On 06/02/11 at 10:21pm, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 16:06 -0400, William Hopkins wrote: > > On 06/02/11 at 09:49pm, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > Unfortunately there seems to be no search engine able to replace > > > Google's search engine. > > > > > > E.g. > > > http://www.ixquick.com/ > > > and > > > http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm > > > can't replace Google for my needs. > > > > Scroogle IS google. So.. not a great example? > > The 'hacked' Google don't need plugins to ensure that Google doesn't > collect your data. Not everybody is using Firefox. > But Scroogle for the German language isn't really a German Google, hits > very often are terrible translated English sides, when using Scroogle. > Other search engines, such as Clusty became untrustworthy.
I don't follow your meaning of 'hacked'. I wasn't aware scroogle didn't localize, sorry. But it IS still google. > > > > > > Btw. I talk homepages down that use trackers, such as Google analytics. > > > > noscript and requestpolicy do a fair job at blocking such things. > > There are a lot more that can do this I know, but to be secure I don't > like to leave the house armed with a Colt. If I would need a Colt to > leave my home, I wouldn't feel comfortable. Analogies might be a little > bit inappropriate, but IMO it's a similar situation. I have no idea what you are talking about. 1) these addons are for privacy more than security 2) your analogy is awkward, if you lived in some dangerous area and had to carry a gun... what? Are you suggesting not to do so for 'comfort'? I really am lost here. What's your proposed alternative? -- Liam
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
