[HN Gopher] If Google sucks then why is everyone still using it?
___________________________________________________________________
If Google sucks then why is everyone still using it?
Author : abhinavsharma
Score : 41 points
Date : 2022-03-18 18:43 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (abhinavsharma.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (abhinavsharma.com)
| hobz22 wrote:
| i use opera on android, firefox in windows, safari on mac and
| duckduckgo for everything and have been for YEARS. I'm offended
| you're including me in your cohort. lol
| TechBro8615 wrote:
| Give it time.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| because it is good, the only people who complain about it are on
| pro-mozilla mediums, even though mozilla sells their users to
| google, the irony :)
| dkersten wrote:
| I actually don't use google (search or other services aside form
| YouTube) very often. As for "everyone", I assume habit and
| momentum. People are used to it so it's hard to change to
| something else. Many people also don't know what alternatives
| there are.
| turbinerneiter wrote:
| Im so used to the UI (down to the fonts, things I can't even
| name), that DuckDuckGo looks off to me. So although it is set as
| my standar search engine, I g! most of the time.
| cruelty2 wrote:
| Maybe you could write a Greasemonkey extension to redirect
| requests from Googles page to DuckDuckGo
| ncann wrote:
| - It's free
|
| - It's better than most alternatives, and in many cases there
| isn't even an alternative
|
| - People have amassed too much data on Google services and the
| cost of moving/switching is too high
|
| - People don't care
| frenchy wrote:
| This article is really not that good, it suggests a bunch of
| obvious reasons why Google has a moat (Chrome, everyone's
| personal data) and misses some others (brand recognition). Then
| it goes and an explains reason why OP thinks Google sucks (to be
| fair I agree with him, but they're pretty subjective). Finally,
| OP claims that people are abandoning Google. Their single data
| point is that since 2009 there have been fewer searches for
| mortgages, because that couldn't possibly have been the result of
| an mortgage-driven recession in 2008.
| cryptica wrote:
| I stopped using Google search. The only Google product I use now
| are Maps and Android. I used DuckDuckGo for a while and more
| recently I switched to Qwant. They're all approximately the same.
|
| I don't think that PageRank or similar algorithms provide any
| competitive edge at this stage. The real advantage of PageRank in
| the past is that it was difficult to game, but nowadays,
| backlinks are all about money and SEO anyway.
| kauguste281 wrote:
| Google sucks compared to Google from years ago. It's still vastly
| superior to the modern alternatives. It doesn't help that almost
| all alternatives out there are just Bing with different window
| dressing, so going through alternatives is just annoying as they
| have all the same holes in the search results.
|
| Another big issue is that everybody just tries to copy Google. I
| don't need Google in less good, I want to see something that
| organize the Internet in a more useful way than just plain text
| search (e.g. what about Youtube-style recommendations for
| websites, old-school Yahoo-style dictionaries, AI categorization,
| Dejanews-style search for webforums, a button to filter out
| everything that requires a login or whatever).
|
| I feel there is a lot of untapped potential that gets missed by
| just trying to be a Google search clone.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| Google _had_ a "search only forums" filter. I was devastated
| when they took it away.
|
| You can fake it by searching one forum at a time with
| "site:whatever.com", but you have to do one at a time and that
| doesn't help if there are forums you don't know about.
|
| Google could double its usefulness overnight just by bringing
| this back.
| vopi wrote:
| idk if you know this but kagi has a "discussion" filter
| (among other filters)
| thrwawy283 wrote:
| You mentioned things I hadn't thought of. Google's Search
| accomplishes the goals of 10 years ago, but steps no further
| than that. It treats its power users like kids, and offers no
| complex filtering to do things like removing search results
| that require logins. Librarians love when you come to them to
| specifically refine your search. Google still has the most
| useful search, but they've taken away methods to get better
| results. I remember I was pretty upset when i couldn't search
| for images by exact dimensions anymore. Bing allows this.
|
| Google's product direction has been inching backwards for a
| decade.
| thereare5lights wrote:
| > Google sucks compared to Google from years ago.
|
| Came here to write exactly that
|
| Why are we still using it?
|
| There's nothing better out there.
| GeekyBear wrote:
| For the same reason that Google pays Apple and Mozilla huge sums
| every year.
|
| Most people won't change the default settings for their search
| engine.
| frb wrote:
| I don't think that most people care about using Google or quality
| of search results at all.
|
| I'd agree that the average HN user and certain professions like
| developers do care. I tried them all, kept switching back to
| Google and recently stuck with Kagi.
|
| If I look at average not-so-technical users, they just enter
| words into their browser's navigation/search bar and are happy to
| get useful results.
|
| It's worth to remember that Google is the default search engine
| in most common browsers (Chrome, Safari, Firefox).
|
| Recently my wife, a typical Mac and Chrome user, got a new
| Windows computer from work. She didn't notice that she was using
| Edge and Bing as browser and search engine until I once looked at
| her screen and commented on it. She shrugged it off as
| unimportant and keeps on using it, even though she could change
| the browser as well as the search engine.
| Havoc wrote:
| Recently managed to finally de-google my search.
|
| SearXNG funneled through protonVPN
| post_break wrote:
| I use DDG most of the time, then when I cant find technical stuff
| I g!. And let's be honest, bing is the king for porn.
| dddnzzz334 wrote:
| > bing is the king for porn.
|
| I would disagree. It is nice at the start but it shows the same
| things on the same search result forever. That is not something
| that you'd want in a Porn search engine, you'd want it to have
| some amount of randomization.
| post_break wrote:
| All I know is that I've fed bing some of the most obscure
| keywords to find what I'm looking for and it's been like "oh
| I know exactly the video you're looking for I've got you".
| traceroute66 wrote:
| Just use Startpage, its Google without the tracking.
|
| DuckDuckGo is ok too.
|
| TL;DR there's no reason to default to direct Google.
| disintegore wrote:
| You still get Google results in the end, which are growing more
| full of blogspam and affiliate link farms every year.
| spiderice wrote:
| Google results are the one thing keeping me on Google. Not
| sure why getting the almost indisputably best results would
| be bad. Even if they are getting worse, they're still miles
| ahead of anyone else.
|
| I've been waiting for a Kagi invite for a while because I've
| heard good things on HN about it. Finally got one a couple
| weeks ago. Finally switched off of it and back to Google
| yesterday. The results weren't even in the same ballpark,
| despite me really wanting it to succeed.
| freediver wrote:
| > The results weren't even in the same ballpark, despite me
| really wanting it to succeed.
|
| Have you posted feedback about bad results on
| kagifeedback.org?
| dleslie wrote:
| It's the bad default of the devices that most people use.
|
| This is basically the outcome that antitrust prosecutors were
| concerned for with Microsoft.
|
| Imagine if Android couldn't bundle a browser, or integrate any of
| Google's SAAS products.
| Jean-Philipe wrote:
| I tried switching to DDG a few times over the past few years and
| always found that it got in my way, especially when working. So I
| usually got annoyed enough after a few weeks and switched back to
| google.
|
| About two months ago, the opposite happened. Google gave me so
| much spam and advertising, the search got worse, now I ended up
| using DDG. It still sucks, for sure, but somehow it sucks less
| than google now.
| SllX wrote:
| My standard line on this is that Google today is not as good as
| Google of (at this point more than) 10 years ago, but it is still
| the best available option _today_ because nothing is as good as
| or better than Google of (at this point more than) 10 years ago.
|
| That said there have been a stack of new search engine posts on
| HN in the last few months and I may have to update my priors once
| I've had a chance to actually investigate the new options.
|
| EDIT: Maybe I should note that I've also been relying a lot more
| on Reddit too in the past year since Apollo has a decent search
| interface for Reddit and I've gotten used to processing new subs
| quickly and getting information out of them. If nothing else I
| usually at least have a stack of new terminology to feed my
| search queries elsewhere.
| dariusj18 wrote:
| Also, the internet is a far better and worse place than it was
| 10 years ago. So much more content, but astronomically more bad
| actors.
| 93po wrote:
| I think it's also only going to get worse when the amount of
| bad content and blog spam is 1000 times the ratio it is today
| due to really human-like AI writing. I am sure Google will
| find ways to detect this, but it will be a cat and mouse game
| for decades because at some point we won't be able to tell
| apart bad, lazy human writing from AI writing.
|
| At some point the internet _has_ to go to a circle of trust
| model with real identities tied to online content of any
| sort. I see no other way to curb this pending disaster than
| being able to block bad actors and bad actors having very
| limited means to publish under an alias.
| helph67 wrote:
| Because `common sense' ain't!
| moltke wrote:
| The truth is that normal people _like_ abusive software. Using
| software that gives them freedom also gives them the
| responsibility to understand the behavior of the machine which is
| something they do not want. No amount of evangelism or possibly
| even education will fix this. IMO for their own good people who
| behave this way should not be allowed to use computers and should
| delegate the task to people who are willing to think through the
| consequences of using a particular piece of software.
|
| Allowing normal people to use computers is cruel in the same way
| making a dog order its food over the telephone is.
| andrewstuart wrote:
| Because people stick with something thats "good enough".
|
| The biggest barrier to any competitor for any product/service
| anywhere is a "good enough" incumbent.
| scotty79 wrote:
| I had trouble switching to DuckDuck Go search previously.
|
| It changed when I installed DucDuckGo browser on my phone. It has
| really good internet decrapifying features and it uses ddg search
| by default and so far I didn't have a single reason to change
| that default.
|
| I hope ddg will relese similar browser for desktop. Maybe I'll be
| able to switch to it then.
| karaterobot wrote:
| By the end of the article, this is full-on marketing the OPs
| product, so be aware of that when thinking about how the problem
| and solution are framed.
|
| It's an interesting question though. I think the answer is that
| most people don't really care? The bubble we live in is filled
| with other people who, like us , are very knowledgeable about
| this domain, pay attention to what's going on behind the scenes,
| and have very strong opinions on it. 99% of the rest of the world
| doesn't give the quality and nature of Google search a second
| thought.
| nightski wrote:
| I'm not using it directly. Have been using DDG for about 10 years
| now.
| ct0 wrote:
| If you're referring to google search specifically, a major tool
| to combat the spammed ads in search that has helped me is
| available here:
|
| https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/g-search-filt...
|
| https://iorate.github.io/ublacklist/docs
| anothernewdude wrote:
| Inertia
| johndfsgdgdfg wrote:
| I tell everyone to use Bing. It's decent, but better than using
| Google. Google invades our privacy, keeps users hostages for
| money. I wish Amazon has built a search engine so that Google's
| tyrannical regime on internet ends.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| How, exactly, does Google keep users hostage for money?
| johndfsgdgdfg wrote:
| G Suite Workspace users are being kept hostages by Google
| unless the users pay more money[1].
|
| [1] https://www.ghacks.net/2022/01/20/google-ends-the-g-
| suite-le...
| tssge wrote:
| Can't they just migrate off of it? I guess the only part
| being held hostage according to the article are their Play
| Store purchases, if even that (the article says the
| purchases' fate is unclear).
|
| To me it seems Google has given ample time to either
| migrate off of it or to become a customer.
| sithadmin wrote:
| Amazon did build one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A9.com
| johndfsgdgdfg wrote:
| Oh thank you. We should definitely promote this more.
| Gualdrapo wrote:
| I still use it mainly for non "standard" search:
|
| - Its location feature is better than DDG or anything else - It
| has gotten worse a bit, but if I tell it to show me results from
| Colombia, 95% of the results it will return are from actual
| websites from Colombia. DDG will throw anything from Latin
| America, for example. Not to mention the disaster with Bing.
|
| - Its image search feature is still more precise than others.
| Reverse search won't return sometimes what I'm looking for and I
| have to resort to Yandex/TinEye/Bing, but still. Oh, and it can
| search for SVGs, which others can't.
|
| - Double quotes aren't returning exact matches, but other
| operators are working fine as far as I can tell. Filetype
| operator is great and way bigger than DDG's, cache operator is
| great for looking for a cached version of a website that is not
| working at the moment, the minus operator still works (sans the
| advertisements).
| nyx_land wrote:
| Because there is effectively no alternative. Bing and engines
| that are different frontends for Bing results aren't
| alternatives, don't kid yourself; it only exists still because
| Microsoft is another company like Google that shoves their subpar
| product onto people (by making it the default search on their
| subpar OS that took over the world) and hopes they never seek out
| alternatives. Most people are too dumb and lazy to seek out
| better alternatives, so they stick with the default search
| engines for Edge or Chrome. For everyone else, there is no real
| alternative, so while Google's search results are getting
| objectively worse, it doesn't matter because it's at least a
| lesser of two evils. They don't need to worry about becoming more
| mediocre when they've made sure to put themselves in a position
| where they basically have no competition.
| penjelly wrote:
| i use brave and brave.search, havent had search issues since
| switching over.
| [deleted]
| falcolas wrote:
| The moat is worse than we think. New search engines are not only
| hobbled by the bandwidth and processing power and storage
| required to spider the web, but by the websites who will
| preemptively disallow them _because_ they 're not Google.
|
| I can't imagine trying to build a new search engine when the
| landscape is intentionally (if justifiably) hostile to new search
| engines.
| ALittleLight wrote:
| Can't you just set your user agent to Google bot?
| nr2x wrote:
| robots.txt is a joke tho.
| sithadmin wrote:
| I'm defaulting to Brave, then falling back on DuckDuckGo, then
| Bing, then Google these days. Feels a lot like the early web
| again.
| fdgsdfogijq wrote:
| Honestly I think people are completely underestimating the
| difficulty of a good search engine. Google was better ten years
| ago because search was an easier problem to solve back then. End
| of story. Nobody is coming along with a better search engine.
| There is too much spam, content gaming, and money to be made by
| hacking search.
|
| These posts should almost be blocked from hacker news. ITs a
| fantasy. Its like saying that democracy has failed so lets
| replace it, replace with what? Its the best we can get given the
| alternatives, and its flaws will always be exploited.
| DantesKite wrote:
| I don't think these posts should be blocked, because they
| create discussion, which creates interest, which incentivizes
| for problem solving.
|
| Humans are incredibly good at solving engineering problems they
| can see from a mile away, although it takes time to solve.
| taysix wrote:
| Not sure if you read the post. They don't advocate for
| replacing Google. They want to add onto Google and other search
| engines.
| joering2 wrote:
| Democracy would be best replaced with cashless society. Society
| based on everyone value of doing what they love doing most (aka
| hobbyist), and virtually everything else replaced by robots and
| technology we already have. This is what's coming eventually,
| but its not something that can be installed on the top of your
| "operating system"; you will have to format the whole hard-
| drive (civil war)
| xboxnolifes wrote:
| I don't understand how any of that has anything to do with
| democracy.
| FastMonkey wrote:
| I suppose in the absence of cash we would just force some
| people to do the necessary tasks that aren't anyone's
| favourite hobbies?
| zargon wrote:
| No. Google is an actively hostile experience. Try it without
| adblock and get a taste of how most people get treated by
| Google. And for the search results, Kagi is already better for
| 90% of my queries.
|
| It's much more difficult now to build a competitive search
| engine, but saying it's impossible and discussions should be
| banned is toxic. (And already basically proven wrong with
| existing competing search engines.)
| Kuinox wrote:
| I disagree, Kagi is not yet "better in 90% of the queries"
| than google, it's good enough to not have to launch google in
| 90% of it's query.
| zargon wrote:
| This is probably true for me, if we also say that 50% of
| the queries are orders of magnitude higher quality on Kagi.
| omnicognate wrote:
| Kagi's better than Google for me. Proof is that initially I
| only had it set up as default search on one device but I've
| progressively switched them all over out of annoyance with
| crap google results. I haven't yet had to go to google once
| to finish a search I started on Kagi.
| fdgsdfogijq wrote:
| I think that with current technology, beating google at the
| scale they run at is impossible. I think with advances it
| NLP, its possible. But right now, its pie in the sky.
| black_puppydog wrote:
| Came here to mention kagi. Very happy user here. The no-spam
| results make it so much more useful as a tool. Also, "block
| this site from myresults forever" gives so much more agency
| to the user than anything Google has release in years.
| Googles "we know better" just reads as a big middle finger to
| me.
| tartoran wrote:
| Wow, they have that? That's what I always wanted from
| Google and they never delivered. Im sure they had reasons.
| I really don't think they want to empower their users, they
| are even hostile to search users and content creators, amp
| comes to mind and am glad it dissapeared already. Meanwhile
| I'be been using duckduck but i'll give kagi a go.
| lordnacho wrote:
| What happens when you ask it how many Ukrainian generals
| have died? Does it insist on giving you pages and pages
| about Russian generals, like Google?
|
| I was looking for this and it really annoys me how it
| thinks it knows what I want.
| [deleted]
| sltkr wrote:
| Kagi requires users to sign up (even though it's currently
| free?) which is 1000x more user-hostile than anything Google
| does and makes it a nonstarter as far as I'm concerned.
| omnicognate wrote:
| Kagi is intended to be a paid service when it launches.
| This is something I actively want. It should make them the
| opposite of user-hostile. Their users will be the source of
| their revenue so they will need to provide value or lose
| them. Login is a necessary part of that. I'm happy to take
| both that inconvenience and the cost.
| buildbot wrote:
| +1 kagi was the first alternative engine that has passed all
| of my random tests, mostly weird cameras and python coding
| searches...
| joe_the_user wrote:
| I'd say you're half right. Things are harder now and the
| success of Google has contributed to this.
|
| However, I think Google has severely degenerated from just two
| years ago, when most of the problems were fully in effect.
|
| Google is a bit of a product of the situation of scams being
| the easiest way anyone makes online.
| RC_ITR wrote:
| The progression that people almost always forget:
|
| 1) New system comes out that indexes/controls/regulates a
| naively created dataset
|
| 2) Data consumers adopt that system and experience benefits
|
| 3) Data suppliers learn rules of system and take advantage of
| it to improve the positioning of their data, thus breaking the
| rules of a system built on the assumption of naive creation
|
| 4) Users complain about the broken system
|
| 5) New entrants realize that the original system actually
| solved the core problem really well, and there are no easy ways
| to solve the 'gaming the system' problem
|
| 6) Flawed system remains the best available option indefinitely
|
| It's like entropy, there's just no fighting it.
|
| EDIT: And to extend this beyond Google - do you see a lot of
| long text blocks in 7 second tik tok videos? That's because the
| creator found a way to game the algorithm.
| bsder wrote:
| > Honestly I think people are completely underestimating the
| difficulty of a good search engine.
|
| No, they are underestimating the difficulty of _funding_ a good
| search engine.
|
| I liked the runnaroo search very much as did several of my
| friends. The guy who ran it couldn't fund it. He shut it down.
|
| Altavista (Yeah, that far back) had a nice feature where it
| would draw a cluster graph of your search results. So, if you
| searched for "python", it would show your results but would
| also draw a little graph and you could see that "Hey, there are
| two clusters here--programming and reptiles." You could then
| click on the "programming" node and the "reptiles" cluster
| would go away. It allowed you to drill through irrelevant stuff
| _really_ quickly.
|
| Note how that feature doesn't exist today--in spite of orders
| of magnitude more programmers being thrown at search, graph
| algorithms, and nifty Javascript web UIs. I wonder why ...
|
| (/sarcasm in case you missed it. I don't wonder why. Such a
| feature would let you drill through irrelevant Ad and SEO
| garbage too quickly and would impact Google's revenue.)
| Kye wrote:
| People said this about pre-Google search engines. Someone will
| figure out the next PageRank and give us another 10-20 years of
| useful search.
| thomassmith65 wrote:
| Honestly I think people are completely underestimating
| the difficulty of a good search engine
|
| I suspect that is not difficult so much as expensive.
|
| Boutique search engines pop up all the time here on HN, but
| they can't compete fairly against Google, without the resources
| to crawl a billion webpages day after day.
| kodah wrote:
| > Nobody is coming along with a better search engine
|
| https://neeva.com/ better than pretty much any solution (Qwant,
| DDG, etc) I've personally tested. It also indexes specific
| websites like StackOverflow, GitHub, and GMail.
|
| Edit:
|
| Neeva does require an account to create because eventually the
| product is going to require a subscription.
| sokoloff wrote:
| "See results for '<my search term>' Create your free Neeva
| account."
|
| "To continue searching and access all of Neeva's features,
| create your free account. Already a Neeva member? Sign in"
|
| Yeah, no.
| kodah wrote:
| Ah, Neeva is eventually going to be a paid product, that's
| why it's that way. That said, their membership is pretty
| cheap for what you get.
| sokoloff wrote:
| I don't mind giving my email or making an account after I
| have any inkling that the product might be worth deleting
| a few spam emails. Neeva was giving me a modal popup in
| my first minute; that's never going to get my email.
| AlexCoventry wrote:
| I experimented with neeva, because I'd really like an
| alternative to Google, even a paid one. However, I found its
| results pretty disappointing. At least for my work, I had to
| go back to Google, because I don't want to waste time "on the
| clock."
| jeffbee wrote:
| We have to have this discussion daily, apparently, but nobody,
| absolutely nobody in this thread and certainly not the article,
| has established an objective basis for "Google sucks". The most
| likely alternate theory, which the article doesn't bother
| discussing, is that Google does not in practice "suck" at all.
| np- wrote:
| We're all just searching Reddit anyway and it's just easier to
| use Google to search Reddit than to use Reddit's own search tool.
| compiler-guy wrote:
| The web itself sucks more and more, and Google results reflect
| that. Much good discussion migrated to siloed locations like
| facebook groups. There are thousands of pages of technical
| content that are barely redone versions of each other. Each SEO'd
| to within an inch of its life. These are quite similar to the
| dozens of identical off-brand products one finds on amazon.
|
| I would love to see Google results get better. But the web itself
| is a mess.
| RSHEPP wrote:
| This has a what seems to be a positive effect in my life
| though. I use the library much more than I used to. Instead of
| finding blogs using Google like the first part of my career, I
| find books at the local library.
| HstryrsrBttn wrote:
| Koshkin wrote:
| Paraphrasing Stroustrup, there are only two kinds of services:
| the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses.
| mountainriver wrote:
| The "google search sucks" rhetoric is getting a bit old. It works
| really really well and is free. I rarely ever have issues with
| it.
|
| I think it's just getting trendy to dog on
| ikiris wrote:
| Its only even really trendy here on HN. This place is getting
| less and less useful over time.
| dash2 wrote:
| I use search.brave.com and it's usually OK. It fails on some
| complex queries. Unfortunately SEO spam for Google also catches
| Brave.
| ncmncm wrote:
| Because Microsoft sucks too? Because browsers default to
| connecting to it?
| alligatorplum wrote:
| This feels like one of those things where people only notice the
| bad experiences, bad search results, and ignore all the times it
| was right, good/neutral search results.
|
| One of google search's biggest advantages is the ability to save
| a click for the user. If I search for "NCAA scores" google will
| show me the live scores directly instead of showing me a link to
| the ncaa website which also shows me the score but at the expense
| of me having to click on the link.
|
| IMO, the right way to dethrone google search would be to have
| better (or more) QOL features.
| gumby wrote:
| Is that a notion page? I couldn't use space to go to the next
| page (the oldest pagination system in the (computing) world).
|
| So I stopped reading at the end of the page.
| richardsocher wrote:
| They don't know yet about you.com? - No spam, no ads, you control
| the ranker with your source preferences, hardcore private mode
| that doesn't save anything nor uses your location (even DDG saves
| your queries and gives location-based results), many developer
| apps that include what you want - eg code snippets in a
| StackOverflow app, AI apps like you.com/write that would write
| essays for you, etc.
|
| Also, many folks (outside the hackernews crowd) never change
| their defaults and Google pays Apple 15B per year, as well as
| Samsung and many others, to be that default.
|
| Disclaimer: I work at you.com
| timothylaurent wrote:
| You's been a refreshing break from the Google-sphere - and it
| gets better and better - The mobile browser is also great!
| ubvhgidft wrote:
| > If Google sucks then why is everyone still using it?
|
| If prison food sucks why do prisoners eat it?
| dymk wrote:
| https://www.google.com/search?q=list+of+alternate+search+eng...
| philovivero wrote:
| If Vladimir Putin sucks, why is everyone letting him be in
| charge over there? If Donald Trump sucks why did we ele-- If
| Barack Obama sucks-- The FBI sucks. Facebook sucks. C sucks.
| The WWW sucks. Fiat currency sucks.
|
| Maybe the real truth is "the top N% of everything sucks?"
| mcbutterbunz wrote:
| The truth is, everything sucks. The more you use something
| the more you see its faults. The grass is always greener...
| dariusj18 wrote:
| Rule 44 of the internet
|
| http://web.archive.org/web/20070110035128/http://www.encyclo.
| ..
|
| Edit: NSFW
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-18 23:00 UTC)