# Brave Search "attacking" DuckDuckGo **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/brave-search-attacking-duckduckgo/18878 **Category:** General **Created:** 2024-06-13T22:42:41Z **Posts:** 43 ## Post 1 by @anon80779245 — 2024-06-13T22:42:41Z Brave will now prompt DuckDuckGo users to switch to Brave Search. [Added search promotion for DDG by simonhong · Pull Request #23889 · brave/brave-core · GitHub](https://github.com/brave/brave-core/pull/23889) Thoughts ? Edit: second links with more pictures [Rotate search promotion for DDG users by simonhong · Pull Request #24057 · brave/brave-core · GitHub](https://github.com/brave/brave-core/pull/24057) --- ## Post 2 by @Valynor — 2024-06-13T22:45:35Z > If user dismiss by clicking close(`x` ) button, this banner will not be shown anymore. No reason to make a DDG vs Brave Search war out of this. --- ## Post 3 by @anon80779245 — 2024-06-13T22:49:30Z That’s why I put attack in quotes, but if you have a better title I am all ears. --- ## Post 4 by @Valynor — 2024-06-13T22:51:06Z It’s just marketing, essentially a somewhat targeted ad for Brave Search. Brave is a company that needs to make money to continue to offer us a very good browser for free. Showing an ad like this ONCE is perfectly fine in my book. --- ## Post 5 by @anon80779245 — 2024-06-13T22:51:55Z I just dislike that they are implying DuckDuckGo isn’t private. That’s what I am taking aim at. --- ## Post 6 by @xe3 — 2024-06-13T22:52:49Z > [@anon80779245](#): > > Thoughts Brave has a bit of a track record of this sort of behavior. I don’t think this warrants dusting off the pitchforks but do think that this type of behavior is not great, and doesn’t give me warm fuzzy feelings towards Brave as an organization. I think that Privacy-centric companies using negative advertising to attack one another should be looked down upon. The primary goal should be to grow the privacy space/userbase as a whole, not in-fight over existing users. > No reason to make a DDG vs Brave Search war out of this. If the goal is to avoid a search war, simply not implementing a banner intended to undermine the reputation of your competitor which says “Ditch the Duck” and calls your competitor “Bing in Disguise” is a great step towards not starting a search war… :man_shrugging: --- ## Post 7 by @Valynor — 2024-06-13T22:56:21Z But DDG is just Bing in disguise. :wink: I agree the first banner is pretty “spicy” but that’s how marketing works to generate attention. They’re not alleging things that are not true as far as I can tell. --- ## Post 8 by @anon80779245 — 2024-06-13T23:06:33Z > [@Valynor](#): > > DDG is just Bing in disguise If truth is binary, then yes. > [@Valynor](#): > > ad like this ONCE If this is once every few years that’s fine, but I should look into this. --- ## Post 9 by @anon86237473 — 2024-06-13T23:31:40Z As Valynor says — it’s just marketing garbage corpo speak and as long as it isn’t false I’d just ignore it. That said. > [@Valynor](#): > > but that’s how marketing works to generate attention. > The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy describes the Marketing Department of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation as: “A bunch of mindless jerks who’ll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.” > Curiously, an edition of the Encyclopedia Galactica which fell through a rift in the time-space continuum from 1000 years in the future describes the Marketing Department of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation as: “A bunch of mindless jerks who were the first against the wall when the revolution came.” Vive la révolution :raised_fist: --- ## Post 10 by @xe3 — 2024-06-13T23:57:17Z > [@Valynor](#): > > But DDG is just Bing in disguise. :wink: If we Ignore privacy completely, then yeah, kind of. But if we Ignore privacy, Brave is Just Chromium “in disguise.” I don’t think that is a fair characterization of Brave Browser, and I don’t think it’s a fair characterization of DDG. --- ## Post 11 by @anon21666177 — 2024-06-14T02:10:28Z The difference is that Brave using a chromium base does not require forwarding your queries to a 3rd party. DDG is offering users a Bing proxy rather than their own search engine. Brave has every right to inform DDG users who may not be aware of this. Not every DDG user is as well-versed in privacy tech as the PG community. The Brave ad is merely providing info to those who may not be aware. --- ## Post 12 by @jonah — 2024-06-14T07:09:03Z Do they do this to Google/Bing? --- ## Post 13 by @anon21666177 — 2024-06-14T07:40:10Z Not sure, but after some digging it may be a response to DDG putting a big banner telling Brave users to “upgrade to DDG”: > **[DuckDuckGo Banner Ad](https://community.brave.com/t/duckduckgo-banner-ad/522074)** > > Description of the issue: New DuckDuckGo banner ad. Exact URL of the website in question: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Brave+Browser Screenshot of the ad as it appears in Brave: Did the issue present with default Shields settings? (yes/no) ... --- ## Post 14 by @anon55464882 — 2024-06-14T08:40:38Z As far as I remember, this banner was not limited to users of the Brave browser but was visible to users of any browser other than the DDG browser. Please correct me if I’m wrong. Edit: Okay, it’s not visible on Firefox, but on Chrome. Seems like it might be Chromium-exclusive. --- ## Post 15 by @jonah — 2024-06-14T10:35:05Z I’m tired of all this in-fighting between privacy projects, it’s lame. --- ## Post 16 by @overdrawn98901 — 2024-06-14T12:40:47Z Not sure if niche is the right word for privacy, but it’s definitely a subset of the available market. So it’s not unsurprisingly a business is trying to snipe other clientele. My opinion is that privacy products are like having a string of great bars or restaurants close together. One might think that it would spread clientele thin among them all, but having many options and choices attracts a larger audience. Analogy kind of breaks if they do the exact same thing though - I personally just stick with a private searx or fallback to DDG. --- ## Post 17 by @anonymous176 — 2024-06-14T13:35:35Z I think the duckduckgo banner on their search engine is far worse, cause the browser is just not competitive at all. at least brave search is basically just an equivalent to duckduckgo search, not better or worse. and the source of search results is a legitimate advantage. duckduckgo’s browser is an active downgrade and just bad. basically zero reason to ever use it. and at least in brave’s browser you have the option to use other search engines, unlike duckduckgo’s one which forces you to use DDG --- ## Post 18 by @Dkama — 2024-06-15T02:25:07Z > [@anon80779245](#): > > I just dislike that they are implying DuckDuckGo isn’t private. That’s what I am taking aim at. Specially when they have an alternative claim that is factual and irrefutable: ddg is pro censorship and will curate results based on their political bias and agenda. > [@jonah](#): > > Do they do this to Google/Bing? How many people use Google in Brave browser though? How many people use Bing at all? --- ## Post 19 by @pinkandwhite — 2024-06-15T06:20:15Z > [@Dkama](#): > > ddg is pro censorship and will curate results based on their political bias and agenda. And by pro-censorship you mean “attempting to help limit the spread of pro-Russian propaganda and health misinformation”. Almost like “censorship” can be good sometimes. --- ## Post 20 by @anon73250778 — 2024-06-15T07:19:49Z I am starting to believe that a person or a country definition of dystopia is another’s utopia. That is country politics for you. --- ## Post 21 by @session.fraction — 2024-06-15T13:58:42Z All search engines curate results to show users what they need. Usually when users look something up on the internet they are looking for accurate information. --- ## Post 22 by @Dkama — 2024-06-15T23:58:13Z > [@pinkandwhite](#): > > And by pro-censorship you mean “attempting to help limit the spread of pro-Russian propaganda and health misinformation”. Almost like “censorship” can be good sometimes. They substituted “Russian propaganda” with all those articles saying Russia was getting crushed and the war wouldn’t last more than a couple of months because Russia was losing in a landslide. Ddg users thank God they got all those unbiased quality news and not any sort of propaganda, right? --- ## Post 23 by @pinkandwhite — 2024-06-16T00:39:29Z Do you have a source? I could link to DDG blogposts and other sources about their removal and downranking of russian misinformation, but I’m not sure that you could provide a source for your very random claim beyond some western news sources being overly optimistic about last year’s ukrainian counteroffensive. Happy to be proven wrong :slight_smile: --- ## Post 24 by @wojciechxtx — 2024-06-16T13:34:26Z > [@jonah](#): > > it’s lame. Maybe. But look at it this way: the more in-fighting, the more people talk about it, the quicker the word spreads…`shady` marketing-wise its brilliant way. --- ## Post 25 by @anon73250778 — 2024-06-17T01:43:39Z > [@wojciechxtx](#): > > the more in-fighting, the more people talk about it, the quicker the word spreads That would be preaching to the choir. We are already drinking the koolaid. There is no need for infighting because it serves no one in the community. This is wasting everyone’s time and effort when we could be preaching to our loved ones (or normies). --- ## Post 26 by @xe3 — 2024-06-17T03:30:27Z > [@anon73250778](#): > > That would be preaching to the choir. We are already drinking the koolaid. Yeah, It isn’t a huge deal, but I think this is what frustrates me about these types of antics. Its zero-sum marketing. It does nothing to grow or attract people to the privacy community as a whole, it is just one privacy company seeking to undermine another, trying to poach some users. It contributes to a divisive atmosphere within our little niche, without doing anything to attract newcomers to the privacy space as a whole. The only people who will see these banners are people who have deliberately gone out of their way to install Brave Browser, _and_ also deliberately gone out of their way to change Brave’s default search engine to DDG instead of Brave Search. Clearly this small group of users are already part of the privacy space, and have expressed an explicit preference for DDG search. --- ## Post 27 by @anon80779245 — 2024-08-14T07:41:12Z Update: **They now (quietly) removed the most “aggressive” stuff**, instead emphasizing the advantage of their product. Source: > > > ### Description > > We added four types of banner via https://github.com/brave/brav…e-core/pull/24057 > Delete type A and B and use only C and D types for promotion. > > ### Steps to reproduce > > 1. Launch brave with --enable-features=BraveSearchOmniboxDDGBanner > 2. Set DDG as a default search provider > 3. Type anything in omnibox and check DDG promotion entry is shown at last > 4. Wait 1 min at least to see another DDG promotion > 5. type anything and check different DDG promotion is visible > 6. Repeat 4-5 several times to see 2 types(C or D) of promotion is shown > > ### Actual result > > We can see four types of banners. > > ### Expected result > > We can see two types of banners. > > ### Reproduces how often > > Easily reproduced > > ### Brave version (brave://version info) > > `1.69.x` > > ### Channel information > > - [] release (stable) > - [X] beta > - [X] nightly > > ### Reproducibility > > - [] with Brave Shields disabled > - [] with Brave Rewards disabled > - [] in the latest version of Chrome > > ### Miscellaneous information > > cc @rebron @brave/qa-team The original 4 banners : [Rotate search promotion for DDG users by simonhong · Pull Request #24057 · brave/brave-core · GitHub](https://github.com/brave/brave-core/pull/24057) --- ## Post 28 by @Satoshi — 2024-08-14T10:32:07Z So weird seeing Brave and DDG fight each other when they both suck and should be avoided lol --- ## Post 29 by @anon80779245 — 2024-08-14T10:39:00Z Because ? --- ## Post 30 by @pedroluccasc — 2024-08-14T13:20:57Z > [@wojciechxtx](#): > > Maybe. But look at it this way: the more in-fighting, the more people talk about it, the quicker the word spreads…`shady` marketing-wise its brilliant way. I strongly disagree with this perspective. Instead of infighting, privacy-focused projects should form a coalition and work together. They should focus on promoting their strengths without resorting to spreading unverified or misleading information. Each project should highlight its benefits without attacking others, channeling their energy into collaborative efforts that educate and attract more people to the cause of privacy and security. (Maybe also explore ways to extend end-to-end encryption beyond individual projects.) The so-called “shady” marketing tactics have been a significant obstacle for newcomers to the privacy community. Instead of finding informative content about the merits of cryptography or why a particular protocol is superior, they’re bombarded with fear-mongering messages like, “If you don’t use a project based in Switzerland (or any other country), you’re being surveilled,” or “If you use X (their competitor, LOL), you’re being spied on.” This approach is not only ineffective but also harmful to the entire privacy community. --- ## Post 31 by @overdrawn98901 — 2024-08-14T13:23:31Z Honestly they probably analyzed click rates and other metrics and saw it wasn’t as successful as they hoped, so they are switching campaigns. --- ## Post 32 by @asanyan — 2024-08-14T13:31:11Z Imagine recommending Brave to someone who wants to switch away from MS Edge precisely due to this sort of behavior, and they immediately see this when they go make a search. :clown_face: --- ## Post 33 by @anon49578468 — 2024-08-14T16:14:38Z Very true. This idea of privacy-oriented market being a zero sum game is harmful. That is why I kinda liked how Signal’s President handled Apple starting to use post quantum encryption ([Link](https://mastodon.world/@Mer__edith/111975554420142260)). This is how you welcome competition while also showing how your product is different. --- ## Post 34 by @pedroluccasc — 2024-08-14T16:28:26Z Absolutely agree, Meredith. It’s a perfect example of handling competition gracefully without coming across as unoriginal or lame. --- ## Post 35 by @wojciechxtx — 2024-08-15T12:15:36Z > [@Satoshi](#): > > they both suck @Satoshi I know why `Brave` suck and am in full agreement here, but why `DDG` suck is unknown to me. Will you explain? --- ## Post 36 by @get2thepoint — 2024-08-15T17:46:52Z a while back, duckduckgo made a deal with microsoft to not block their trackers in their mobile browser. they eventually reneged on that deal, but still scummy. for the record brave is also scummy as hell and it astounds me that pg continues to recommend their shit. “but its open source” and “the crypto stuff isnt _that_ bad” isnt a valid excuse, not that they seem to care. bringing up these issues instead is treated and dismissed as “infighting” or “drama” as if pointing out the issue is more problematic than the issue itself. --- ## Post 37 by @dumpster — 2024-08-15T18:08:34Z > [@get2thepoint](#): > > a while back, duckduckgo made a deal with microsoft to not block their trackers in their mobile browser. they eventually reneged on that deal, but still scummy. What’s worst is they kept this secret. They advertised that their “privacy browser” blocks trackers, but omitted that they whitelisted Microsoft trackers. They only admitted to it after an independent researcher broke the story. They lied to us. They betrayed us. Nothing Brave has done comes close to comparing to that. --- ## Post 38 by @asanyan — 2024-08-15T18:21:32Z I agree with this, but Brave is still the least bad Chromium browser. IMO it makes sense to recommend but the caveats and controversies should be stated somewhere. (Ungoogled Chromium is good on some platforms, but even in these it wouldn’t fit the PG criteria as it takes a few days to update sometimes) --- ## Post 39 by @anon73250778 — 2024-08-16T05:43:54Z > [@asanyan](#): > > least bad Browsers and their web rendering engines ought to be more like “actually good” rather than “least bad” but this is the kind of world we live in. What does it take for an “actually good” browser to exist? --- ## Post 40 by @asanyan — 2024-08-16T14:25:24Z In my opinion, firefox derivatives (LibreWolf, MB, even Floorp), are good. Chromium derivatives though not so much. I like the QtWebEngine browsers but there’s the problem that they use older Chromium versions. --- ## Post 41 by @Nima — 2024-08-16T22:44:57Z The press is thoroughly integrated into the intelligence apparatus of the state, if we go by your claim that “censorship can be good” and DDG should downrank anything based on claims of state-propaganda(which doesnt mean it is necessarily false), then DDG should also start downranking western sources(nearly all news outlets) blatantly lying about and supporting the Israeli/US genocide in Gaza with Europe’s backing. --- ## Post 42 by @Valynor — 2024-08-16T23:27:56Z There is no perfect search engine or browser. Everything has a bias. There’s the personal bias by the people that control the ranking of a search engine, there is bias on a company level and there is bias on a political level, too. You will not find a flawless solution. The only thing we can do is to inform us from a multitude of sources and trying to be aware of the bias in those **and in ourselves** and find our own conclusions. --- ## Post 43 by @anon80779245 — 2024-08-18T20:30:14Z With that word, I think this thread can be closed. --- ## Post 44 by @ph00lt0 — 2024-08-30T13:31:39Z