikipedia for instance).

However, I have to admit that most of the times I end up searching on google
:)

~~~
CoryG89
In regards to searching a particular site, is this the same thing as using the
tag site:wikipedia.org on Google?

~~~
proex
It's better, in my opinion, as it loads the website specified and use the
website's search tool directly.

Give it a try, go on DDG and type !w to search on wikipedia.

------
socillion
I've been using DDG as default search engine in Firefox, with Google on
fallback under the keyword "g". You can make a bookmark with a URL like

    
    
        https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%s
    

and add arbitrary keywords to the bookmark, like "yt", "g", or "so". Then you
can simply enter that keyword followed by the search term in the address bar.

DDG definitely doesn't have the same quality results as Google, but it's close
enough in most circumstances for me that the times I have to search twice
aren't a huge factor.

~~~
jredwards
I use DuckDuckGoog. Non bash-syntax searches automatically hit google.

------
depsypher
The only thing stopping me from making this switch is that doing arithmetic in
the url bar stops working... I use that quite a bit. Is this some deep
integration with chrome or can it be made to work with ddg as well?

~~~
iAinsley
Use AlfredApp for arithmetic ;)

~~~
gee_totes
or the command line utility _bc_

~~~
lloeki
If you use bash, you can also use _$(( 3 + 2 ))_. More often than not, if it
gets cumbersome to fit it into Spotlight, I'm going to fire up a Python
console.

------
bariswheel
Stop using your credit cards while you're at it...

------
kushti
How to make Blekko default search engine in Firefox :
[http://chepurnoy.org/blog/2012/11/how-to-make-blekko-your-
de...](http://chepurnoy.org/blog/2012/11/how-to-make-blekko-your-default-
search-engine-in-firefox/)

------
fungi
i always make ddg my default... but then ill just use google for a sec and
forget to change my search back to ddg and then without noticing ill be using
google for the next week.

.... so my project for the weekend is to make a firefox extension that resets
your search default every X hours/days.

~~~
maxerickson
Have you seen the ! queries on DuckDuckGo? If you add !g to a search, it
redirects you to Google. !i goes to Google Image search. I guess there are
others.

~~~
jaryd
There are quite a few! And the list is growing... :)

[https://duckduckgo.com/bang.html](https://duckduckgo.com/bang.html)

~~~
stevewillows
Like a previous commenter noted, the instant math portion of google is a good
feature. Any way to do this with DDG?

~~~
chrismorgan
Simple queries are done in just the same way:
[https://duckduckgo.com/?q=42*PI](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=42*PI)

More complex queries are typically done with Wolfram|Alpha. This goes a long
way:
[https://duckduckgo.com/?q=graph+y+%3D+x%2Bcos^2%28sqrt%2842*...](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=graph+y+%3D+x%2Bcos^2%28sqrt%2842*PI*x%29%29+-+z)

------
zenbowman
I don't trust Chrome, DDG w/ Firefox is easy and at least they are open about
their practices.

------
pavilion
Better on Firefox Aurora give it a try

------
revathskumar
I trust Google than Facebook.

------
gboone42
Anyone who tried to find news about the Boston Marathon Bombings on the day
they happened via DDG should be aware the engine's inferiorities.

------
doktrin
DDG is already my default search engine, and landing page (in FF, mind you).

However, honestly, I prefer Google's results. Has anyone else had this
experience?

~~~
ramblerman
If you're typing !g more often than not. What keeps you using it?

------
tuananh
DDG when searching for reference: yeah; bang syntax is great.

Google for everything else.

~~~
oscilloscope
!g everything else

------
quattrofan
How does this help? Isn't DDG still located in the US?

------
lsiebert
Chrome passwords have an export feature, right?

------
JEVLON
Better Privacy VS Tailored Search.

------
humanspecies
Using DuckDuckGo in Chrome is like asking for privacy while walking around
naked in Times Square. Chrome has 100% unrestricted access to anything your
user can access on your PC, no matter what search engine you choose.

~~~
m0th87
Here's a full list of what data is sent back to google:
[http://lifehacker.com/5763452/what-data-does-chrome-send-
to-...](http://lifehacker.com/5763452/what-data-does-chrome-send-to-google-
about-me)

Do the autocomplete results still go to google? If so, then enabling DDG on
chrome is indeed fruitless.

~~~
nivla
Just as an FYI, new versions of chrome also sends back the full URL and the
hash of any file you download or save. I bumped across this when I was trying
to download light table and it din't let me open it. After a bit of research I
found file scanning to be the new addition to chrome's malware checks. With
all the NSA debacle going on now, I am feeling even more paranoid. I love
chrome but I will be switching to Firefox or IE10 soon.

~~~
magicalist
No, it doesn't. I've detailed how safe browsing works in Chrome, Firefox and
Safari works before[1]. tl;dr only partial hashes are exchanged, so you can't
reverse it even if you really wanted to.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5588362](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5588362)

~~~
nivla
Yes it does. Check this page out [1] and this stackoverflow question.[2]

"If a file isn’t from a known source, Chrome sends the URL and IP of the host
and other meta data, such as the file’s hash and binary size, to Google."

[1] [http://blog.chromium.org/2012/01/all-about-safe-
browsing.htm...](http://blog.chromium.org/2012/01/all-about-safe-
browsing.html)

[2] [http://superuser.com/questions/387724/how-to-disable-
downloa...](http://superuser.com/questions/387724/how-to-disable-download-
scanning-protection-of-new-chrome-17)

------
comrade1
It's only really meaningful if their operations and management are outside the
u.s. Is this the case? Are there search companies with their engines in
Switzerland or even the EU?

