/tech/ - Technology★

Searx nigger

>>846347

Literally the same crap.

excite

>>846371

>decentralized

Same German ip is decentralized? :^)

Google unironically for results. But use Searx if you want a privacy-oriented search engine. Startpage is kinda good too.

Searx gives me completely unrelated search results. I will make a search for a specific word, and get results for shit completely unrelated.

I remember looking information for gasoline prices in Europe and finding a bunch of porn sites.

DuckDuckGo gives far better search results and it's way faster.

>>846395

Searx gets a lot better after you experiment with the enabled search engines in the settings. Bing likes to insert porn into your results, I think.

>>846398

>Bing likes to insert porn into your results

But why?

>>846403

They don't advertise it openly, but I've heard they put serious effort into being the best search engine for porn. I'm guessing that something about Searx, perhaps repeated queries with safe search off or something, makes it think Searx is always looking for porn.

yacy, qwant

>>846358

>>846392

You can host your own instance fucking faggot.

Yacy was a good try, but I don't think it's going anywhere.

You own local instance of searx is the best solution.

>>846408

I really love lite.qwant.com but I haven't tried yacy in a while, maybe I'll setup a instance again on my vps and see how it goes.

>>846411

If by local you mean on your local machine you're being retarded anon. The only reason searx is private at all is by having many users associated with a single ip, that of the server where searx is hosted. If you don't want to forward your search queries just as if you were using the engines searx is built on you need other users to use your instance anon.

>>846412

just configure it to use tor, once startpage reaches a certain size, they'll sell user data as well, if they're not already doing it. still better than using google directly though

>>846412

You're the one being retarded. You're trusting a tier to not reveal your profile, and give up the logs.

You're the kind of retard who sub to some VPN provider blindy trusting them for the logs?

lol

>>846414

I'm not trying to belittle searx, it's a fine idea if you have enough users to obfuscate your traffic. I just disagree with anons suggestion. If you're using tor though does it really matter which search engine you use?

>>846415

Difference is I'm aware of my insecurity. You seem to think that by forwarding your traffic to multiple search providers from your ip with no other traffic to obfuscate your own you're making your situation better instead of worst by a factor of exactly however many search engines you have enabled.

>>846419

If you think that makes any difference fam from the eyes of your ISP

>>846422

???

>>846419

>If you're using tor though does it really matter which search engine you use?

true, but it still has a function in preventing fingerprinting, js, cloudflare, captchas, and so on, while still being pretty fast.

i'd mostly recommend it because you can get good results and usabilty, and have a lot of options regarding search engines for fine-tuning.

if you use an instance hosted somewhere else you again run into the problem of having to trust them not to keep logs as well.

>>846412

> haven't tried yacy in a while,

now that you mention it neither have i, but the last time i used it i didn't get search results as useful as qwant which i understand why, so i ditched it

>>846429

I've used it before, I did quite like it. I'm not at all opposed to searx, I'm just opposed to not obfuscating your traffic while using it. I also agree hosting your own is a better solution, but if your instance isn't public where other users can use it your traffic isn't obfuscated, that's my only point.

>>846444

presumably it's always getting better as more people index things. Too bad the demo-portal is down I would have liked to have tested it without installing the full application.

>>846445

>if your instance isn't public where other users can use it your traffic isn't obfuscated, that's my only point.

yes, that's true. maybe we should petition vc to put up searx.cock.li, that would be reasonably trustworthy, i think, and potentially have a big enough userbase

>>846460

That'd be cool, we should petition him to accept a crypto with a bit cheaper transaction fee and a focus on anonymity while we're at it, btc is getting a ridiculous.