I needed to reinstall Firefox on this computer, so I started up Chrome to download the latest version and it blocked the download as unsafe! I had to manually tell it to download anyway.

Fuck Chrome. I’m glad I only used it to download one file and went back to Firefox.

        • a Kendrick fan@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I use both SearX and LibreX alongside DDG and that helps with 99% of my daily search online.

          If I need to use Google for search, I do so in my tor browser.

          • Vt1984@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The safety of tor browser is great, but I usually use the private mode of safari or firefox, I am lazy to wait for the tor… unless I do some important things.

            • a Kendrick fan@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Browser private modes are not really private, it’s just an isolated window that won’t save your search to the browser history. Google and other trackers would always link your private session back to you.

              Read Mozilla’s take on browser private modes.

              • Vt1984@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s just a balance between performance and safety. Everyone in different situations needs to consider whether it’s suitable for themselves to make different decisions. The most safe usage doesn’t always mean the best usage for every situation, OK?

            • a Kendrick fan@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That looks great at first until I tried searching and I got hit with a low-res captcha asking me to choose pictures about minecraft because /g/tards bots are stressing the server. I don’t get that on SearX.

              Also, the server is in the US, privacy-wise, that’s quite bad.

        • Virtual Insanity @lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Is it fair that I have to post a source when someone criticizing doesn’t?

          I’m just a passing stranger that just happens to have good knowledge about a significant misunderstanding that happened a year ago.

          I don’t walk around with ‘sources’ to all of the knowledge I’ve ever gained hanging out of my back pocket.

          This is why “source?” posts are stupid and unreasonable, double so when in response to something where a source was never provided.

          Now… that all said, I do have a moment now that I didn’t have previously to provide additional information.

          This article… https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31490515 …Is a starting point, and more info can be found with your own search.

          The basic gist was that it was claims DDG pass user data that could identify a user to Microsoft from searches, however this was never the case.

          I have to allegiance with DDG… they do an ok job. But I do indeed think it unfair they get continuously accused of wrongdoing, even still to this day as evidenced here.

          This is just another case of bad, negative or incorrect information getting more publicity than the facts.

          • SnipingNinja@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Someone did provide a source in response when asked instead of writing a diatribe, not that I disagree with you, but your complaint was unnecessary. Someone made a claim and was asked for more information, you made an opposite claim in response to that and were asked for more information.

            • Virtual Insanity @lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The person that made the claim never responded. I don’t know what you’re talking about.

              However I did respond, when I could.

              So point stands, an accusation was made without evidence, and that accusation is still there, and now mine and one other post responds to that accusation… that again is without evidence.

              My issues is, when I made that last post, why was I asked for a source, but no one asked the person making the claim against DDG for a source?

              If the people asking me for a source had also asked the original claimant for a source I’d have no issue.

              The practice of asking the counter claimant for a source and not the claimant is rife, unfair, unreasonable and needs to be called out.

              If seems far too common to accept a say so when an accusation is made online.

          • Fat Tony@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Is it fair that I have to post a source when someone criticizing doesn’t?

            If you’re trying to debunk a myth or call someone’s BS, then yes a source should be your opening statement. Is it fair? No. Is it necessary? Absolutely.

            With all that said thank you for providing the source. A very well written one it was. I am going to debunk this myth now too, if and when I see it.

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Thanks. Sorry you feel providing a source for claims is unfair, but it is what it is.

            All I really needed was context, to be honest, in this particular case. I got that, so thanks again.

            • Virtual Insanity @lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Asking for a source isn’t unreasonable in a more important setting.

              It’s more an issue that no one asks for source for the original accusation.

              It’s the kind of action that lets baseless and faulty accusations get more traction than the truth.

              • Victor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think they were just curious and should’ve probably said “What happened? And do you possibly have a link to more information?” I don’t think they were questioning the claim, itself. That’s just my interpretation.