poee
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2005
- Messages
- 257
Nice, Startpage.com uses Google results without all the Google tracking:
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
How to Remove Your Google Search History
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
And did you read the update from Google? The guy got canned ASAP. How much do you trust duckduckgo's admins and policies?
And for what it's worth, that page is laughably inaccurate and stupid. It's also *wrong*. Google, like duckduckgo, hides the search term from the referrer URL (which is sent by your *browser*, not by google) - at least it has been since 2009. Both of them accomplish this in the exact same way. They do this by routing every link you click through themselves (eg, instead of the link taking you directly to the site, it instead goes to google/ddg which then redirects to the site you want). However, when you use the https version of Google, your browser won't include a referrer URL. Thus, there is no need for the referrer masking via redirect. Google's masking happens via javascript, so if you disable javascript and use the https version then the site doesn't know where you are coming from at all, nor does Google know what link you clicked. Similarly, if 3rd party sites are all working together to build some profile of you as that page suggests (a huge lol on that one), then that will happen if you use DDG as well. That isn't something DDG or Google can control, they can only control what happens on their own site - and Google certainly doesn't sell your profile to anyone.
Or, if you are really worried, turn off referrer URLs in your browser.
And you can test this really easily - just do a search for "what is my referrer url" and click on the "whatsmyrefererurl.com" link - that will show you what the site gets (and again, this comes from your *browser*)
So your solution to hiding from Google is to route *all* of your traffic through DDG. How is that more private? And it's through an American company, meaning they are subject to all the same data retention laws that Google is. And something tells me DDG can't or won't put up as much of a fight against requests as Google does, nor are they transparent about requests like Google is.
FoxyProxy is set up to automatically switch to Tor when I'm on anything owned by Google
Uh, why? Your IP isn't unique and doesn't actually tell the site anything.
Or you could just look at the Chrome source. No need for packet sniffers, although as you point out it would be quite easy to spot if the settings aren't respected.
So instead you get startpage.com tracking? Why do you think startpage or duckduckgo don't log info? Simply because they say they don't? They totally do keep logs, everyone does.
chockomonkey
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2003
- Messages
- 8,328
I've switched to startpage for a couple days, and unfortunately, side-by-side comparisons don't add up.
I searched for "it is a mystery" in image search, and the ghost did not come up. Hopped over to google, and bam--the entire first row was the little ghost or variations of it.
I may need to go the route of Tor, but that shit looked complicated >_<
chockomonkey
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2003
- Messages
- 8,328
Well, yes actually that is the reason. Do you have proof otherwise? (no i don't have proof they don't, obviously)
I have rerouted the firefox browser using the plugin https-everywhere to redirect me to startpage when entering in google.com. Good if you have a habit already . Https google use to be more anonymous but now it seems they track that also. Startpage is the way to go now. That history in google is probably backed up some place even if you click delete. I wouldn't trust it still. Google probably has an account made with your ip address without even having a regular account made just in case your not signed in to your personal account. Everything is backed up for their own purposes and whenever big brother wants to get in and take a look. I recommend https everywhere to everyone.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
. Https google use to be more anonymous but now it seems they track that also. Startpage is the way to go now. That history in google is probably backed up some place even if you click delete. I wouldn't trust it still. Google probably has an account made with your ip address without even having a regular account made just in case your not signed in to your personal account. Everything is backed up for their own purposes and whenever big brother wants to get in and take a look. I recommend https everywhere to everyone. https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
I still get a kick out of people getting upset about something they've done for years. You all should get in the habit of reviewing your account settings every couple of months everywhere. Search history was something I turned off something like 6 years ago when they started.
I know they keep logs because it's the only way to really monitor the site and measure impacts backend changes have. Either they are capturing logs and anonymous info to improve their search results, performance, and stability - or the site will continue to suck. There's really not a middle ground there. You either capture the data you need to improve things, or you don't and things don't really improve. Also I'm not sure I could trust a site whose about page has blatant factual errors and misinformation. When your site's welcome page is an easily disproved conspiracy theory in conjunction with impossible to keep promises, that's not exactly confidence inspiring. Also a quick look at the traffic shows DDG making at least 2 javascript requests that include your search term (in addition to the main page which obviously has it as well), and the site doesn't work without JavaScript (Google works fine with JavaScript disabled)
But what makes you distrust Google when they say they anonymize their logs?
poee
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2005
- Messages
- 257
@kllrnohj - Do you work for Google? Are you at least getting some compensation for your PR efforts on Google's behalf -- your vehement dismissal of anything said that isn't pro-Google? You trust Google completely, and you distrust Startpage and DDG completely, throwing FUD on them and their entire raison d'être (privacy for our searches -- who would want that?) How is it you know that Startpage and DDG are lying to us about keeping our searches private, while convinced that Google could never do such a thing? Perhaps there is a rational explanation for your arguments that don't come off like a paid endorsement or blind fanboyism?
- who would want that?) How is it you know that Startpage and DDG are lying to us about keeping our searches private, while convinced that Google could never do such a thing? Perhaps there is a rational explanation for your arguments that don't come off like a paid endorsement or blind fanboyism?chockomonkey
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2003
- Messages
- 8,328
Well you have at least put more thought into it than i have, clearly.
The thing that makes me distrust google is how much i use them. gmail, chrome, google. lots of docs, etc. They have the whole package. I just want to diversify, really.
chockomonkey
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2003
- Messages
- 8,328
...and i can't give up gmail =P
@kllrnohj - Do you work for Google? Are you at least getting some compensation for your PR efforts on Google's behalf -- your vehement dismissal of anything said that isn't pro-Google? You trust Google completely, and you distrust Startpage and DDG completely, throwing FUD on them and their entire raison d'être (privacy for our searches -
Uh, sorry, you're going to have to read my posts again. You clearly missed the boat big time.
My distrust of DDG comes largely from the fact that they are using FUD, including straight up lies, to try and gain users. When you resort to such shady means to gain your users, I'm not exactly inclined to trust them or give them the benefit of the doubt. It would be like going to Google's about page and seeing them say things like "We're better than Bing because we don't murder puppies *AND* we'll keep you safe from any harm forever!"
You'll also note I haven't really talked about startpage at all as I haven't used them at all or really read about it. Having played with it quickly I don't really see a point, and things like "We do NOT store your IP address!" on the top of every result just emphasizes that they are betting on gaining users via FUD instead of real technical merit - your IP address doesn't mean much of squat. And you're still getting Google ads and Google results, only with a worse UI, fewer features, and fewer tools - so why not just use Google? If you're worried about so called "tracking cookies", you can always just block cookies from Google. Heck, Google even provides a permanent opt-out solution that blocks Double-Click cookies for IE, Firefox, and Chrome (and there appear to be a handful of 3rd party solutions that do the same thing) - which pretty much makes the entire point of startpage's existence irrelevant. So with startpage it isn't so much that I don't trust them, it's just that I don't get why they exist when everything they provide already exists, but in a better form.
I'm really just trying to understand WHY people would be going through these sorts of sites. For a group of people that are meticulous about evaluation hardware from numerous sources, cross checking every shred of info, verifying results, and cross checking every claim made by a company/site, some of you are surprisingly susceptible to a simple, straightforward smear campaign.
And to be clear, I'm not "vehement dismissal of anything said that isn't pro-Google" - Google gets many things wrong, they make mistakes, and they aren't perfect. And other sites offer some interesting competition - Wolfram Alpha has a lot of cool stuff, and even Bing occasionally has its moments. I'm more confused at this notion of "I don't want to use this companies product, instead I want to use this companies product through a 3rd party because somehow through pixie dust and magic it's more private!" Then again I also think a lot of this "privacy" craze is rooted in a drastic lack of understanding as to how Google actually makes money, and a vast, vast overestimation of the value of personal info in the first place.
@kllrnohj
Privacy is everything. Would you like to take a dump in a see-through porter potty. I don't trust the government or any company. They don't care about you or me individually. Sooner or later you'll get screwed over with that kind of trust thinking. They don't care about you. You can say you got nothing to hide, yea, but they got all that information that could be used against you at whatever time. Your being monitored and recorded.
CIA doesn't even need a team of people to dig up dirt on anyone anymore. They got facebook, google, and all those sites which you enter your information in freely. Just saved them millions of dollars in R&D. You ever land yourself in court your screwed if you said anything in any emails or anything online on facebook/myspace. Not wearing some tin foiled hat but i know its not a good idea to give up too much information on a sites that give it out freely to agencies and companies. If there's any record of anything it better be only on my hard drive.
If you think its just a matter of cookies your all wrong with Google. Google tracks you and saves deleted emails and everything. Your being watched most likely if your using chrome
Privacy is everything. Would you like to take a dump in a see-through porter potty. I don't trust the government or any company. They don't care about you or me individually. Sooner or later you'll get screwed over with that kind of trust thinking. They don't care about you. You can say you got nothing to hide, yea, but they got all that information that could be used against you at whatever time. Your being monitored and recorded.
CIA doesn't even need a team of people to dig up dirt on anyone anymore. They got facebook, google, and all those sites which you enter your information in freely. Just saved them millions of dollars in R&D. You ever land yourself in court your screwed if you said anything in any emails or anything online on facebook/myspace. Not wearing some tin foiled hat but i know its not a good idea to give up too much information on a sites that give it out freely to agencies and companies. If there's any record of anything it better be only on my hard drive.
If you think its just a matter of cookies your all wrong with Google. Google tracks you and saves deleted emails and everything. Your being watched most likely if your using chrome
Has anyone experienced weird cookie issues with using various Google services after disabling the history tracking? I'm not sure if that's actually when it started, but if I log into GMail with my Google sites account, and then go over to Google Groups, I'm logged out and need to log back in. Then if I head over to Google News, I need to log back in again. Every one in a while I'll get a page telling me I have cookies disabled. It's really quite annoying.
I *NEVER* said privacy wasn't important. I said absolutely nothing of the sort.
As for that article, it doesn't actually have any evidence of anything, it's just "what if" after "what if" - and tbh it sounds like they are butthurt that an algorithm change lowered their ranking.
And if you don't want that stuff turning up in court, don't put it in *any* recorded medium. Companies that are handing over data in court like that are following the law - they have no choice. Don't give strangers incriminating evidence, is that really so hard to do?
And "give it out freely"? Please. Companies fight back against illegal requests all the time. Google even publishes a report on it here: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/governmentrequests/ The government can't just walk up to a site and ask politely for your info and get it - they need a legal request for it. Which means the company isn't "freely" giving it away at that point, they *must* respond to the request. If you expect any company to go to jail for you you are insane.
The Safari one is a Safari bug that Google engineers even submitted a patch for. The IE one is a straight up lie by MS. The "trick" Google was using is the exact same one Microsoft *recommends* and *uses* itself mainly because the "feature" they added to IE6 was so broken it didn't work.
From the article itself: "the agreement will not allow the NSA access to users search details or e-mails." - and the rest of it is just random speculation with no evidence to support anything stated. So not only do they not have evidence, their own source says there isn't any user data sharing.
Also every time I see this Google/NSA relationship brought up it seems to stem from the confusion that NASA and NSA are two completely different agencies. Google has agreements with NASA, not the NSA. NASA is Google's next door neighbor, not the NSA.
Did you read the two updates by any chance? Also nothing in that article mentions anything about tracking.
Wrong URL? But no, they don't save deleted emails. If you move an email to the trash you have 30 days to recover it. If you click "delete forever", though, it is gone. For contacts you have 30 days to undo before they too are gone forever.
Uh, might want to read that again. It says Google's investment arm, Google Ventures, invested in a company. That company - which isn't Google - scans public pages to preserve the past and use it to try and predict the future. What's weird or wrong with that? And what does it have to do with Google?
Your being watched most likely if your using chrome
Prove it.
Oh, and I can't help but notice that of the 7 links you provided, 5 of them are from the exact same website. Might want to try diversifying your info a bit. You seem concerned with diversifying who gets your "personal information", but not who gets to whisper in your ear. IMHO you've got your priorities backwards there.
lol knit picking each word and link crumb by crumb. Look at the sources of each link before going detail by detail. Its obvious your defending a losing battle. Google has always complied with agencies on supplying information and has censored search results even. Don't even try to act like Google is too holy to be so evil. I can understand if it was 12 years ago when no the internet was much less a safety risk but now Google has had a bad track record since than. I won't even respond anymore. Its obvious your a either being paid or too brainwashed to understand the situation. Why don't you go live in China or the UK if you like surveillance and security so much.
I bet you want to be watched by someone day and night like this also. Thats what you support.
I bet you want to be watched by someone day and night like this also. Thats what you support.
I believe the word you're looking for is "nit". I didn't make a scarf.
Regardless, I didn't nitpick them, I crushed them. You didn't post a single true statement, AND you have repeatedly failed to understand what I'm saying.
What battle am I losing? Google's market share doesn't seem to be hurting, so if anyone is on the "losing" side here it would be you. But if that's how you see this you've got it totally wrong.
Yes, they've complied with local *laws*. Something *every* company does - how is that evil? This goes back to that whole "if you expect any company to go to jail for you you are batshit insane."
No, that's not what I support, not even close. It's clear, however, you don't understand the issues in the slightest and are just repeating what someone with an agenda has spoonfed you.