[HN Gopher] DuckDuckGo was down
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       DuckDuckGo was down
        
       Author : jshupe
       Score  : 163 points
       Date   : 2024-05-23 06:03 UTC (16 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (duckduckgo.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (duckduckgo.com)
        
       | allanrbo wrote:
       | not down for me.
        
         | jshupe wrote:
         | site responds but search results are down on my phone wifi, and
         | LTE, and desktop
        
           | kbrkbr wrote:
           | Same here still
        
       | kernelsanderz wrote:
       | down for me. doesn't get search results
        
       | pcvarmint wrote:
       | It started failing on searches 1-2 hours ago.
        
       | secondary_op wrote:
       | bing.com also down, looks like duckduckgo is frontend to bing
       | 
       | at least bing images,
       | https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=katrina
        
         | secondary_op wrote:
         | > It's not you, it's us
         | 
         | > Bing isn't available right now, but everything should be back
         | to normal very soon.
         | 
         | > https://www4.bing.com/bingparachute/panda.png
         | 
         | > https://www4.bing.com/bingparachute/bing_logo.png
        
         | FriedrichN wrote:
         | It seems that https://www.startpage.com also uses Bing for its
         | images.
        
       | hilux wrote:
       | 22-May-2024 ... the day privacy (finally) died.
        
         | secondary_op wrote:
         | Presume that duckduckgo is not private or otherwise
         | compromised.
         | 
         | For example many things I search trough duckduckgo later that
         | day showed up in my twitter/x.com algorithmic feed, coincidence
         | ? don't think so.
        
           | n_ary wrote:
           | Or it could be that, when you search something, you also
           | click through to some of the results, where FB/AdWords and
           | other trackers are present.
           | 
           | Alternatively, there was a fallacy of human mind(forgot the
           | name), where if you think of something, your brain will start
           | focusing on the random occurrences of that things in all
           | places. So, those ads were always there, your brain just
           | started focusing suddenly on those as you were thinking of
           | those things.
           | 
           | Note: Not affiliated with DDG.
        
             | 256_ wrote:
             | It's called the Baader-Meinhof effect.
        
             | secondary_op wrote:
             | Yes, in this case only way to not be spied on is to not go
             | on the internet
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_illusion
        
           | weberer wrote:
           | There's also the likelyhood that the pages you landed on sent
           | your info to their "ad partners"
        
           | logtempo wrote:
           | duckduckgo don't prevent website to track you or deposit
           | cookies etc. Once you're on a website, let's say twitter,
           | duckduckgo does nothing.
           | 
           | > When you view Twitter content such as embedded Tweets,
           | buttons, or timelines integrated into other websites using
           | Twitter for Websites, Twitter may receive information,
           | including the web page you visited, your IP address, browser
           | type, operating system, and cookie information.
           | (https://developer.x.com/en/docs/twitter-for-
           | websites/privacy)
           | 
           | So, if you visit a news paper that have embedded twitter post
           | in it, twitter might know you passed by this website.
        
       | naitgacem wrote:
       | I just experienced this as well. I had a giggle when I opened a
       | new tab and searched "is duckduckgo down" and the default search
       | engine is ... duckduckgo.
       | 
       | Still no results .. strange :P
        
       | ffpip wrote:
       | What a coincidence!
       | 
       | I used it after 3-4 months and it didn't show any search results.
       | Thought I had forgotten how to use their !bangs feature. Turns
       | out it is down
        
       | alentred wrote:
       | https://www.bing.com/ is down too at the moment.
       | 
       | Curiously I cannot find a "health" or a "status" page for either.
        
         | kuro_neko wrote:
         | Does it vary by region? Mine works fine for bing.
        
           | pcvarmint wrote:
           | Bing is sluggish but seems to work sometimes now.
           | 
           | I wonder if it's a DDoS attack on Bing.
        
             | Iulioh wrote:
             | ....can you really DDoS Bing?
        
         | wannacboatmovie wrote:
         | Maybe today's the day we find out DDG is just a UI to an Amazon
         | Go-style backend: a room full of workers in India typing the
         | queries into Bing and copy/pasting the results back to you.
        
         | tgv wrote:
         | DDG runs on bing, so that squares. Apparently, MS uses Bing for
         | their portal, because I can't search inside Azure portal
         | neither.
        
           | ErrrNoMate wrote:
           | like a very large number of things we are pitched as search
           | engines: https://www.searchenginemap.com/
        
         | windowshopping wrote:
         | works for me 8 minutes later, idk
        
         | mrweasel wrote:
         | The lack of status pages is annoying. Neither Bing, Ecosia or
         | DuckDuckGo have one.
        
         | beretguy wrote:
         | https://xkcd.com/2347/
        
           | danesparza wrote:
           | Wow. This.
        
         | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
         | It has not been down for me.
        
       | hpeter wrote:
       | same. I just noticed it too, about 30 minutes ago
        
       | mrweasel wrote:
       | It seems to be all search engines powered by Bing. Ecosia isn't
       | working either, and they also don't have a status page.
        
         | opem wrote:
         | yep
        
       | anoplus wrote:
       | Started about an hour ago (~1716454800000)
        
       | camiat wrote:
       | Yup, I am also running into the same issue where duck duck go is
       | returning the error message:
       | 
       | > Sorry, we ran into an error displaying these results. Click
       | here to try again.
       | 
       | I thought it was just duck duck go, but I tried searching with
       | bing, and was met with:
       | 
       | > It's not you, it's us
       | 
       | > Bing isn't available right now, but everything should be back
       | to normal very soon.
        
       | DeathArrow wrote:
       | Maybe it was acquired by Google?
        
       | teekert wrote:
       | Yes, seeing it too, for about an hour already! Came here to
       | check. Nothing on their xitter page but this thing is spiking:
       | https://downdetector.com/status/duckduckgo/
        
       | 256_ wrote:
       | If you look up "hacker news", it at least shows you an insert
       | from the Wikipedia article, even if there are no normal results:
       | https://html.duckduckgo.com/html?q=hacker+news
        
         | meonkeys wrote:
         | I love this low-tech DDG interface! Made my day, thanks. (aha,
         | https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/features/non-ja...
         | mentions the "HTML" and "Lite" versions)
         | 
         | Also, why is your username green?
        
       | bun_terminator wrote:
       | They lost all relevance after they gleefully announced their
       | manipulation of search results 2 years ago
        
         | rurban wrote:
         | Still better than Google
        
           | beretguy wrote:
           | Still there are better alternatives to ddg. I use Brave and
           | Kagi.
        
             | rurban wrote:
             | But not free. I use Fennec with ddg. Loved Kagi, but too
             | expensive for my German income
        
               | em-bee wrote:
               | brave search is free.
        
               | beretguy wrote:
               | Yes, Kagi is expensive. But it also has useful features
               | other search engines don't. It's nice if you can afford
               | it.
        
       | CTOSian wrote:
       | bing as well
        
         | pierrebeucher wrote:
         | Same problem, encountering similar problems with Qwant (though
         | not always)
        
         | WCSTombs wrote:
         | Bing is up now, but DDG is still down.
        
           | worik wrote:
           | Comes and goes for me
        
           | mgoetzke wrote:
           | down right now.
        
       | n_ary wrote:
       | My conspiracy mind tells me, may be bing changed their search api
       | with breaking changes or suddenly introduced massive
       | billing(think Twitter API, reddit API et al.) hence all search-
       | engines pulled an immediate break without having time to
       | fix/update.
        
       | hi-v-rocknroll wrote:
       | Yup. Maybe it's a NS, LB, or IPv6 only problem because it works
       | eventually.
        
       | nirse wrote:
       | Is it just me, or has DDG been having trouble often lately? Or is
       | it just a combination with some outage + degradation of search
       | results lately that makes me g! regularly these days? Didn't use
       | to need that.
        
         | epolanski wrote:
         | Bing's been working oddly for few days now for me.
         | 
         | I guess it impacts the other engines that are based on it.
        
       | blackeyeblitzar wrote:
       | Ecosia is also down. I think all of these use Bing under the
       | covers? If it is actually a Bing problem, it is pretty incredible
       | that MS has an outage this long. Makes me think twice about the
       | stability of Azure.
        
       | whitehat33 wrote:
       | DDG Site responds, but gives and error and is not showing search
       | results.
        
       | pluto_modadic wrote:
       | Hmmm... Is having a status page a sign of engineering maturity?
        
         | DANmode wrote:
         | Engineering _excellence_ , maybe.
         | 
         | And then the curve ends back on the ground,
         | 
         | with manual updates being swapped back into the same previously
         | automated status pages,
         | 
         | because money.
        
       | mnuu wrote:
       | DDG down here
        
         | jollyca wrote:
         | Same here - it used to work intermittently this morning (1 out
         | of 3 searches), but now I get the same error every time
        
       | maryShap wrote:
       | Get the same error with both Firefox and Edge. Very frustrating.
        
         | loloquwowndueo wrote:
         | The site is having trouble, a different browser is not going to
         | help.
        
       | spaniard89277 wrote:
       | keyword !brave works though
        
       | ikt wrote:
       | I duno how this isn't getting more views tbh
       | 
       | Ecosia and Duckduckgo and Bing are down, there's at least 5% of
       | the search engine market (the non-google part) down at the moment
        
         | beretguy wrote:
         | Man, can you imagine if this happened to Google! I'm so curious
         | now.
        
         | hhh wrote:
         | because not that many people use search engines other than
         | google
        
           | dzhiurgis wrote:
           | which is surprising given how unbearable google has gotten
           | 
           | it's a bit like sticking to using windows in 2010
        
             | throwaway290 wrote:
             | It's not surprising given how much better it is than
             | everything else
        
               | loloquwowndueo wrote:
               | lol what? Google or Windows? Got a chuckle out of this
               | either way.
        
               | throwaway290 wrote:
               | who said anything about windows?
        
               | ohthatsnotright wrote:
               | I've been migrating away from google with their recent
               | changes because it's gotten less and less useful in
               | getting me the answers. DDG has done better, but it's not
               | as good as Google used to be before it was taken over by
               | MBAs.
        
               | throwaway290 wrote:
               | DDG is Bing. Using DDG is supporting Microsoft. Even if
               | Bing was better than Google I wouldn't do it on principle
        
             | adamomada wrote:
             | It's not surprising. For approximately everyone there are
             | only two search engines: Chrome and Edge
        
         | hawk_ wrote:
         | I know ecosia relies on bing but why does this affect DDG? Do
         | they internally use bing as well?
        
           | bdcravens wrote:
           | https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/sources
           | 
           | "Of course, we have more traditional links and images in our
           | search results too, which we largely source from Bing."
        
       | secondary_op wrote:
       | That's it, ddg is gone from my Firefox and hopefully from my
       | browsing habits.
       | 
       | Speaking about Firefox, it is insane how needlessly complicated
       | it is to add new search engine to Firefox [1]
       | 1. Open a new tab and type about:config in the address bar
       | 2. In the search box type:
       | browser.urlbar.update2.engineAliasRefresh         3. Click on the
       | little + symbol on the right. It should look like after you
       | pressed it: boolean true value         4. Go to firefox Settings
       | - Search. Or enter this in the address bar:
       | about:preferences#search         5. In the "Search Shortcuts"
       | section you should notice a new "add" button. search add button
       | 6. Press the add button and fill in the name, search engine url
       | and a keyword(optional).         7. Go to the "Default Search
       | Engine" section and select the engine you just added.
       | 
       | [1] https://superuser.com/questions/7327/how-to-add-a-custom-
       | sea...
        
         | joveian wrote:
         | Neat, I kept thinking there should be a way to add keywords to
         | that list and now I know how to do it (execept for some reason
         | you can only add a new engine with a keyword there and not add
         | a keyword to an existing engine :( ). I use mozlz4 and aeson-
         | pretty to look at the search.json.mozlz4 file.
         | 
         | https://github.com/jusw85/mozlz4
         | 
         | https://github.com/informatikr/aeson-pretty
         | 
         | To be fair you can also just right click on the URL bar when on
         | a page that advertises having a search and click Add <name of
         | search>. Or if you want to search by keyword you can right
         | click on most search boxes and click "add a keyword for this
         | search". Mycroft Project has a bunch of random search engines
         | ready to add to Firefox (via right clicking on the URL bar when
         | on the search entry page):
         | 
         | https://mycroftproject.com/
         | 
         | If you use more than one search engine, I like the Right Click
         | Search addon to be able to search highlighted text with
         | multiple engines easily (unfortunately not monitored by Mozilla
         | but you can look over the code before installing and turn off
         | updates since it is quite simple and requires no permissions):
         | 
         | https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/right-click-
         | search/
         | 
         | The most privacy friendly way to search is to search the site
         | you want to end up on when you know what site that is and they
         | have a usable search.
         | 
         | For general search engines, I suggest giving Metager a try, it
         | is a non-profit metasearch.
         | 
         | https://metager.org/
        
           | mrweasel wrote:
           | > For search engines, I suggest giving Metager a try
           | 
           | Cool, might as well give it a go while Ecosia is down.
           | Thanks.
        
       | cbovis wrote:
       | Non-Google recommendations in the interim?
        
         | beretguy wrote:
         | Kagi
        
         | sumosudo wrote:
         | searx.org
         | 
         | public instances https://searx.space
        
         | em-bee wrote:
         | https://search.brave.com/
         | 
         | using that as my default search engine on firefox since last
         | year. quite happy with the quality of results.
        
           | shiandow wrote:
           | It's fairly quick and supports !bangs, and it actually works
           | right now... I'll give it a try.
        
           | cbovis wrote:
           | Looks great thank you. I see there's a !brave bang for
           | duckduckgo too so no need to change up browser defaults.
        
         | ColinHayhurst wrote:
         | https://seirdy.one/posts/2021/03/10/search-engines-with-own-...
        
       | BubBob wrote:
       | In the meantime you can try KARMA, the first search engine
       | dedicated to protecting animals and biodiversity! It's powered by
       | Brave Search so it's privacy friendly and independent from the
       | GAFAMs. You can check it out here: https://karmasearch.org
        
       | maryShap wrote:
       | Duckduckgo doesn't work on Windows 11 but does work on Windows 10
        
         | beretguy wrote:
         | I... don't understand how that's possible.
        
           | bitnasty wrote:
           | Serving different resources based on reported user agent
           | data.
        
         | RegW wrote:
         | I'm using 10 - it doesn't work for me.
        
       | Mountain_Skies wrote:
       | DuckDuckGo also is unable to provide search results, which seems
       | to confirm they use Bing as a base for their searches.
        
         | riffraff wrote:
         | ditto for Ecosia.
        
         | adamomada wrote:
         | Startpage too, but only on mobile (???)
        
         | deliriumchn wrote:
         | Yes, they use bing https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-
         | pages/results/sources...
        
           | the_70x wrote:
           | DuckDuckGo is just a search proxy
        
       | beretguy wrote:
       | I also sometimes get 500 on Brave Search, but not always? Kagi
       | works fine. Yeah, something is wrong with bing. That's what you
       | get when you rely on others instead of building your own. A jenga
       | tower. https://xkcd.com/2347/
        
         | pythux wrote:
         | Please see my answer to another similar message of yours here:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40452726
         | 
         | Brave Search is fully independent and does not rely on Bing
         | whatsoever so any 500 is unrelated to this incident.
        
       | dvh wrote:
       | It was me. I asked it which pigeon has orange beak and it crashed
       | it.
        
         | saikatsg wrote:
         | Let me help you ;) https://unsplash.com/photos/blue-and-white-
         | bird-with-orange-...
        
           | dvh wrote:
           | That's him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_wood_pigeon
        
         | linker3000 wrote:
         | Actually, I think it was me asking "Show me an example of a
         | major systems outage at Microsoft."
         | 
         | /Bets on "If it's not DNS, they'll be rolling back a poorly-
         | tested patch they just installed."?
        
       | jmcnulty wrote:
       | They're aware of the problem.
       | 
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/duckduckgo/comments/1cynfft/duckduc...
        
         | mrweasel wrote:
         | It's disappointing that a "meeh" Reddit post is total sum of
         | communication from Bing, DuckDuckGo, Ecosia and others.
        
       | farmdve wrote:
       | While we are on the subject of search engines, which search
       | engines still show you like blogs, forum posts and stuff like
       | that? Most of the blogs for obscure projects or problems are no
       | longer even discoverable.
        
         | fp64 wrote:
         | You're supposed to get your information from big platforms
         | exclusively, otherwise how would you be able to see all the
         | nice ads and "curated activism"?
        
           | qwertox wrote:
           | "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological
           | battle. That tramples curiosity" [0]
           | 
           | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
             | fp64 wrote:
             | I'm sorry, I did not realize that complaining about big
             | corporations using their monopoly was considered political
             | and ideological now, but I suppose it makes sense. Please
             | excuse my previous comment, I agree it's not helpful, and I
             | should have resisted the urge to voice my frustration with
             | the direction I see the internet heading
        
               | UI_at_80x24 wrote:
               | FWIW, I agree with your post and disagree that it
               | violates the rules.
        
         | __jonas wrote:
         | https://search.marginalia.nu/
         | 
         | https://blog.kagi.com/small-web
        
           | pooper wrote:
           | I tried marginalia with site: for my blog.
           | 
           | > This website is not known to the search engine. To submit
           | the website for crawling, follow these instructions.
        
             | __jonas wrote:
             | Yes, it's not a massive index that already includes every
             | known website, that's not the goal of it at all.
             | 
             | Is there something wrong with these instructions?
        
         | ramenbytes wrote:
         | Kagi. They actually have a filter setting to only show forum
         | results. They have one for the "smallweb" as well. Also a
         | "smallweb" landing page designed to help you discover niche
         | creators like you mentioned. Here: https://kagi.com/smallweb/
        
           | 123yawaworht456 wrote:
           | this is cool as fuck
        
         | ColinHayhurst wrote:
         | Mojeek, fully independent index. self-disclosure: CEO
        
         | renegat0x0 wrote:
         | That is exactly why I scrape internet. I maintain all found
         | domains in github:
         | 
         | https://github.com/rumca-js/Internet-Places-Database
         | 
         | I wanted to have all links about amiga, or commodore, chiptune.
         | 
         | It is not a search engine. For now, it is only data.
         | 
         | Maybe this will help somebody, or somebody will be able to use
         | this data better.
         | 
         | I have a demo app running on rpi. It may be immediately broken
         | if top many ppl accessed it.
         | 
         | https://renegat0x0.ddns.net/apps/places
        
         | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
         | How about providing an example of a blog for an obscure project
         | or problem that is no longer discoverable.
        
         | PascLeRasc wrote:
         | Google with the udm-14 flag: https://udm14.com/
        
         | niutech wrote:
         | Brave Search Goggles to the rescue:
         | https://search.brave.com/goggles/discover
        
       | voidUpdate wrote:
       | DDG relying on bing for doing searches is... strange to me. I
       | feel like I've seen its own web crawler in my access logs
        
         | WhereIsTheTruth wrote:
         | NSA needs backup, when people wants to remain "private" ;)
        
         | NikkiA wrote:
         | It's other ! commands still work though, so !g will work as a
         | backup or even !yandex if you feel that way inclined (and don't
         | mind answering endless captchas
        
           | gitaarik wrote:
           | yeah of course that works because that just redirects to to
           | another site
        
         | beretguy wrote:
         | Yeah, I knew they rely on Bing but didn't know this much. This
         | really makes me not want to use ddg anymore. I'm seriously
         | considering just paying $108/year to Kagi.
        
           | biglyburrito wrote:
           | You don't have to go straight to the Professional ($108/year,
           | unlimited searches) plan. There's also the Trial (free, 100
           | searches one-time) and Starter ($5/month, 3600 searches per
           | year) plans, to help you figure out if it's worth spending
           | for the unlimited plan.
           | 
           | Once I hit 3600 searches & was faced with the prospect of
           | either going back to DuckDuckGo & Google to provide inferior
           | search results -OR- paying $108/year for Kagi, it made the
           | choice pretty simple. But it took me a few months to get to
           | that point, and I don't think I spent more than $15 in that
           | time figuring out if Kagi was right for me.
        
             | beretguy wrote:
             | I am already on $5 plan and it's definitely worth it. I was
             | able to find things that neither ddg nor brave could.
        
         | marginalia_nu wrote:
         | Most alternative search engines are backed by either Google or
         | Bing. Some have their own indexes as well, but it's rare to see
         | a fully independent search engine.
        
           | biglyburrito wrote:
           | Kagi is indie & works just fine, because it doesn't leverage
           | either Google or Bing. IMO it works as well as Google used
           | to, back when it didn't serve up SEO-tuned garbage or
           | straight-up malware sites in its first pages.
           | 
           | https://kagi.com
        
             | marginalia_nu wrote:
             | That isn't true at all, it uses a bunch of different
             | providers (including my own search engine).
             | 
             | "Our search results also include anonymized API calls to
             | all major search result providers worldwide"
             | 
             | - https://help.kagi.com/kagi/search-details/search-
             | sources.htm...
        
       | Kye wrote:
       | DuckDuckNoGo
        
         | pooper wrote:
         | What makes me sad is that even the url decode function of duck
         | duck go failed :(
         | 
         | I'd have thought at least that part would work.
        
           | SSLy wrote:
           | at least the !bangs still work, they probably are implemented
           | at their load balancers
        
         | ekianjo wrote:
         | ah thats why ddg was down too?
        
       | IceWreck wrote:
       | Yes, ddg is just a bing frontend which anonymizes results before
       | sending them to MS.
        
       | pixxel wrote:
       | Bing wrappers exposed.
        
       | maelito wrote:
       | So, Kagi's not relying on Bing ?
        
       | mgoetzke wrote:
       | Teamviewer also seems to have issues. No one in our company can
       | even log in, not even get past the email screen in their own web
       | app
        
       | mrweasel wrote:
       | Is it just me or is it really weird that neither Microsoft, or
       | ANY of the search engines that uses Bing on the backend has
       | posted anything about this?
       | 
       | DuckDuckGo and Ecosia has not been working all morning (CET) but
       | there is zero indication on their sites that they are even aware
       | of the problem. DuckDuckGo has a single Reddit posts and that's
       | it.
        
         | beretguy wrote:
         | I kind of hope it's something to do with AI, like, I don't
         | know, AI coming to conclusion that internet is bad for humanity
         | and so it's trying to shut down a search engine, or something
         | mildly dystopian like that.
        
         | beAbU wrote:
         | I went looking for a DDG status page this morning before seeing
         | this link on HN. Google found a tweet from them earlier today
         | with an announcement [1]
         | 
         | I'm pretty surprised that I'm unable to find a dedicated status
         | page for DDG - kinda horrible that I need to rely on
         | twitter/reddit in order to know that they are having issues.
         | 
         | I'm also a little tickled by the fact that I need to search
         | "Duck Duck Go status !g" in order to be directed to Google,
         | because searching for DDGs status on DDG does not, well, work.
         | 
         | 1 - https://x.com/DuckDuckGo/status/1793557968027570527
        
           | mrweasel wrote:
           | That statement in that tweet is also strange, but it's the
           | same for Qwant and Ecosia now. I wonder if they are
           | contractually not allowed to state that there are issues with
           | Bing, or if others are correct in that they really don't want
           | to be to public about the Bing dependency.
        
         | ricardo81 wrote:
         | Because DDG markets itself as privacy focused, yet is hosted on
         | MS servers.
         | 
         | Ecosia make a lot about their green credentials but it's not
         | obvious if they factor in the CO2 output of what Bing requires
         | to product results.
        
       | beretguy wrote:
       | I don't see anybody mentioning Brave Search. I'm getting 500.
       | Anybody else?
        
         | Aaargh20318 wrote:
         | One of the interesting things about this downtime is that it
         | has highlighted how many 'alternative' search engines are
         | really just a front-end for Bing.
        
           | beretguy wrote:
           | Not sure why your text is grey. I mean, yeah, "Dependency"
           | xkcd exists for a reason: https://xkcd.com/2347/
           | 
           | Except that in this case instead of a "random person in
           | Nebraska" we have a multi billion dollar corporation.
        
           | dewaldr wrote:
           | Wait until the ChatGPT API goes down one day and see how just
           | about all startups from the last 12 months are just wrappers.
        
             | eskibars wrote:
             | You don't need to look hard to find this happen. OpenAI has
             | had several API outages this year
        
         | pythux wrote:
         | Hey, Brave engineer here. Brave Search is up and running
         | (thanks to our fully independent index and no reliance on Bing
         | whatsoever). Any 500 error is unrelated to the Bing incident.
         | 
         | Would you be able to share a query if the 500 happens
         | consistently? We'll look into it.
         | 
         | Thanks for your help, I hope that helps,
        
           | beretguy wrote:
           | Test - works
           | 
           | Test one - works
           | 
           | Test one two three - got 500
           | 
           | Feels strange.
           | 
           | Edit:
           | 
           | Hello - works
           | 
           | Hello world - 500 again
           | 
           | It's like, if you type in more than 1-2 words it gives you
           | 500.
           | 
           | Edit:
           | 
           | Test one two - just gave me 500 this time. It's not very
           | consistent. Maybe it's something on my end. I wonder if
           | anybody can reproduce it. I made a screen recording to proof
           | I'm not too crazy, if necessary.
        
             | pythux wrote:
             | Thanks! At the moment we are not observing any 500s on our
             | end so it would definitely be very useful to get a screen
             | recording so that we can pin-point any issue that you are
             | facing.
        
       | SushiHippie wrote:
       | According to the comments on this lemmy post [0] Bing,
       | DuckDuckGo, Ecosia, StartPage, Qwant are/were affected
       | 
       | [0] https://lemmy.world/post/15708430
        
       | datenyan wrote:
       | Looks like it's affecting anything Bing-related, at least over
       | here in Australia. Same symptoms for Bing and Ecosia.
        
         | tu7001 wrote:
         | Yep, (typing from Poland)
        
         | tetris11 wrote:
         | Same, Germany
        
       | nobody9999 wrote:
       | Yes. It certainly appears so, and has been down for at least a
       | couple hours.
        
       | nobody9999 wrote:
       | This appears to be covered by the following HN submission which
       | already has a dozen comments. Please redirect your interest
       | there:
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40451490
        
       | drpossum wrote:
       | If you still want to search with bing you can use this URL
       | 
       | https://www4.bing.com/
        
         | beretguy wrote:
         | I don't, but I'm still curious what difference does that "4"
         | make?
        
           | drpossum wrote:
           | It's one more than 3 (I think that host just doesn't have AI
           | stuff associated or whatever is bringing it down)
        
       | CassisW wrote:
       | Hillarious! I was debugging a python script and didn't get
       | results from duckduckgo and I was checking ANYTHING else first
       | before checking their page manually.
       | 
       | Then checking if my IP perhaps is blocked.
       | 
       | Nope, down in general, no search results
        
       | h2onock wrote:
       | Perhaps it's time to give Mojeek a try if you haven't already.
        
         | throwaway211 wrote:
         | Unfortunately I tried to DDG 'mojeek', but that didn't work!
         | 
         | https://www.mojeek.com/
        
       | nazgulsenpai wrote:
       | I have been meaning to check out Brave search anyhow.
        
       | rendall wrote:
       | Bangs still work e.g.
       | https://duckduckgo.com/?q=duckduckgo+search+not+working+!g
        
       | mhuffman wrote:
       | Can't wait to find out what happened here. This seems to be a
       | massive outage. Interesting how fragile things become when so
       | much technology is concentrated into just a few companies.
        
         | theshrike79 wrote:
         | It's always DNS.
        
           | jeffrallen wrote:
           | Unless it's Nagle. (Sorry animats.)
        
           | onion2k wrote:
           | Or BGP
        
         | us0r wrote:
         | My money is on expired domain somewhere or security
         | certificate.
        
           | jraph wrote:
           | A Windows update restarted a critical server automatically. A
           | core service is blocked from starting by a Candy Crush ad
           | installed by the update. The Crandy Crush ad is somehow
           | expecting a Copilot key to be pressed on the keyboard to let
           | the system keep going.
           | 
           | MS engineers are waiting for an online purchase of a new $400
           | keyboard with the Copilot key to complete and planning to run
           | to the data center to plug the keyboard.
           | 
           | However, the Bing outage is preventing the purchase to go
           | through, because the payment somehow relies on Bing
           | suggestions to load for obscure reasons.
        
             | Kerbonut wrote:
             | No way Microsoft could be this inept... could they?
        
             | exikyut wrote:
             | Very very technically, if RDP is enabled and working, this
             | could be fixed by rdesktop-ing to the machine from a Linux
             | box and using xdotool to experiment with typing raw
             | keyboard scancodes through the RDP session in the hope you
             | figure out the encoding of the Copilot key.
        
               | r2_pilot wrote:
               | The Copilot key is actually Left-Shift + Windows key +
               | F23
        
               | adamomada wrote:
               | And you can remap it but can't use it as a modifier key
               | https://www.tomshardware.com/software/windows/windows-
               | copilo...
        
               | jraph wrote:
               | Neat answer :-)
               | 
               | I also appreciate that you prevented me from countering
               | using a guard like "if RDP is enabled and working", and
               | that a follow up answer actually provides the missing
               | piece xD.
        
             | rchaud wrote:
             | Update: the payment gateway is Stripe, which is not
             | processing any transactions associated with the MS account.
             | A developer has posted the issue to HN in the hope that a
             | Stripe employee will see it and escalate the issue. /s
        
               | manuelmoreale wrote:
               | I love that you had to include the /s because someone
               | might actually believe that is indeed the case. What a
               | bizarre world we live in.
        
               | adamomada wrote:
               | Poe's Law is pretty old by now
        
               | manuelmoreale wrote:
               | I get that but still. I found it amusing.
        
             | ornornor wrote:
             | MS knows better than to run windows on their servers.
             | They've famously been running Linux on their public web
             | facing stuff for years, including when they were publicly
             | discrediting Linux (because IIS and MS server were so good
             | they couldn't run their web services reliably and
             | securely).
        
         | radiorental wrote:
         | Genuine question, are distributed systems naturally more
         | resilient?
         | 
         | I can see arguments for both sides. Your point and then the
         | hidden failure modes without central observability and
         | ownership. Nothing exists in isolation.
        
           | Dalewyn wrote:
           | >are distributed systems naturally more resilient?
           | 
           | All else being equal: Yes.
           | 
           | It's like asking if a RAID1 is more resilient than a single
           | drive.
        
             | CWuestefeld wrote:
             | To the GP's point - if you lose the RAID controller, then
             | you've lost a whole lot more than just a single drive
             | failure.
        
               | Dalewyn wrote:
               | Yes, RAID isn't a backup, but it is resilient.
               | 
               | You will have a better chance at uptime with a RAID than
               | a single drive so you hopefully don't have to climb up
               | ventilation ducts, walk across broken glass, and kill
               | anyone sent to stop you on your quest to reconnect those
               | cables that were cut.
        
               | Gormo wrote:
               | The controller isn't stateful; it's just an interface to
               | the disks. If the controller fails, but the disks
               | haven't, then all you've lost is the time it takes to
               | plug the disks into a new controller.
               | 
               | With RAID1, there's also nothing specific to the RAID
               | configuration inherent in the way the data is encoded on
               | the disk. You might have to carefully replicate your
               | configuration to access the filesystem from a failed
               | RAID0 array, but you can just pull and individual disk
               | out of a RAID1 array and use it normally as a standalone
               | disk.
        
             | steve1977 wrote:
             | RAID1 is mirrored. That is not what I would call a typical
             | distributed system. It is a very redundant system. Like a
             | cluster.
             | 
             | A distributed system _without_ redundancy would rather be
             | something like data stripped across disks _without_ parity.
             | 
             | And that actually makes it less resilient, because failure
             | of one component can bring down the whole system and the
             | likelihood of failure is statistically higher because of
             | the higher number of components.
        
               | Gormo wrote:
               | When I think of distributed systems, the RAID1 analogy
               | seems much more applicable than RAID0.
               | 
               | The term "distributed" has been traditionally applied to
               | the original design of the TCP/IP protocol, various
               | application-layer protocols like NNTP, IRC, etc., with
               | the common factor being that each node operates as a
               | standalone unit, but with nodes maintaining connectivity
               | to each other so the whole system approaches a
               | synchronized state -- if one node fails. the others
               | continue to operate, but the overall system might become
               | partitioned, with each segment diverging in its state.
               | 
               | The "RAID0" approach might apply to something like a
               | Kubernetes cluster, where each node of the system is an
               | autonomous unit, but each node performs a slightly
               | different function, so that if any one node fails, the
               | functionality of the overall system is blocked.
               | 
               | That second approach seems more consistent with what we
               | traditionally label as "distributed" -- for example, the
               | original design of the TCP/IP protocol, along with lots
               | of application-layer protocols like NNTP and IRC, have
               | each node operating autonomously but synchronized to
               | other nodes so the whole system approaches a common data
               | state. If one node fails, the other nodes all continue to
               | operate, but might cause the overall system to become
               | partitioned, leading to divergent states in each
               | disconnected segment.
               | 
               | The CAP theorem comes to mind: the first approach
               | maintains availability but risks consistency, the second
               | approach maintains consistency but risks availability.
               | But the second approach seems like a variant
               | implementation strategy for what is still effectively a
               | centralized system -- the overall solution still exists
               | only as a single instance -- so I usually think of the
               | first approach when something is described as
               | "distributed".
        
               | bradjohnson wrote:
               | You're assuming a stateful system where the state is
               | distributed throughout the components of the system. For
               | a stateless component of a distributed system, you don't
               | need redundancy to recover from an outage.
               | 
               | >likelihood of failure is statistically higher because of
               | the higher number of components
               | 
               | Yes, absolutely true, but resiliency for a distributed
               | system is not necessarily like your example of data
               | stripped without parity, unless we're specifically
               | talking about distributed storage.
        
           | _heimdall wrote:
           | Distribution alone doesn't make a system resilient. A
           | distributed system can help with resilience for anything
           | related to network or hardware failure, but even then you
           | need to make sure the different resources don't have a hard
           | dependency on each other.
           | 
           | If you want a resilient system redundancy and automatic
           | failover systems are really important, along with solid error
           | handling.
           | 
           | Think about a distributed data store for example. You may
           | spread all your data across multiple distributed areas, but
           | if each area is managing a shard of data and they aren't
           | replications then you still lose functionality when any one
           | region goes down. If you instead have a copy complete copy of
           | data in each region, and a system to automatically switch
           | regions if the primary goes down, your system is much more
           | resilient to outages (though also more complex and
           | expensive).
        
             | Timshel wrote:
             | It does not garanty resiliency but it does increase it.
             | 
             | If tomorow mastodon.social disappear the network might lose
             | 80% of it's content but recovery could be possible even if
             | the server never come back.
        
               | _heimdall wrote:
               | My point was just that resilience still depends on _how_
               | a system is distributed and what else is done.
               | 
               | Distribution alone doesn't really make a difference,
               | though pairing it was redundancy and failovers is going
               | to get pretty far.
               | 
               | The case of mastodon.social is really a question of
               | whether the value there is the network and protocol
               | itself or the user created content posted there. If its
               | the user content, the value is lost when the one host
               | goes away. If the value is the network and protocol then
               | yes, the value of the network is still there even though
               | the data is gone. It does raise an interesting question
               | of whether Mastodon is really considered distributed or
               | not, the network is and hosts are using a shared protocol
               | _but_ the data isn 't really distributed.
        
               | Timshel wrote:
               | Yes there is the question of network vs data :). And as
               | you mention while some data end-up being distributed with
               | Activity Pub the protocol is not made to allow
               | restoration.
               | 
               | One point I find interesting too is that distributed
               | network often allows more agency to external actors. For
               | example if you believe that the resiliency of the
               | mastodon.social instance is not enough for you then you
               | can decide to host you own server with your preferred
               | criteria.
        
               | _heimdall wrote:
               | That's really where ActivityPub starts to rub me the
               | wrong way. Server admins really need moderation power
               | since everything is hosted on their hardware, but it also
               | is a poison pill for decentralization.
               | 
               | I can host my own server and make my own rules, but every
               | other admin can just ban my instance.
        
               | lxgr wrote:
               | I feel like that's actually a counterexample. At least
               | most people with mastodon.social as their home server
               | will probably not have a backup of their
               | followed/following graph and never be able to recover.
        
           | zevv wrote:
           | Not distributed per se, but _diversity_ makes a huge
           | difference in resilience.
           | 
           | When everybody is using the exact same tech, the fall out of
           | an incident can be huge because it will affect everybody
           | everywhere at the same time. Superficially it might seem
           | efficient and smart, but the end result is fragility.
           | 
           | Diversity of species is what nature ended up with as the
           | ultimate solution: the individual species do not matter, but
           | life as a whole will be able to flourish. With technology,
           | we're now moving the other way: every single thing gets
           | concentrated into one of the few cloud providers. Resilience
           | decreases, fragility increases.
        
             | salawat wrote:
             | I prefer heterogeneity rather than diversity. Different
             | implementations of similar processes fenerally make
             | different tradeoffs, incurring different bottlenecks, and
             | resulting in an ecosystem with a higher statistical
             | probability that one relative Black Swan won't wipe out a
             | key structural function in it's totality.
             | 
             | It's actually a hallmark of building fault tolerant systems
             | and ecosystems. Pity the economists and MBA's can't be
             | convinced of it. Otherwise there'd be less push to create
             | TBTF institutions.
        
           | halfcat wrote:
           | Not exactly "more resilient", but rather, "the only way to
           | gain more resiliency over a single system".
           | 
           | A distributed system can be more resilient, but it also adds
           | complexity, making it (sometimes) less _reliable_.
           | 
           | A single system with a lot of internal redundancy can be more
           | reliable than a poorly implemented distributed system, which
           | is why at a smaller scale it's often better to scale
           | vertically until a single node can't handle your needs.
           | 
           | Distributed systems are more of a necessity than "the best
           | way". If we could just build a single node that scaled
           | infinitely, that would be more reliable than a distributed
           | system.
        
           | oefrha wrote:
           | With a large number of small providers, more often than not
           | some of them will fail on any given day, but stars need to
           | align really well to get a half-of-the-internet-is-down kind
           | of failure caused by AWS or Cloudflare.
        
           | steve1977 wrote:
           | Distributed systems with tight coupling and no redundancy are
           | less resilient. It's not so much a question about
           | distribution but more about redundancy and coupling.
        
         | re-thc wrote:
         | Used a Co-pilot enabled PC.
        
         | the_biot wrote:
         | Not necessarily massive. Given that Bing works again now, this
         | seems more like an API frontend failure, or an internal routing
         | failure at some level.
         | 
         | Note they seem to have managed to fix the Bing frontend hours
         | ago, but DDG is still dead in the water. Priorities... :-)
        
           | pythux wrote:
           | Bing does not work me at the moment (maybe they can service
           | partial traffic? Unclear if it's better/worse than a few
           | hours ago when the outage started)
        
         | simias wrote:
         | My subjective impression as a web user since the late 90s is
         | that now things break relatively rarely (I think it's the first
         | time I have any such issue with DDG for instance) but when they
         | do a huge chunk of the web becomes unreachable.
         | 
         | Back when things were more decentralized individual websites
         | and services would have issues much more regularly because the
         | individual software and hardware stacks weren't as robust and
         | fault-tolerant, but then usually the problem would always be
         | limited to a single website/service.
        
           | AbstractH24 wrote:
           | And America only uses the term "Too Big Toto Fail" when it
           | comes to banks.
        
             | lelanthran wrote:
             | > And America only uses the term "Too Big Toto Fail" when
             | it comes to banks.
             | 
             | And only when they're not in Kansas, anymore.
        
       | josemanuel wrote:
       | DDG has been down all morning (UK) on safari mobile and chrome on
       | windows 10.
        
       | feb wrote:
       | Actually Qwant.com uses bing API too and has a warning at the top
       | of their homepage.
        
         | lioeters wrote:
         | Yeah I saw this too. DDG was down, so I searched (on
         | Wikipedia!) for another search engine. Tried Qwant for the
         | first time, and it's also down.
        
       | devnonymous wrote:
       | Huh, of all those, ddg seems the odd one. I thought it used its
       | own search service, didn't realise it was bing underneath. Even
       | if that's not entirely true the fact that the home page is down
       | due to the same reason that bing is down doesn't look good.
        
         | enkrs wrote:
         | When the outage started, for me duckduckgo.com just returned no
         | results with the searchbar visible. The ddg homepage was still
         | working. I've been using "my search term !g" for now and ddg
         | just redirects my search to Google, so I don't have to change
         | search provider in browsers.
        
         | misnome wrote:
         | It's been many hours now. They could have at least added a page
         | saying "We are having an outage" rather than "There was an
         | error displaying the search results. Please try again."
        
       | altdataseller wrote:
       | Maybe this forces DDG and ChatGPT to make their own search engine
       | index and corpus. Sure it might be a few years too late for the
       | former, but thats probably what they said 5 years ago too.
        
         | bogtog wrote:
         | Do DDG and ChatGPT believe that they could do a better job of
         | uptime than Microsoft?
        
           | altdataseller wrote:
           | Its not just a question of uptime but dependencies too. The
           | moment it doesnt make strategic sense to have an open Bing
           | API for Microsoft, anyone reliant on them is in for a world
           | of hurt. Especially if its the core feature of your product
           | (ie DDG)
        
         | pityJuke wrote:
         | Brave is genuinely impressive here in having their own index
         | (granted, that's the result of an acquisition rather than their
         | own volition).
        
           | BirAdam wrote:
           | Yeah. I like Brave Search. In my own usage it seems to offer
           | far more useful results rather than 5 pages of ads.
        
         | Operyl wrote:
         | With how aggressively Anthropic is crawling the internet right
         | now, they might not be far behind. They're hitting some web
         | properties I oversee at 50 RPS in some cases and it's
         | frustrating.
        
         | ColinHayhurst wrote:
         | Another option is to use multiple sources. For example Kagi who
         | use Mojeek (self-disclosure) and others; "Our search results
         | also include anonymized API calls to all major search result
         | providers worldwide"
        
         | siva7 wrote:
         | A rare outage should cause an executive to think "let's make
         | our own search engine index"? If for every partner outage i
         | would go "let's do it ourselves' i would be long out of
         | business
        
           | altdataseller wrote:
           | It should remind them their entire livelihood is dependent on
           | one single company. They arent partners at all. Its more like
           | one is sustenance/oxygen for the other
        
             | dextro42 wrote:
             | But are they? Not asking for the contract side here but for
             | the technical aspect.
             | 
             | If DDG relies mostly on Bing and it fails forever in the
             | future, they can "simply" make a contract with google and
             | continue whatever they were doing.
             | 
             | Same for OpenAI. Its not that Bing is the only search
             | engine index on the web is it ? So yes, it would mean they
             | have to spend a lot of manpower in a short time.
             | 
             | On the other hand, how likely is it that Bing just goes
             | offline?
             | 
             | Do you always have a second datacenter in case your
             | provider fails? Not everyone does it and as long as you
             | have a way of putting things back up in reasonable time you
             | are good to go.
        
               | pythux wrote:
               | What makes you think that Google would agree to such a
               | deal?
        
               | jsnell wrote:
               | That they've been making those deals with other search
               | engines for a long time (e.g. Kagi, Startpage, Mullvad
               | Leta).
        
       | michael9423 wrote:
       | So much about DuckDuckGo's claim that Bing is only a part of
       | their search results.
        
         | Springtime wrote:
         | Prior to the Russia-Ukraine situation they actually did offer
         | Yandex results if you set your region to Russia. It was
         | interesting sometimes to see if there were any more useful top
         | results. So at one point the claim was accurate.
        
         | deutschepost wrote:
         | I'm pretty sure it was always just a proxy for bing. Just
         | stripping away the Microsoft tracking.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27394925
        
           | rvnx wrote:
           | If you use Bing: You have "only" Microsoft Bing tracking you
           | 
           | If you use DuckDuckGo: Now, you have "Yahoo Ads" instead of
           | Microsoft Ads, but these ads, they are in fact Microsoft Ads,
           | except sold via Yahoo.
           | 
           | In front of these Yahoo Ads, DuckDuckGo actually adds its own
           | click-through tracker.
           | 
           | Now you have DDG, Yahoo and Microsoft tracking you.
           | 
           | Bonus point if you click on an Amazon affiliate link, because
           | in that case, the Amazon affiliate (DuckDuckGo) knows item-
           | per-item what you purchased.
        
             | dazc wrote:
             | Good reason not to use amazon then.
        
             | Springtime wrote:
             | There's a setting in DDG to disable ads. I'm aware of the
             | Amazon affiliate link URL addition but since I don't buy
             | anything from Amazon it doesn't concern me personally.
             | Either way everyone can benefit from running a content
             | blocker (I'd be surprised if anyone from this audience
             | wasn't).
        
             | Brian_K_White wrote:
             | that kagi couples plan feeling better and better
        
             | roenxi wrote:
             | If you use a search product then _someone_ is going to have
             | your search history and it 'll more-than-likely be provided
             | to law enforcement in your country who are the #1 threat to
             | you [0]. It'll also be sent to some sort of data centre for
             | tracking and whatever commercial uses that tracking is good
             | for. I've never understood how that would be a threat, but
             | if you don't like it it comes almost baked in to the
             | business model. You can't stop them sharing data, so they
             | will probably do it for money.
             | 
             | The sell is more that the data MS/DDG has is hopefully
             | going to be siloed away from Google and so it is getting
             | more expensive for an given entity to cross-reference
             | information about you. And if we're lucky competitive
             | pressure will peel DDG away from MS sooner or later if they
             | get larger.
             | 
             | [0] This logic does lead to an argument for a fair chunk of
             | HNs readership to use Yandex, because they are hosted in a
             | country that is effectively at war with the English-
             | speaking world but not presently targeting English
             | speakers.
        
               | fattegourmet wrote:
               | your [0] is just silly. If a person is at risk from their
               | state's law enforcement, handing over their search data
               | to yandex just makes it easier for Russia to convert them
               | into spying/sabotage activities through, e.g., extortion.
               | 
               | As you have noted, Russia is at war with the ~English-
               | speaking world~ West, so it is much more likely to use
               | this data against the users than in the past.
        
             | sharpshadow wrote:
             | This makes sense, I was sceptical with the fast pace DDG
             | had in the search market.
        
           | niutech wrote:
           | DDG was once caught red-handed of tracking for Microsoft:
           | https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/24/ddg-microsoft-tracking-
           | blo...
        
             | Springtime wrote:
             | That's a strange characterization of it. They weren't
             | tracking for MS, their branded mobile browser (distinct
             | from their site) was found to have an exclusion in its
             | built-in content blocker for Microsoft-run tracking scripts
             | in ads.
             | 
             | Or put another way, if their browser had no content blocker
             | (like the stock browsers of any mobile OS), their browser
             | would be behaving like all the others. The scrutiny came
             | from the conspicuous exclusion, given their arrangement
             | with Bing (much like the controversy of Adblock Plus many
             | years ago).
        
               | tombert wrote:
               | I don't think the parent's comment was that strange of a
               | way of characterizing it.
               | 
               | Yes, they block other tracking scripts, but since they
               | have an explicit exception for tracking from Microsoft,
               | it's not a complete stretch to say they were "tracking
               | for MS"; I know technically it's Microsoft doing the
               | tracking, but DDG gives them _explicit permission_ to do
               | so. I think that it 's a distinction without much of a
               | difference, and I don't think it's unfair to extrapolate
               | a bit. If they're being misleading about the types of
               | tracking in their mobile app to make Daddy Microsoft
               | happy, why the fuck would I believe their claims that
               | their search engine (which is more or less a proxy for
               | Bing) would be immune from it?
               | 
               | It actually really upset me; I was a big user and
               | advocate of the DDG browser on iOS and Android, but when
               | that news came out it felt like a big betrayal. I haven't
               | used any DDG product since then, and while I have no idea
               | what kind of trackers they block (if any), I just use
               | Firefox Focus now with Kagi search.
        
               | Springtime wrote:
               | _> why the fuck would I believe their claims that their
               | search engine (which is more or less a proxy for Bing)
               | would be immune from it?_
               | 
               | The context of the news was a security researcher
               | conducting an audit of the app. If DDG were, as the GP
               | claimed, performing tracking on behalf of MS then it
               | would be more concerning since there _is_ a difference
               | between performing tracking on behalf of a third-party
               | company and merely excluding them from being blocked via
               | a content blocker that most mobile browsers lack anyway.
               | 
               | A mobile app has much more freedom to do what it likes so
               | if this was the worst that occurred in an audit I'm not
               | of the opinion this mark against them is enough to change
               | my use of them. Many things carry some compromise so one
               | has to weigh if an alternative is better. Use of Firefox
               | by default has Mozilla tracking (hence why some mobile
               | forks exists, including one I use), analytics for
               | sponsored links, non-disableable domain name auto-
               | completion by partners, while use of Kagi search is
               | directly tied to an IRL identity via payment.
               | 
               | For me, I'm comfortable using uBlock Origin on both
               | Desktop and Mobile (via a Firefox fork) unless more
               | egregious facts present themselves.
        
               | tombert wrote:
               | > The context of the news was a security researcher
               | conducting an audit of the app. If DDG were, as the GP
               | claimed, performing tracking on behalf of MS then it
               | would be more concerning since there is a difference
               | between performing tracking on behalf of a third-party
               | company and merely excluding them from being blocked via
               | a content blocker that most mobile browsers lack anyway.
               | 
               | Sorry, I'm still not entirely sure that I agree that this
               | doesn't count as tracking on behalf of Microsoft. If
               | their browser has an "if MSTracker then allow else
               | doNotAllow", that still seems like it's effectively
               | endorsing MS tracking.
               | 
               | That said, I agree with your criticisms on Kagi (as
               | outlined in sister thread). It would be ideal if Kagi had
               | some means of truly decoupling searches from accounts,
               | but as I stated, at least Kagi charges a fee so they have
               | a means of making money _without_ mining and selling
               | data.
               | 
               | Which Firefox fork do you use? Does it work on iPhone? I
               | would really prefer to use something that allows me to
               | install extensions like uBlock.
        
               | Springtime wrote:
               | _> Which Firefox fork do you use? Does it work on
               | iPhone?_
               | 
               | I use Fennec, which afaict is Android only. It's my
               | understanding it removed various Mozilla analytics though
               | some is said to remain. It's compiled independently from
               | source by F-Droid, which supports reproducible builds.
               | 
               | Primary reasons I use it is for enabling about:config
               | editing out of the box and third party addons (either
               | Mozilla-approved ones like uBlock Origin or any arbitrary
               | addons so long as they're in an addon 'collection',
               | following the same procedure like Firefox Nightly until
               | Mozilla fulfils their goal of easier addon support).
        
               | tombert wrote:
               | Yeah, doesn't appear to support iOS, at least not in the
               | app store.
               | 
               | Once Alt stores show up in the US I suspect we'll get a
               | lot more of these browsers showing up on iPhone. My last
               | experience with Android was awful so I went crawling back
               | to iOS, but I think that I just got a bad physical unit
               | more than anything else.
               | 
               | I did see that Kagi's Orion browser allows you to install
               | extensions, though I had issues with stability when I
               | tried it a year ago, but a lot can change in a year so I
               | should probably give it again.
        
               | freediver wrote:
               | > It would be ideal if Kagi had some means of truly
               | decoupling searches from accounts
               | 
               | Important to note is that Kagi does not associate
               | searches with an account to begin with, nor there are any
               | incentives for Kagi to do so (search log would be just a
               | giant liability from a standpoint of Kagi's business
               | model, with no benefit).
               | 
               | I think what you mean is - are there means to make that
               | provable from a technology standpoint? It turns out there
               | are, through something called blind tokens, and we are
               | looking into it. It is being discussed in Kagi forums
               | here: https://kagifeedback.org/d/653-completely-
               | anonymous-searches...
               | 
               | Another solution available right now in Kagi is paying
               | for the service with Bitcoin/Lightning and using a random
               | email address to sign up (Kagi does not need or verify
               | email addresses, they are just a login id and can be
               | anything).
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | Kagi has its own issues. At least with DDG you could
               | search without logging in and your searches weren't
               | directly tied to your name/address/credit card. Ads are
               | best handled with ad blockers anyway.
               | 
               | This rando's comments (https://old.reddit.com/r/privacy/c
               | omments/1bmubkd/thoughts_a...) on the filter bubble
               | problem seems like a reasonable concern too. It's best
               | for a search engine to know nothing about you and just
               | provide the best results for what you asked, not what it
               | thinks you want to hear.
        
               | tombert wrote:
               | The privacy vs. anonymous thing is fair, and I have some
               | issues with that, and I wish it were a bit more clear on
               | what exactly that means. Even if Vlad's example of
               | "parents knowing what you're doing but still respecting
               | privacy" thing is true, it's not like I _want_ my parents
               | know I 'm looking at porn, even if they don't know what
               | kind of porn I'm looking at. That's something that they
               | should address.
               | 
               | I still trust Kagi more than basically any free service
               | though. There's no ads, and since they charge for search
               | they at least have a means of making money that doesn't
               | involve selling my data. Even if Kagi knows what I'm
               | doing, I'm willing to accept that they're not dispensing
               | my data quite as liberally as Google and Microsoft (and
               | apparently DDG).
        
         | ricardo81 wrote:
         | Just the way they market it. Almost 100% positive their organic
         | results are purely Bing. The 'other sources' seems to be a
         | sleight of hand wrt wiki boxes etc.
        
         | darreninthenet wrote:
         | Not defending DDG or anyone here but it depends on the cause of
         | the outage... is it something broken in Azure (for example)
         | that's causing it? As has been pointed out it's still possible
         | to search with Bing (both directly and through DDG with bangs)
         | so it might not be as simple as you're implying.
        
           | datavirtue wrote:
           | I get here by typing a mangled version of "hacker news" into
           | DDG. It's currently not working at all.
        
             | ddtaylor wrote:
             | But why?
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | wait, if you typed that into DDG and it brought you here,
             | then how is it not working? if that's not what you meant,
             | you worded your "DDG is not working at all, so I jumped
             | onto HN to look for a thread about it" comment very
             | strangely
        
         | leokennis wrote:
         | Some DDG results still work, mostly the "instant answer" cards
         | like word definitions.
         | 
         | As far as I know, DDG's claim was mainly that they use Bing,
         | but that Bing is unable to see/corellate who searched for what.
         | Basically that DDG acts as an anonymity proxy between you and
         | Bing.
        
         | lucideer wrote:
         | Tbh I've been rather impressed about how much of DDG has
         | continued to work while all their results are down - e.g. all
         | bangs continue to work fine.
        
         | fguerraz wrote:
         | Where did you read such a claim? There is a difference between
         | "only a part" and "largely sourced from".
         | 
         | _Of course, we have more traditional links and images in our
         | search results too, which we largely source from Bing. Our
         | focus is synthesizing all these sources to create a superior
         | search experience._
         | 
         | https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/sources...
        
           | niutech wrote:
           | From their FAQ (thanks to Web Archive):
           | 
           | > Where do you get your results?
           | 
           | > From over 30 sources, including DuckDuckBot (our own
           | crawler), crowd-sourced sites (in our own index), Yahoo!
           | BOSS, embed.ly, WolframAlpha, EntireWeb, Bing & Blekko. For
           | any given search, there is usually a vertical search engine
           | out there that does a better job at answering it than a
           | general search engine. Our long-term goal is to get you
           | information from that best source, ideally in instant answer
           | form.
        
             | Shank wrote:
             | Well, at least Blekko is definitely dead from that list, so
             | it's not a reflection of today.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blekko
        
             | notatoad wrote:
             | Yahoo BOSS and WolframAlpha are also bing, right?
        
           | udev4096 wrote:
           | Unless you have been living under a rock, they have said it
           | plenty of times
        
         | niutech wrote:
         | They claim on their website (https://duckduckgo.com/about): "We
         | are the independent Internet privacy company", meanwhile they
         | prove otherwise. They depend on Bing API, unlike Brave Search
         | or Mojeek, which are truly independent and respecting privacy.
        
           | ohmyiv wrote:
           | Are they truly independent now? I remember a couple of years
           | ago a small percentage (less than 10%?) of searches used
           | bing. It's great of they're fully independent now.
        
         | jccalhoun wrote:
         | I mean, 100% is technically still "part"
        
       | beretguy wrote:
       | Use Brave search for now instead.
       | 
       | https://search.brave.com
        
         | reddalo wrote:
         | No thanks, it's run by cryptobros.
        
           | beretguy wrote:
           | Then you can pay for Kagi.
        
           | atomicfiredoll wrote:
           | The amount of Brave and Kagi spam in this thread is nutso. I
           | can't be convinced it's not coordinated marketing by either
           | or both of them.
           | 
           | I'm not saying that there aren't some satisfied customers,
           | but at some point a normal human being says: "Hey, 30 other
           | people posted this. Maybe I shouldn't."
        
       | kunley wrote:
       | Bing is working though, DDG still down
        
       | mrkramer wrote:
       | Death by outsourcing.
        
         | exitzer0 wrote:
         | This guy Microsofts.
        
       | dewey wrote:
       | > Hopefully DDG will be back soon, as I'm loathe to go back to
       | Google for search.
       | 
       | Maybe Kagi is an option for you? I'm very happy with them and
       | exclusively use them for more than a year now after never getting
       | comfortable with DDG.
        
         | dpatac wrote:
         | I concur on Kagi. Now when I go to other search engines I just
         | get frustrated.
        
         | jasonvorhe wrote:
         | Came here to praise Kagi (and Brave Search) as well.
        
         | nobody9999 wrote:
         | >Maybe Kagi is an option for you?
         | 
         | Thanks, but I'd rather have my tonsils extracted through my
         | ears. Unless you're buying.
         | 
         | From the FAQ[0]:
         | 
         | >Kagi Search requires an account only because it is a paid
         | service which requires an account for the transaction.
         | 
         | [0] https://help.kagi.com/kagi/faq/faq.html#why-does-kagi-
         | search...
        
           | dewey wrote:
           | You pay with your data instead, which is a fair choice.
        
           | idiotsecant wrote:
           | Yes, unlike google who takes all the pesky account business
           | out of the loop and does the tracking for you!
           | 
           | Either you pay for the product or you _are_ the product for
           | someone else who is paying. I know which I prefer.
        
           | quectophoton wrote:
           | They say this:
           | 
           | > You can create a Kagi account with any email address
           | including a fake one (we do not care or verify it, it is just
           | an id for logging in)
           | 
           | But seeing how they didn't go the Mullvad way, and instead
           | chose to ask for an email during signup and hide this bit of
           | info in a completely separate page, doesn't sit too well with
           | me and comes off as a little bit dishonest (they say they
           | don't need this info but sure seems to me they seem to want
           | to have it).
           | 
           | And part of the message I get from reading their F.A.Q. is
           | that a valid email address might start being required at any
           | time soon.
           | 
           | Sure, they would have payment information anyway, but if
           | searches are also linked to email address, that means
           | companies that offer free services can try to buy this
           | information about their free users. So even if you don't pay
           | for, say, Discord, they can still be interested in the
           | searches that are linked to the email address you signed up
           | with.
           | 
           | The difference in privacy between Mullvad and Kagi is not
           | even that much since both are paid services; but Mullvad can
           | get my money and a good chunk of my internet activity, while
           | Kagi doesn't get either from me.
           | 
           | Look, I don't mind too much paying for stuff. And even if I'm
           | paying, I wouldn't even care[1] if I get non-intrusive non-
           | tracking ads (i.e. just text, or first-party <img> tags)
           | related to stuff that I _don 't_ delete from my search
           | history. Show me ads for anime figurines, or new releases of
           | light novels, or nice notebooks, or shops selling plants, or
           | computer parts, or a new Steam Deck, stuff like that. I would
           | even help fine tune the ads if it means I get better
           | recommendations (or fewer bad ones, at least).
           | 
           | But it's these kinds of mixed signals, like trying to project
           | an image of offering better privacy than what's common[2]
           | while also doing the email address thingy, that give me a lot
           | of pause when I'm evaluating a service.
           | 
           | [1]: I'm aware my stance on ads is unusual here in HN. I
           | wouldn't disable my adblocker, but if done right, I wouldn't
           | need to. I haven't gone out of my way to block HN frontpage
           | ads (yet), for example.
           | 
           | [2]: That's the subjective impression I got, which might be
           | wrong. The rest of my comment was written based on this.
        
         | reddalo wrote:
         | Yep [1] is also a new interesting search engine, based on the
         | index that Ahrefs [2], a SEO toolkit, has been keeping for 13+
         | years.
         | 
         | The only downsite is that it's slower than DDG and Google.
         | 
         | [1] https://yep.com/ [2] https://ahrefs.com/
        
           | dewey wrote:
           | You said slow...but even trying that landing page took 4
           | seconds for me.
        
         | firebird84 wrote:
         | Kagi has the same problem for me. The results don't load about
         | 50% of the time. I had to cancel my subscription because I
         | couldn't just roll the dice every time I searched to see if it
         | would come back. Happens to all devices on my network.
        
           | andyjohnson0 wrote:
           | Not disputing your experience, but fwiw I've been using kagi
           | since it was in beta (now a paying customer) and I can't
           | remember this ever happening to me.
        
           | dmd wrote:
           | I feel like maybe this is your network. I've been using Kagi
           | for months and have never even once had this happen, nor has
           | anyone, ever, not even once, reported this kind of issue on
           | the Discord.
        
           | dewey wrote:
           | I've never seen that, maybe some extension, content filter
           | gone rogue?
        
           | benhurmarcel wrote:
           | Have you contacted their support?
        
       | bhaney wrote:
       | Bing is down and the rest of those use Bing for results?
        
       | maryShap wrote:
       | Duckduckgo is working fine on my iPhone15.
        
       | GRBurst wrote:
       | yeah seems like at least for many that is the case. I wasn't
       | aware that so many engines are using bing! under the hood. Afaik
       | qwant uses their own thing and that startpage is using google
       | under the hood, but that might have changed
        
       | maryShap wrote:
       | Sorry, should have said that it was with the Safari brower
        
       | nullndr wrote:
       | Ddg has been down for 5 hours. Quite a problem they got.
        
       | biglyburrito wrote:
       | Kagi works just fine: https://kagi.com
        
       | divyaranjan1905 wrote:
       | Even startpage.com shows no results
        
         | probably_wrong wrote:
         | Startpage works for me in Germany, and has been working all
         | morning. DDG remains unhappy.
        
         | luuurker wrote:
         | It's working for me. Also, they use Google for search results,
         | not Bing.
        
       | keybits wrote:
       | A Microsoft outage is the source of this problem:
       | A massive Microsoft outage affects Bing.com, Copilot for web and
       | mobile, Copilot in Windows, ChatGPT internet search and
       | DuckDuckGo.              Microsoft outage started at
       | approximately 3 AM EDT and seems to have primarily affected users
       | in Asia and Europe.
       | 
       | https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/microsoft-ou...
        
         | keybits wrote:
         | Being discussed here:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40453077
        
       | tokai wrote:
       | Whats up with the 'surprised' comments about ddg? I don't like
       | ddg myself, but it has never been a secret that they base their
       | results on bing.
        
         | whalesalad wrote:
         | now I know why their results are so trash. switched to kagi a
         | few years ago and it has been quite nice.
        
           | moffkalast wrote:
           | Paying for search results? Come on, we're not _that_
           | desperate.
        
             | whalesalad wrote:
             | Totally worth it. Very happy to see a small startup start
             | eating into this space and happy to support them.
        
       | sidcool wrote:
       | Still down.
        
       | biglyburrito wrote:
       | Kagi works just fine: https://kagi.com
        
         | randomuser69 wrote:
         | 100 search for free :(
        
       | neogodless wrote:
       | Is there any possibility that the latest Windows 11 update which
       | is going out to "Insiders" now could be massively increasing the
       | load on CoPilot / Bing infrastructure?
        
       | _tk_me wrote:
       | Microsoft outage
        
       | dgan wrote:
       | Same for Startpage.
       | 
       | Using Kagi now
        
       | dgan wrote:
       | Same for Startpage
        
       | weinzierl wrote:
       | Bangs still seem to work, so "[search term] g!" saves the day
       | until this is fixed.
        
       | az09mugen wrote:
       | Startpage [0] search also is not returning web results. But image
       | search is working. I wonder what's happening.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.startpage.com
        
       | FerretFred wrote:
       | > "Update 1: Microsoft has confirmed an issue where users may be
       | unable to access the Microsoft Copilot service"
       | 
       | So not all bad then?!
        
         | TechDebtDevin wrote:
         | I'm still unsure of what MS Copilot is. For the longest time I
         | thought it was GH Cp because of the obvious association, but
         | it's not. I'm assuming it's some bunk ass Bing "AI" assisted
         | search?
         | 
         | I truly think MS is the perfect example of a moat experiencing
         | a drought. Unfortunately, money can't buy rain, it can only
         | pump water from other sources. This never works.
        
           | FerretFred wrote:
           | I encountered MS Copilot recently when I reluctantly
           | installed Windows for a local charity (their idea, not mine).
           | Basically, if you do a search it'll give you the results but
           | will then fill your screen with other information allegedly
           | related to your query but relayed in the most verbose and
           | annoying manner possible.
        
             | TechDebtDevin wrote:
             | Sounds like a native MS product.
        
           | altdataseller wrote:
           | I thibk its the AI version of Clippy or something embedded in
           | Office or Microsoft365 or whatever they call that thing these
           | days.. (i think, i have absolutely no idea either :)
        
           | mavhc wrote:
           | It's chatgpt wearing a hat and sunglasses
        
           | lenerdenator wrote:
           | For better or for worse, it absolutely works. Pumping water
           | from other sources or copying another type of well has been
           | Microsoft's MO for almost 50 years and they're one of the
           | most valuable companies on the planet.
        
             | TechDebtDevin wrote:
             | We are on different scales of time. This does not work. Ask
             | MS how well this technique went with phones. Their moat is
             | as wide as the Mississippi. It will be a while, but there's
             | a large quantity of water required to fill that ditch. They
             | obviously know what they're doing, but time has a way of
             | eating things.
        
           | t-sauer wrote:
           | Copilot is branding, not a product or feature. Problem is
           | that the features/products that run under that branding don't
           | have proper names themselves and I guess that's what trips up
           | a lot of people.
        
           | grimoald wrote:
           | Why the snarky tone? MS Copilot is a mixture of enhanced
           | search, ChatGPT like chat and Dall-E 3 for image generation,
           | but without the need to create an account (only for image
           | generation, I think). I use it at work every day and it is
           | super helpful. I haven't compared it to ChatGPT, though.
        
             | coldtea wrote:
             | > _Why the snarky tone? MS Copilot is a mixture of enhanced
             | search, ChatGPT like chat and Dall-E 3 for image
             | generation, but without the need to create an account (only
             | for image generation, I think)._
             | 
             | Because such branding deserves a snarky tone.
        
               | HeckFeck wrote:
               | _Sent from Outlook_ (whichever program /service/webapp
               | that means now)
        
               | TechDebtDevin wrote:
               | Thank you.
        
           | HeckFeck wrote:
           | No no, you're confusing it with Copilot Series X, it
           | leverages the latest Windows screen capture technology on
           | your Xbox One X Series One and is intended to help
           | speedrunners up their game, while also helping connect
           | everyone else with relevant products and services from over
           | 9000 partners.
        
         | BirAdam wrote:
         | So, uh, Copilot+PC, how much of their AI computer thing would
         | be completely useless right now?
        
       | tanelpoder wrote:
       | I had been using DuckDuckGo for the last 2-3 years, but starting
       | from early this year I noticed that their search index just
       | didn't index some of the things I searched for (enterprise tech
       | stuff). These searches worked ok before and still worked with
       | other engines. So I finally switched to Kagi and am happy with
       | it.
        
       | npteljes wrote:
       | I love the acknowledgement that DDG put on their page.
       | We're currently experiencing an issue with DuckDuckGo Search.
       | Thanks for your patience while we get our ducks in a row.
       | In the meantime, you can use other search engines right here by
       | using "bangs"
       | 
       | So fun and straightforward.
        
         | notRobot wrote:
         | Interesting how they insist that they use "so much more" than
         | just Bing for their results, but the moment Bing goes down
         | their search functionality is down entirely, unable to show a
         | single result.
        
           | devit wrote:
           | They probably start with Bing results and do custom
           | filtering, ranking and presentation, so without the initial
           | Bing results they can't do anything.
        
             | ffhhj wrote:
             | Someone please tell them they can wrap that code inside an
             | "if" condition, and continue with the rest of the search.
        
               | niutech wrote:
               | What would be the rest if they don't have their own
               | index?
        
             | niutech wrote:
             | So basically DDG is the wrapper for Bing Search, not an
             | "independent" search company as they claim.
        
               | victor_z wrote:
               | Probably. But DDG at least offers more privacy, right?
               | 
               | Right?
        
               | niutech wrote:
               | DDG has a history of breaching privacy:
               | https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/24/ddg-microsoft-tracking-
               | blo...
               | 
               | Meanwhile Brave Search or Mojeek provide more privacy,
               | being independent at the same time.
        
               | berkes wrote:
               | > Brave Search or Mojeek provide more privacy
               | 
               | Do they? Or have they just not had that "history" yet? I
               | don't see anything fundamentally different in Brave that
               | protects your and my privacy better than on DDG. I don't
               | know Mojeek enough.
        
               | syklep wrote:
               | Brave explicitly claims not to.[1] Brave also does not
               | rely on Bing for results.
               | 
               | [1] https://search.brave.com/help/privacy-policy
               | 
               | Edit: mojeek claims the same.[2]
               | 
               | [2] https://www.mojeek.com/about/privacy/
        
               | kunley wrote:
               | Last time i checked, Brave was insisting on convinving me
               | to use certain cryptocurrency platforms and it was more
               | intrusive with it than typical web ads, which seemed
               | really twisted, as the same Brave claimed to give ad-free
               | experience.
               | 
               | Are they still doing that?
        
               | NayamAmarshe wrote:
               | They don't. The cryptocurrency options are all disabled
               | by default and are opt-in.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | It literally never did that. There's some crypto wallet
               | button that you get in the address bar that you can
               | disable with a right click, and that's pretty much the
               | extent of it. All crypto and other related functionality
               | is completely opt-in.
        
               | decide1000 wrote:
               | Yes, those ads are still part of Brave.
        
               | niutech wrote:
               | I was talking about Brave Search
               | (https://search.brave.com), not Brave browser. Seaech
               | doesn't promote crypto.
        
               | Timshel wrote:
               | That only concern the browser not the search engine ?
               | 
               | HN discussion at the time:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31490515
        
               | ipqk wrote:
               | Cause Brave CEO, Brendan Eich, is such a swell guy.
        
               | kornhole wrote:
               | Yes it is one of many metasearch sites and not actually a
               | search engine. Other engines include Kagi, Yandex, Brave,
               | Mojeek, Quant, and something called Google.
        
               | niutech wrote:
               | Quant also relies on Bing API.
        
               | decide1000 wrote:
               | Quant or Qwant? Qwant does not rely on the Bing api but
               | has its own index.
        
               | mardifoufs wrote:
               | Are you sure about that? It doesn't completely rely on it
               | but didn't it use bing as one of the search providers?
               | I'm probably completely wrong and my info is outdated but
               | I'm asking because it would be pretty special (in a good
               | way!) if they use their own index exclusively.
        
               | niutech wrote:
               | Qwant, sorry. On Wikiledia they mention Bing multiple
               | times: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qwant
               | 
               | Qwant was also out of service today due to Bing API
               | outage: https://www.gamingdeputy.com/bing-outage-exposes-
               | qwant-and-d...
        
               | gregw134 wrote:
               | Pretty sure kagi is a bing wrapper too, although they
               | blend in some other datasets.
        
               | miloignis wrote:
               | Kagi's main results come from Google actually. (edit: see
               | https://help.kagi.com/kagi/why-kagi/kagi-vs-google.html -
               | Kagi really shows how good Google _could_ be, since it 's
               | mostly using the Google index and then doing user-
               | friendly things instead of user-unfriendly things on top)
        
               | iamthirsty wrote:
               | While I'm not disagreeing that Kagi's main results from
               | Google, the source you linked doesn't _specifically_ say
               | that. Just says:
               | 
               | > "Heck, it even enables Kagi to exist!"
               | 
               | > "We're grateful to have access to Google's search
               | technology and infrastructure for Kagi."
               | 
               | So I wonder what the actual results mix is. Like I said,
               | could be mainly from Google.
               | 
               | Edit: Added additional quote.
        
               | pphysch wrote:
               | I firmly believe Google will release Premium Search at
               | some point. They did it quite successfully with
               | YouTube...
               | 
               | One wonders if the popular narrative around
               | crappification of Search is partially self-induced to
               | prime consumers for premiumization.
        
               | danielcampos93 wrote:
               | More countries have nukes than companies have actual
               | indexes
        
               | Zambyte wrote:
               | As someone who uses Kagi, I think it is absolutely not
               | accurate to say they are a search engine rather than a
               | meta search engine. Most of their results come from the
               | other engines you listed.
               | 
               | https://help.kagi.com/kagi/search-details/search-
               | sources.htm...
        
               | worksonmine wrote:
               | Interesting, I always had the impression they had their
               | own index. Shame.
        
               | Zambyte wrote:
               | As per the first sentence on that page, they do. It's
               | just not their only source, and from my experience it is
               | far from the main source. You can see "% of unique Kagi
               | results" on each search; these are the results from their
               | own index.
        
               | openplatypus wrote:
               | Mojeek has its very own index.
        
               | Minor49er wrote:
               | The industry term is "whitelabeling"
               | 
               | Sometimes it pays to pretend
        
               | elevatedastalt wrote:
               | The legal term is "deception".
        
               | ThrowawayTestr wrote:
               | Taking someone else's product and making it better is a
               | useful service.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | And Bing lifts their results from Google
               | (https://www.wired.com/2011/02/bing-copies-google/) so in
               | the end it seems like the internet only has one search
               | engine.
        
               | barbazoo wrote:
               | There's also Kagi
        
               | bloblaw wrote:
               | That article is from 2011. I can imagine that in 13 years
               | this may no longer be true.
        
               | pphysch wrote:
               | What would lead you to believe that in the last 13 years
               | MS would make the titanic investment of reimplementing
               | their (alleged) Google-based search backend?
               | 
               | Given the trajectory of Bing this seems unlikely.
        
               | adamomada wrote:
               | For me it's because DDG (aka Bing) results are vastly
               | different than Google results. I use the !g and !s bangs
               | often.
               | 
               | I think you're making a huge assumption that _nothing_
               | would change in 13 years!
        
               | politelemon wrote:
               | Makes me wonder, does this mean Bing is the Chromium or
               | Firefox of search?
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | Brave Search [1] is 100% independent. There's also Yandex
               | [2] which also works excellently, but is biased towards
               | more Russian language results. The image search is second
               | to none though.
               | 
               | [1] - https://search.brave.com/
               | 
               | [2] - https://yandex.com/
        
               | wannacboatmovie wrote:
               | Wait till you find out who makes some store-brand food.
        
             | throwaway425933 wrote:
             | How can a poor peasant start using Bing APIs? They seem to
             | cost a ton. Do I have to raise money before I even attempt
             | a metasearch engine.
        
           | Vinnl wrote:
           | I believe that generally refers to all their custom answers,
           | e.g. when you search for "weather <place name>".
           | Nevertheless, those don't seem to work either.
        
             | rekoil wrote:
             | I bet their engineers are currently discussing how to make
             | any such answers possible without Bing working, assuming
             | the upstream data for them is not in fact also Bing.
        
           | tinyhouse wrote:
           | Absurd. They have been doing search for so long and couldn't
           | build their own search index? I understand it's a huge
           | investment, and clearly for some data sources you need to
           | create partnerships and depend on others (e.g., youtube
           | videos). But you would think that a search engine company
           | would invest more in this area.
        
             | skeeter2020 wrote:
             | Do you really understand the scale of this (ongoing)
             | investment? I'm not sure I'd classify this as "Absurd" -
             | the value of DDG is not yet-another (tm) search index but
             | the specific values they add on top. When you have limited
             | resources I'd say they're making the right choice.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | Brave rolled their own completely independent search [1]
               | on what I assume is a relatively limited budget. It seems
               | that regularly grabbing the data would be pretty easy.
               | The harder part would be searching/ordering it in an
               | efficient and meaningful way while avoiding SEO, but that
               | seems more like a fun problem than a difficult one (if
               | not both).
               | 
               | [1] - https://search.brave.com/
        
               | tredre3 wrote:
               | There are two things the general HN sentiment genuinely
               | believes is impossible to build unless you have billions
               | of dollars:
               | 
               | - Search Engines
               | 
               | - Browser Engines
               | 
               | I don't quite understand how we got there because neither
               | of those things are impossible. Both are achievable with
               | a small team and a couple years of runway. As proved by
               | Brave and Ladybird.
        
               | adamomada wrote:
               | It's easy to make a crappy search and crappy browser, I
               | think the sentiment is aimed at producing a useful
               | alternative to google and chrome
        
             | aembleton wrote:
             | I wonder if there's anything in their contract with Bing
             | that prevents this.
        
             | niutech wrote:
             | Exactly. See Brave Search, they are much newer but did it
             | right.
        
               | slig wrote:
               | Brave Search feels like Google from 2008. Just works, no
               | BS.
        
             | ricardo81 wrote:
             | Building an organic dataset with decent results is the
             | expensive and hard part. Weather, wiki etc are the kind of
             | things you can develop on a $20/m dedicated server.
        
           | npteljes wrote:
           | I definitely felt misled, when I first learned about this,
           | back when they censored Tank Man the same time Bing did[0]. I
           | did remain a user though, mostly because I haven't felt like
           | keeping up who the current good guys are. Lately I have been
           | considering Kagi, but I don't like it that I need to log in
           | on all my devices, and then I have to have a fallback, for
           | when I'm not on my own devices.
           | 
           | So yeah, for my intents and purposes, DDG is a frontend to
           | Bing. I do appreciate how uncluttered it is though, in
           | comparison.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man#Censorship
        
             | freedomben wrote:
             | I do wish Kagi had less friction getting logged in on each
             | device, but they have gotten it as streamlined as possible
             | without patching the browsers. Your key goes in a query
             | string so you can put it in any browser's new/default
             | search engine config[1].
             | 
             | [1] https://help.kagi.com/kagi/getting-started/setting-
             | default.h...
        
             | pmlnr wrote:
             | I just left Kagi. At first, it looked very nice, but for
             | some reason, in a few weeks both Google and ddg gave me
             | much better results. The new g web filter is actually quite
             | good as well.
        
           | bambax wrote:
           | Yeah, exactly. They're mostly a front end for Bing. I know
           | they have their fans, and this remark will probably anger
           | them, but I have never understood the point of DDG.
        
           | elevatedastalt wrote:
           | There are only 3 planet scale search indices I think. Google,
           | Bing and Yandex. Everyone else is just rehashing those
           | results.
        
           | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
           | Data point: Bing was not down for me.
        
         | ReadCarlBarks wrote:
         | Firefox users can create their own "bangs" with bookmark
         | keywords. Just bookmark https://example.com/%s and then assign
         | a keyword to it from the Library window (full bookmarks
         | manager).
        
           | roelschroeven wrote:
           | Or right-click in any search box on any website, choose "Add
           | keyword for this search".
        
         | shaan7 wrote:
         | The notice helped me realize that Yahoo! Search still exists xD
        
           | Krastan wrote:
           | Doesn't yahoo also use bing under the hood?
        
         | gpvos wrote:
         | Took them several hours to put that message there though.
        
           | berkes wrote:
           | Often the case with US-based companies that have outages
           | during "office hours in Europe". We, europeans see it going
           | down. Communication on why, how and ETAs only appear at the
           | start of the US day.
        
             | mdaniel wrote:
             | This take implies there is no on-call rotation at DDG,
             | which I find suspicious
        
               | em-bee wrote:
               | the most important function of on call rotation is there
               | to fix problems, not to make announcements to the public.
               | so they surely have the first, but maybe not the second.
        
               | mdaniel wrote:
               | Well, maybe that perspective explains why it takes 6+
               | hours to update any status page then: "welp, shit's
               | broke, better wait for the management team to wake up to
               | tell anyone"
        
               | em-bee wrote:
               | more like: wait for them to decide exactly how to present
               | this to the public.
        
               | glenjamin wrote:
               | This is incorrect, the primary job of an on-call rotation
               | is to satisfy customers.
               | 
               | It's usually much better ROI to publicly acknowledge an
               | issue if the resolution is not going to be single digit
               | minutes, as it massively reduces the incoming
               | query/support burden
        
               | em-bee wrote:
               | yes, but the users of the search engine are not the
               | customers. actually, who would the customers of ddg be?
               | 
               | ad agencies? are they going to get upset if their ads are
               | not visible for a few hours on of many sites where they
               | post them? are they even going to notice?
        
             | ErrantX wrote:
             | DDG has a global remote workforce so this wouldn't seem to
             | apply in their case.
        
               | playingalong wrote:
               | (just guessing) the directors might be in US though
        
             | openplatypus wrote:
             | DDG has relatively large pool of European employees.
        
           | adamomada wrote:
           | They should put an if results = 0 then post helpful message
           | instead of try broken search again?
        
         | realfeel78 wrote:
         | I thought _I_ was easily entertained.
        
       | eth0up wrote:
       | I'm not sure why DDG has become such an acceptable google
       | alternative. Even google returns less IP-based, irrelevant
       | results. It's not terrible and sometimes it's good, but results
       | are frequently absurd. I find an instance of searx, or even
       | swisscows generally superior. DDG has no regard for specific
       | queries and always seems to insert a handful of ridiculous IP-
       | based results, however impossibly pertinent to the subject. I
       | think DDG has IP tourette.
        
       | knifie_spoonie wrote:
       | It's probably because Bing is down
        
       | Brajeshwar wrote:
       | The movies were indeed way ahead and knew -- Mothership snaps and
       | the entire fleet just collapse like an unplugged discharged
       | device.
        
       | is_true wrote:
       | Probably nothing, or a rogue AI is taking over MS.
       | 
       | This is the real world...if a tree falls in the forest and no one
       | hears it
        
         | jklein11 wrote:
         | Go on... if a tree falls in the forest, and no one hears it...
         | ?
        
           | throwaway211 wrote:
           | The falling produces a sound that no one hears.
        
           | wglb wrote:
           | Do the other trees laugh at it?
        
       | aeonian_8 wrote:
       | "We're currently experiencing an issue with DuckDuckGo Search.
       | Thanks for your patience while we get our ducks in a row.
       | 
       | In the meantime, you can use other search engines right here by
       | using "bangs":                   Google: !g why did youtube
       | remove my subscriptions list         Yahoo: !y why did youtube
       | remove my subscriptions list         Wikipedia: !w why did
       | youtube remove my subscriptions list         And many more."
       | 
       | This change just happened. I've been waiting on Ddg since ~10am
       | in Frankfurt, Germany.
        
       | cooljoey wrote:
       | Oops, lots of corporate MS Dynamics platforms are down as they
       | rely on Bing address api
        
       | cooljoey wrote:
       | Oops lots of corporates MS Dyanmics platforms down as they rely
       | on Bing address api!
        
       | sixthDot wrote:
       | what a quack
        
       | philipov wrote:
       | Single point of faaaaiiiiiluuuuure - Sing it!
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | I love it when Cloudflare accidentally breaks something and
         | over half of the entire internet immediately goes down.
        
           | mdaniel wrote:
           | I also love that because I hope it will cause people to
           | rethink such rampant centralization. Yeah, I get it, blah,
           | blah, ddos, spider, etc, but for their gatekeeping, there
           | sure doesn't seem to be any appeals process if they deem you
           | to be Not An Upstanding Netizen
        
       | MatthiasPortzel wrote:
       | Luckily !g still works, but this is pretty by bad.
        
       | binarymax wrote:
       | Unlikely, but perhaps this might motivate DDG into finally making
       | their own index and eventually drop bing
        
       | blondie9x wrote:
       | Is it just me or is search terribly broken on the internet.
       | 
       | It's Google or Bing and Bing imposters.
       | 
       | Why aren't there more broad search options? Search was better
       | when we had page rank algorithms. It's gotten over condensed into
       | 2 companies.
        
         | alphabetting wrote:
         | search has always been hard and say if you do get market share
         | on google, a portion of the massive SEO industry will
         | eventually turn their sights on you and make your life hell.
        
         | lawn wrote:
         | Like others have said, try out Kagi. I didn't buy the hype but
         | the results are much better.
        
         | nottorp wrote:
         | Page rank was a google thing, and it helped them take market
         | share from everyone else and achieve their current quasi-
         | monopoly?
        
       | benrutter wrote:
       | I use Ecosia (which Bing powered) and wondered why it was down
       | earlier. Makes you realise just how few players there actually
       | are in the search rankings space.
        
         | repeekad wrote:
         | I believe you.com has their own proper search index? Ecosia and
         | duckduckgo exist purely on ad revenue, any good search engine
         | will be paid for in the future, even Google's non-ad search
         | results make me hesitant, it's all SEO spam now, plus chatGPT
         | or Gemini can answer nearly any question when you pay for the
         | real service
        
       | jandrusk wrote:
       | How in the world is DDG dependent upon Bing to function? So glad
       | I switched to Brave Search :)
        
       | kbazbaz wrote:
       | From DDG: https://x.com/DuckDuckGo/status/1793557968027570527
        
       | IG_Semmelweiss wrote:
       | Question for OP. What would be your guess that someone like he
       | article writer is able to make the inference that Bing being down
       | was also impacting DDG or ChatGPT ?
       | 
       | Is it public knowledge that they use the Bing backend to do their
       | work ?
       | 
       | Particularly for Bing Copilot, isn't the relationship the other
       | way around (OpenAI has the core sauce, bing uses its API to power
       | their copilot searches) ?
        
         | jerpint wrote:
         | Microsoft has the compute, so its likely to be an
         | infrastructure problem
        
         | marcosdumay wrote:
         | At least for DDG, it's public knowledge.
        
       | rodondenderon wrote:
       | Nice to see https://search.brave.com/, https://entireweb.com and
       | https://mojeek.com are still kicking it. In case anyone needs to
       | know alternatives besides the monopoly that is Google.
        
       | mistyvales wrote:
       | Maybe it's an issue with their Bing connection..
        
       | markbeare wrote:
       | This probably relates to the Bing Search API. A lot of these
       | alternative search engines are using Bing for the organic
       | results.
        
       | noman-land wrote:
       | It's still down... crazy.
       | 
       | I had to use Yahoo today, ew.
        
       | jraph wrote:
       | DDG is back.
        
       | kbazbaz wrote:
       | Back: https://x.com/DuckDuckGo/status/1793652538476216398
        
       | dudeinjapan wrote:
       | Bet their site reliability team was saying "F*k F*k No!"
        
       | gunapologist99 wrote:
       | I switched to Brave search; I think their search results are from
       | a search engine they acquired, so they don't use Bing or Google
       | unless you tell them to 'mix in' those results. I've actually
       | found Brave search's results to be more accurate and less spammy
       | than Google's, but they still exhibit similar biases in
       | predictable areas.
        
       | udev4096 wrote:
       | I hope duckduckgo tries to shift away from Bing. They were lying
       | about the fact that "we rely on different crawlers apart from
       | Bing"
        
         | iamthirsty wrote:
         | Where exactly were they lying, and how do you know for a fact?
        
       | sigmonsays wrote:
       | maybe it's time to centralize crawlers and search data, making it
       | publicly available to anyone willing to process it.
       | 
       | Not only would that reduce crawler traffic on websites to a
       | single crawler entity it would make page data available for any
       | indexer.
       | 
       | The idea that one company owns this data is kind of silly, it
       | should be a coalition or a group of companies working together...
        
         | RunningDroid wrote:
         | I think a better design would be to define a spec for search
         | data so sites that implement it could generate a ".well-
         | known/search_data.zst" (or whatever) and people would only need
         | to crawl the site to check compliance with the spec.
        
       | vondur wrote:
       | I was getting an error from Bing not working earlier today.
       | Possibly related?
        
       | phreeza wrote:
       | Did they stop publishing detailed traffic stats? They used to
       | have a very detailed page if I recall correctly, but I can't find
       | it any more.
        
       | nashashmi wrote:
       | I realized DDG was just a skin on Bing a couple of days ago.
       | Bing's results have gone incredibly sour. Too many ads on bing.
       | Bing speaks of censorship and fake results (repeated listings of
       | the same garbage on 3rd, 4th pages).
       | 
       | The only thing DDG is good for: using bangs! search any and every
       | search engine thru ![bang].
       | 
       | What other search engines are still good? Google hit the fan a
       | couple of years back after the hire of Prabhakar Raghavan
       | (https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-men-who-killed-google/). Bing
       | cowered to censored results. ChatGPT is muzzled.
        
       | kawfey wrote:
       | I grew up using Google (and ask jeeves and yahoo.) In school,
       | google won.
       | 
       | Now, google sucks. It's all ads, AI SEO maxxing, and the work to
       | find useful results has gone up manyfold. I found myself using
       | site:"" to get closer to what I needed.
       | 
       | I tried DDG, and it's more or less the same, but it's like the
       | search engine is conspiring against you to more or less find
       | completely useless results.
       | 
       | I tried kagi, and i love it. I hate that it's 100 searches for
       | the cheapest account, but it gets me right into the thick of my
       | research off the bat, plus searching smallweb has brought my
       | faith back into the internet, and it's AI stuff is useful,
       | insofar that it doesn't get in the way.
       | 
       | DDG is still my standard search tool for "picture of banana" or
       | "WWII jet airplanes" but for "forum discussion 73 magazine
       | article on homebrew superheterodyne receiver from 1980s" im going
       | straight to kagi.
        
         | elicksaur wrote:
         | >it's like the search engine is conspiring against you to more
         | or less find completely useless results.
         | 
         | Has not been my experience at all. Been using ddg as my default
         | for a few years. What kinds of searches do you find
         | frustrating?
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | In my experience DDG and Google are similar in that you
           | either get what you wanted right away, or you're doomed
           | 
           | At least with Kagi it's been worth scrolling down a page or
           | two before reformatting my search query.
        
         | Atlas48 wrote:
         | I main DDG for it's bang feature. It's permanently ingrained
         | into my muscle memory now.
        
           | niutech wrote:
           | Brave Search supports bangs too!
           | https://search.brave.com/bangs
        
       | jsemrau wrote:
       | I wrote a Langchain ReAct agent that searches the web for me
       | using Wikipedia, Serpapi (google), and DDG. Works better than
       | traditional search.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-23 23:01 UTC)