But I don't like having my actions logged, and my results filtered.
I would rather drive a Ford Escort, than drive a BMW that had a gps tracker that was actively monitoring my every move, and making certain roads invisible to me.
But anyways, my reasoning is not really on topic.
Just looking for peoples input on search engines that they have used, that are not google.
The thing is that whether or not to follow the law is not a choice of the web search engines. Bing* probably do exactly the same filtering. Else they would be shut down.
* Yahoo does not count, it uses Bing.
So in order to avoid the censorship, you would need to find a web search engine that does not actually use google or bing as result provider. And that it intentionally disobeys DMCA complaints and that it can actually provide accurate results. Each of those assertions makes the theoretical search engine more and more unlikely.
Last edited by vexorian; September 5th, 2012 at 11:59 PM.
Whether posting a link to infringing content itself constitutes "contributory infringment" is, I believe, still not resolved by US Courts. It certainly hasn't been taken to the Supreme Court.
ISPs are protected from legal action only if they comply with take-down requests. The law is vague about whether noncompliance with one request could remove the "safe-harbor" provisions under which an ISP may operate. If I were Google I wouldn't want to take a chance with that.
My biggest complaint with Google these days is that search result URLs are embedded in tracking URLs so it's typically no longer possible simply to right-click a URL on a results page and copy and paste it into another document without the Google cruft. If the URL points to an HTML document you can follow it to the actual site and then copy and paste the URL from the address bar. The process is much more difficult if the link points to a PDF document. Following the link downloads the document and displays it in a helper application (in my case, Okular), but that doesn't help. Sometimes you can copy the link text which is displayed below the title, but if the URL is too long, it will be edited and thus cannot be used.
Just saying that a website that uses google as search engine is not really an alternative to google. It is good as a layer between you and google to avoid logging your searches. Not really a true "alternative" but more of an addon.
I think the only real alternative to google is Bing. But it logs you just as much if not worse than google.
Last edited by vexorian; September 6th, 2012 at 12:22 AM.
It is using google. It is actually the first thing the web site tells you. Any DMCA-related filtering google does will be inherited by startpage.com.
It is really no different than a proxy between you and google.
Google respects user privacy more than any corporation I've ever seen or heard of... And they're also quite open about what they track and don't track, and give plenty of options to the user.
I think this Google paranoia is completely unfounded...