News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by llimos on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @02:01PM (#24840474)
DuckDuckGo claim to make significantly less money per search than Google does, which seems to disprove that search queries are enough of a discriminator on their own.

Source: https://spreadprivacy.com/search-preference-menu-duckduckgo-...

Despite DuckDuckGo being robustly profitable since 2014, we have been priced out of this auction because we choose to not maximize our profits by exploiting our users. In practical terms, this means our commitment to privacy and a cleaner search experience translates into less money per search. This means we must bid less relative to other, profit-maximizing companies.

Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by username90 on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @04:07PM (#24841843)
Could be that DuckDuckGo users just aren't good ad targets. The big thing separating them is "hates big corporations", I could easily see advertisement for big corporations not being a big hit for this crowd.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by inopinatus on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @05:57PM (#24842749)
I'm a DDG user. I do not "hate big corporations". I may dislike some big corporations. I've enthusiastically worked for others.

I hate poverty, injustice, and bigotry. I cannot stir up strong feelings about an advertising company.

On the other hand I am a terrible advertising target, not wholly impervious to advertising but actively resistant, in part having seen under the bonnet of the sector and found little but a morass of grubby lies and folks with broken moral compasses. I intentionally interpret advertising as noise, not signal.

(corollary: attempts to disguise advertising are an irritant and a cognitive burden, so I allocate advertorials, content marketing, and drip-email compaigns to the Brand Damage circle of hell)

Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by paulgb on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @05:25PM (#24842489)
Maybe, but one big difference I notice between the two is that a search for <brand> on Google often has the top result as an ad for that brand, whereas on DDG it will be the same result but not an ad. It seems that brands don't have to “defend their turf” on DDG by buying ads on their own name as they do for Google.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by dhimes on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @06:21PM (#24842922)
I wonder if DuckDuckGo would be more successful if it was easier to find out how to advertise with them. Like, a link on the page that says "Advertise on Duck Duck Go." I've tried to advertise with them in the past a few times and gave up. I posted here before also, as I think Gabriel used to read the pages.

I use them for search as my default, and I would have used them for ads. I still might if they put a link there.

Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by cpeterso on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @07:08PM (#24843228)
From what I've heard, DuckDuckGo sources its ads from Bing. I searched for "camera" on DuckDuckGo and the ad links have URLs that redirect to Bing, e.g. "https://duckduckgo.com/y.js?ad_provider=bingv7aa&u3=https://......".
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by cvwright on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @07:35PM (#24843390)
Agreed, it took me far too long to find an answer to this.

Apparently you have to sign up for some Microsoft ad platform, and then select DDG as one of the places to show your ads.

Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by ColinHayhurst on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @12:44PM (#24849531)
Actually I don't believe you can place on DDG. You can only select "Bing, AOL, and Yahoo search syndication search partners"
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by dhimes on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @08:09AM (#24846974)
Wow. So you're really advertising through Microsoft.

Hopefully someday DDG will have its own index.

Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by srtjstjsj on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @03:37PM (#24851242)
There's a reason MS and Google have an index and DDG doesn't. It's expensive.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by AJ007 on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @06:49PM (#24843086)
I would like to see data on Google's revenue distribution per user, guessing it would be very lopsided. Some users are clicking ads for 50%+ of their searches. DuckDuckGo users are different because they most likely at minimum know the difference between a search result and an ad.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by stjohnswarts on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @09:38PM (#24844071)
There's no way that "some users" (implying a significant proportion) are clicking ads 50% of the time after they do a search. that would be a very rare duck indeed.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by nitrogen on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @01:28PM (#24850052)
We've heard of this pattern:

1. Search Facebook login

2. Click first link

This user probably clicks a lot of ads.

Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by fastball on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @03:01PM (#24841138)
I should certainly hope that DDG makes less per search than Google, since they are just repackaging a lot of google searches.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by minerjoe on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @03:46PM (#24841629)
Bing.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by fastball on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @06:39PM (#24843031)
Well yes they're getting "their" search data from Bing, but I meant how a lot of people seem to just use DDG to `!g [search]`.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by krallja on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @07:46PM (#24843464)
`!g search` isn’t a repackaging - it just redirects you to google.com/search?q=search
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by boomboomsubban on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @03:36PM (#24841513)
Search queries are generally enough for ads, but DuckDuckGo only makes money on selling those ads, while Google also sells your person information connected to the search.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by arthurcolle on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @09:34PM (#24844050)
factually incorrect
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by nl on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @05:25PM (#24842486)
This isn't true.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by hackerfromthefu on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @09:54PM (#24844144)
the Need Some Anonymity begs to differ
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by nl on Tuesday October 20, 2020 @11:45PM (#24844570)
> the Need Some Anonymity begs to differ

I don't know what this means.

But Google doesn't sell data. They let you buy ads against people that match your data or requirements, and that's a pretty fundamental difference.

Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by boomboomsubban on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @10:05AM (#24847985)
Yeah, I was trying to figure out how to say that Google further monetizes your search info without saying they sell your data, but gave up. It's still why Google makes more per search.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by sbuk on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @06:57AM (#24846551)
Still creepy. They still track user behaviour across sites to collate the data, so that they can put you into a neatly packaged silo for advertisers.
Re:U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly by jldugger on Friday October 23, 2020 @04:20PM (#24873612)
Need Some Anonymity == NSA == National Security Agency

But not sure what OP meant by that