Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google Privacy Microsoft Mozilla Technology

Mozilla Exec Urges Switch From Google To Bing 527

Andorin writes "Asa Dotzler, Mozilla's director of community development, has published a brief blog post in which he recommends that Firefox users move from using Google as their main search engine to Bing, citing privacy issues. Disregarding the existence of alternative search engines such as Ask and Yahoo, Dotzler asserts that Bing's privacy policy is better than Google's. Dotzler explains the recommendation with a quote from Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google: 'If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines — including Google — do retain this information for some time...' Ars Technica also covers the story."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla Exec Urges Switch From Google To Bing

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Google (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 11, 2009 @09:18AM (#30400602)

    I actually applaud Firefox for this change.

    What change? They didn't change anything.

    Marketing companies shouldn't just fuck everyone in the ass for their own gain.

    You know Microsoft's privacy policy isn't all that better. They still associate your search with your name and ip address for 18 months after you searched. 'Fuck everyone in the ass for their own gain' is a bit of a hyperbole, wouldn't you say?

  • Clusty (Score:3, Informative)

    by LeepII ( 946831 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @09:24AM (#30400654)
    Clusty is by far the best search engine. I don't understand why more people are not using it.
  • by Malc ( 1751 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @09:24AM (#30400658)

    Google has been pissing me off recently with their toolbar updates that change the behaviour of the browser. If I wanted the new window/tab functionality of Firefox to behave like Safari, I'd be using Safari. Why do I want the sidewiki thing, or whatever it's called? Etc, etc. Piss off: I got the google toolbar as better way of searching for things, along with find in page option when I have the results. So it gets uninstalled.

  • How about Cuil (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 11, 2009 @09:40AM (#30400814)

    It surprises me that when there are discussions about search engine privacy, Cuil never seems to be mentioned. Or at least I do not see it.

    On Cuil's privacy page it says:
    "When you search with Cuil, we do not keep any personally identifiable information, period. Your search history is your business."

    So is there some reason Cuil is not brought up more? Maybe there are resons not to use it that I do not know about. Or perhaps it is just not well known.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 11, 2009 @09:40AM (#30400816)

    Yes, because if he had put actual thought into the recommendation, he would have suggested people use Ask.com with AskEraser [ask.com] turned on. It has by far the best privacy policy of the options provided by search companies.

    Bing's policy is no better than Google's, and the sole decision process here seems to have been that Googe's CEO said something stupid (though factually true given currrent laws) this week, but Microsoft's CEO didn't.

  • Re:Clusty (Score:4, Informative)

    by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @09:57AM (#30400986) Homepage
    Well, for one thing, searching for mozilla recommends bing [clusty.com] doesn't return any hits relevant to this story. Unlike Google. And Bing.
  • Switch to CUIL (Score:3, Informative)

    by chord.wav ( 599850 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @10:00AM (#30401034) Journal

    Or you can use CUIL (http://www.cuil.com). It's a great search engine
    As they say: Cuil analyzes the Web, not its users

  • by jmyers ( 208878 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @10:12AM (#30401182)

    Most people will like the design elements of Bing.
    shopping - so does Google
    links to other products - so does Google
    I just pulled up Google and Bing search results side by side, some font on my monitor.
    I noticed a direct link to a PDF in my results

    Have you actually tried Bing?

    I just did a couple of searches in Bing and compared the results to Google, got almost the exact same sites.

    Never underestimate Microsoft. The worst thing Google can do is get cocky and think MS is not a competitor.

  • Well there's a twist (Score:2, Informative)

    by club ( 1698284 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @10:20AM (#30401284)
    Most of the Mozilla Corporation's profit comes from Google. In 2006 they made 66.8 million dollars, 85% of which was from Google.[Citation given] [computerworld.com]

    And now they're telling people to abandon Google and go with Bing -- which is owned by a competing that would gladly kill Firefox if given the chance.

    I really think Dotzler is a bit off the mark here.
  • Re:Google (Score:1, Informative)

    by theIsovist ( 1348209 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @10:23AM (#30401328)
    Mods, how is this flame bait?
  • Re:clusty, hmmm (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 11, 2009 @10:23AM (#30401330)

    It's the same search engine which runs the search website's of the US, Norway, New Zealand and Israel Governments. http://www.gcn.com/Articles/2008/05/21/Widgets-to-the-rescue.aspx [gcn.com]

    Surprisingly big for a search engine that so few people have ever heard of.

  • use scroogle (Score:2, Informative)

    by kcyber ( 652633 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @10:32AM (#30401432)
    + google search
    + ssl available
    + no cookies

    - no personalization

    http://www.scroogle.org/ [scroogle.org]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 11, 2009 @10:40AM (#30401530)

    I admire him for ruining Novell.

  • Re:Google (Score:3, Informative)

    by TheCoders ( 955280 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @11:23AM (#30402080) Homepage

    > they don't have the right to deny requests from law enforcement agencies

    This is true, if the government comes to them while they still have the information or before they gather it. The difference is, Google will keep your information around a lot longer than Microsoft will, and they put it to all kinds of marketing purposes that may be pushing the "don't-be-evil" envelope.
    See http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2282232,00.asp [pcmag.com]

  • Re:The Blog Page (Score:2, Informative)

    by Myen ( 734499 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @11:24AM (#30402094)

    Yep, that's his personal blog (in fact, explicitly not listed in Planet Mozilla by his choice).

    The background is trees - he recently bought a nice wooden house somewhere; there's blog posts about that too.

  • Re:Google (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 11, 2009 @11:24AM (#30402106)

    sopssa, with his fairly recent UID, is quickly parroting as a Microsoft/anti-open/anti-Google poster child... he was the first to post recently in an anti-Linux fashion and his obvious angst against open source principles in general... a quick look at history is revealing.

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1473112&cid=30382128 [slashdot.org]

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1474872&cid=30399306 [slashdot.org]

  • Re:Make privacy easy (Score:4, Informative)

    by icebraining ( 1313345 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @11:49AM (#30402436) Homepage

    If you and the stranger agree to a type of encryption with public/private keys and any of that best practice stuff; *that* information still has to be communicated. If you first mail your 'encryption key' to your stranger; then mail the encrypted message - now it just means you'd need for your information to be peeked at twice.
    If your web-browser is smart enough to be able to decrypt information from a webserver - why wouldn't some hacker's program be able to? Provided they were snooping the negotiation phase between your pc and the server? Magic?

    Don't you understand the concept of asymmetric encryption? I don't have to send my key via a secure channel. I can post my public key in this post for anyone to see.

    Anyone who wants to send me a message, will encrypt it with my publicly available key and it will only be possible to decrypt it using my private key. That's the "magic" my web-browser/email software/etc has that the hacker's programs don't have.

  • Scroogle.org (Score:3, Informative)

    by anilg ( 961244 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @11:55AM (#30402512)

    I use scroogle.org .. it's a proxy between me and google.. and they claim to erase all logs within 48 hours. (I understand it's just a claim.. still it's another entity sitting between me and google). I've always hated the way when search results in google make you think they go straight to link (the hover URL is the site abc.com), but when you click on the item, some javascript converts it to google.com?redirectsomething=abc.com. That is just plain devious in my eyes.

    You can also find the search addon at http://mycroft.mozdev.org/search-engines.html?name=scroogle [mozdev.org] which adds scroogle as default to the firefox search bar.

  • Re:Google (Score:4, Informative)

    by marcansoft ( 727665 ) <hector AT marcansoft DOT com> on Friday December 11, 2009 @12:03PM (#30402636) Homepage

    I find that Bing falls for marketing scams and SEO much worse than Firefox. Random download sites and outright scams show up in Bing first with lots of searches, while Google is much more successful at ignoring marketingese and just giving you the site you want.

    For example, searching for Wii homebrew [bing-vs-google.com] gives:
    Google:

    1. Homebrew Channel page on Wiibrew (very relevant starting place)
      • Main Page of Wiibrew (probably THE best result)
    2. Wii homebrew on Wikipedia (actually a pretty bad page, but understandably high result)
      • Homebrew Channel page on Wikipedia (decent)
    3. Some random broken site that probably sucks, but has a good domain name
    4. The Homebrew Channel's homepage

    Bing:

    1. Some random German wii homebrew site (not "official" in any way), but with a good domain
    2. Wikipedia entry
    3. Another random German homebrew site
    4. A random Spanish homebrew site
    5. An affiliate of a huge (and successful) scam getting people to pay for homebrew and warez tools
    6. Another affiliate of the scam
    7. Another affiliate

    So basically, people looking for Wii homebrew and using Bing are at a much higher chance of getting scammed. Seriously, Wiibrew isn't even in the first page of results.

    Going the other way, searching for the name of the scam (homebreware) yields (antiscam = site that explains that homebreware is a scam):
    Google: antiscam, antiscam, antiscam, scam, scam, antiscam, scam, ...
    Bing: scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam...

    Someone using Bing and doublechecking on what they're about to buy isn't going to remotely realize they're being scammed.

  • Uh... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Spewns ( 1599743 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @12:20PM (#30402858)
    Why recommend people go into the jaws of likely an even more untrustable giant corporation? Why not use a search engine actually dedicated to privacy, like ixquick? See: http://www.ixquick.com/eng/protect-privacy.html [ixquick.com]
  • Re:Privacy fears (Score:5, Informative)

    by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @12:25PM (#30402954)
    You speak as if searching anonymously were a simple matter of not logging in. The fact is, you have no real way of knowing where any given search engine may be following you. Between cookies, redirect links, ip address tracking through ads or other inline links on 3rd party sites, search content analysis (as with the "anonymized" searches leaked by AOL a few years back)... there is a real question whether anonymous web use is possible at all, a question which nobody can answer definitively since new analysis techniques are discovered all the time.
  • Re:Google (Score:3, Informative)

    by powerlinekid ( 442532 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @02:26PM (#30404850)

    informationweek.com... [informationweek.com]
    searchenginewatch.com [searchenginewatch.com]

    Yeah... it happened.

  • Re:Google (Score:3, Informative)

    by ciscoguy01 ( 635963 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @02:35PM (#30405004)
    Or use scroogle.org which proxies your google searches so they have no idea whom you are.
    Or startpage.com / ixquick.com which meta searches multiple search facilities and keeps no private information.

    http://startpage.com/eng/protect-privacy.html [startpage.com]
    Startpage is powered by Ixquick. The only search engine that does not record your IP address. Your privacy is under attack ! Every time you use a regular search engine, your search data are recorded. Your search terms, the time of your visit, the links you choose, your IP address and your User ID cookies all get stored in a database. The identity profiles that can be constructed from this cloud of information represent modern day gold for marketers. But government officials, hackers and even criminals also have an interest in getting their hands on your personal search data. And sooner or later they will...
  • Re:Google (Score:3, Informative)

    by centuren ( 106470 ) on Friday December 11, 2009 @03:43PM (#30405894) Homepage Journal

    Responding to a Subpoena [wikipedia.org] is not "volunteering".

    Quite right, but while that fact makes Yahoo, AOL, and Microsoft look less bad in that situation, it makes Google look better. From one of the cited articles:

    "Google is not a party to this lawsuit and their demand for information overreaches," Nicole Wong, Google associate general counsel, said in a statement. "We had lengthy discussions with them to try to resolve this, but were not able to and we intend to resist their motion vigorously."

    I'd say fighting a government subpoena issued on dubious grounds is a lot more respectable than simply not volunteering information.

And it should be the law: If you use the word `paradigm' without knowing what the dictionary says it means, you go to jail. No exceptions. -- David Jones

Working...