Well, I only suggested putting DDG in the list of search engines, but making
it default would be interesting.
As earlier said, Google the search engine is certainly not "freer" than DDG;
neither is Yahoo, Bing, or the other search engines in the list right now.
Yet DDG is partly based on Yahoo BOSS, which seems to not really be free
software at all:
http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/search/bosstos/bosstos-2317.html
Of course, Google/Bing/Yahoo are just as restrictive. And most of the code on
GitHub for DDG seems to be under a free software license:
https://github.com/duckduckgo
The owner of the site has said his intention is to make DDG 100% F/OSS...
over a period of time. Of course, history shows that intentions, no matter
how well promised, often don't turn out as *intended*. ;) (Personally I trust
DDG, but who am I to speak for others?)
I'd had an idea for a free-software search engine awhile ago (who hasn't?),
but I didn't have the time, energy, experience, or more importantly money to
make it.
There are already 100% free search engines, but most are incomplete, older,
and require downloading their software. Others are just the API for a search
engine. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Free_search_engine_software )
Having a window that pops up and asks what search engine you want to use (and
allowing you to change the choice later) would be great, but this still could
be considered as indirectly promoting non-free software. After all, isn't
Canonical's inclusion of Adobe Flash and Air in its repository considered
"promotion of non-free software"? (
http://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html#Ubuntu ) True, Flash is
directly non-free and the search plugins aren't, but Canonical's decision was
indirectly promoting it.
Besides, if you had the choice between a brand you're familiar with and some
other brand that you've never heard of, which would you take?
This issue brings up a lot of ethical questions: Is having Google or another
non-free site the default search promoting non-free software? What about
"open-source" sites? What about part-free software sites? Is indirectly using
non-free software the same as directly using it? What about sites that
contribute to F/OSS projects? Google has contributed to F/OSS, but they are
also the guys with Chrome and privacy concerns.
Perhaps it's a necessary evil? Or maybe we need to make a DDG alternative?
