The problem is I find myself reverting to the !g more often and often. I really like the DDG approach and tried really hard to use it exclusively. But I'd say that in 30-40% of searches it doesn't cut it and google does a better job (even though I'm not logged in to it - if that even matters?). And once you know better results are only a couple of keystrokes away it's hard to not do it :[

Why the scare quotes?

I guess the term "personalized" (to use quotes of my own) infers using your personal data to tailor results. People who are opponents of that practice are huge advocates for DDG.

"using your personal data to tailor results", true, I don't like it either. When we are targeted, we always see the outdated ads from 9 out of 10 websites we visited but don't like to re-revisit.

So "pull" is more favored than "push". See the book:

"Pull - The Power of the Semantic Web to Transform Your Business" by David Siegel.

But I do like personalized information storage. Maybe you want to reference to the blog post:

Why do we need the Private Web? http://bit.ly/1c2DzN6

" When we are targeted, we always see the outdated ads from 9 out of 10 websites we visited but don't like to re-revisit"

this is very true. You have just listed a billion dollar idea. If I search for an adidas shoe or just go to a company website then I start seeing ads related to those just visited sites - how boring. Retargeting just seems to be plain stupid instead consumer should be showed more variety

Yes, "more variety". Give you a big 5! We are like-minded.

But from an idea to a popular web application has long way to go. We just kicked off our first Kickstarter project to spread the message out here: http://kck.st/JNqv8z

Some people gave me negative points, maybe they don't like the BingoBo.com website because it does not provide enough data. Please read today's update here: http://kck.st/1exzNy6

Enjoy!

'personalised' has connotations of just how you want things, not just 'different just for you' (possibly worse). If you don't like the results of the personalisation that might be a reason to quote the word.

Dunno if this a seperated by common punctuation thing, but to me, a Brit, I dont even know the term "scare quotes". To me, its just emphasis.

Here are some examples of how they're used:

McDonald's is the only "restaurant" in town that's open today.

My four-year-old is "helping" me build a table.

Please escort this "gentleman" to the exit door.

But sometimes, it's just meant as emphasis of the word, together with a nod to the fact that the specific word may have been consciously chosen by others, and you're reusing their label without fully endorsing it.

For example:

I don't want the kinds of results Google calls "personalized".

Using the quotes elsewhere alludes to that same sort of sentiment – referring to something that others do literally call "personalized" – but in not so many words.

There may also be a slight implication of a "scare" second-level of meaning – maybe when Google claims the results are "personalized", that's really just cover for "revenue-optimized despite what's best for me". But that sinister reading isn't required by the quotes, just vaguely hinted.

They read like just sarcasm to me.