DuckDuckGo extends Yahoo partnership - gHacks Tech News

DuckDuckGo extends Yahoo partnership

Search engine DuckDuckGo announced the extension of its partnership with Yahoo a moment ago that brings new features to all users of the search engine.

The search engine has partnerships with several companies including Bing, Yandex or Wikipedia that power results or features on the site.

The new partnership allows DuckDuckGo to introduce new features to the search engine. In particular, the following options are provided to all users:

  1. Options to use date filters to filter results by day, week or month.
  2. Implementation of site links to display additional links for popular sites and services.

DuckDuckGo extends Yahoo partnership

duckduckgo yahoo

To filter by time period, click on the menu icon located at the top right of the search engine and then on the Anytime listing there near the top.

This opens a new menu that you use to select day, week or month as the time period filter. It is unfortunately not possible right now to go beyond that, or select a custom range.

Site links are displayed for select company websites or services only. While you find them listed for NASA for instance, no sitelinks are provided for Google, Microsoft or Apple.

They link to points of interest on the site, and extend the site's listing in the search results significantly.

The new functionality is not rolled out fully yet which may explain why you see site links for some sites but not for others. DuckDuckGo states that the full functionality will be available soon for all users.

Privacy

DuckDuckGo reassures that the extended partnership with Yahoo is in full accordance with the company's privacy policy, and here specifically that it won't share personal information with partners.

Of course, in accordance with our strict privacy policy, we do not share personal information with any partners, including Yahoo. To make this crystal clear, Yahoo has also published a privacy statement to the same effect. We're proud to work closely with a partner who is willing to work with us to protect your privacy.

Yahoo released a statement of its own that confirms that the company does not receive unique identifiers of individuals when they run searches on DuckDuckGo.

Unless explicitly provided by users through the search queries themselves, Yahoo does not receive any unique identifiers of individuals conducting searches on DuckDuckGo. Yahoo does not attempt to identify individuals through their use of the DuckDuckGo search services.

It does receive search queries and non-personally identifiable information in the context of providing search content though.

Now You: Which search engine do you prefer currently and why?

Summary
DuckDuckGo extends Yahoo partnership
Article Name
DuckDuckGo extends Yahoo partnership
Description
Search engine DuckDuckGo announced the extension of its partnership with Yahoo a moment ago that brings new features to all users of the search engine.
Author
Publisher
Ghacks Technology News
Logo




  • We need your help

    Advertising revenue is falling fast across the Internet, and independently-run sites like Ghacks are hit hardest by it. The advertising model in its current form is coming to an end, and we have to find other ways to continue operating this site.

    We are committed to keeping our content free and independent, which means no paywalls, no sponsored posts, no annoying ad formats (video ads) or subscription fees.

    If you like our content, and would like to help, please consider making a contribution:

    Comments

    1. oz said on July 1, 2016 at 6:32 pm
      Reply

      I’m still using StartPage.com, although I do use DuckGo from time to time.

      1. pain said on July 2, 2016 at 3:46 pm
        Reply

        exact same for me ! startpage uses google results without sending any personal info to it

        1. Patrick said on July 2, 2016 at 9:53 pm
          Reply

          But most of the time Google results are not the results you are looking for, I used to use Startpage but switched to Duckduckgo, results much better.

    2. Xi said on July 1, 2016 at 6:38 pm
      Reply

      Partnership with Yandex was much better. The search results are not so good in current Yahoo partnership.
      I wish Yandex will soon overtake Yahoo in partnership with DuckDuckGo.

    3. Mark Hazard said on July 1, 2016 at 7:13 pm
      Reply

      Thanks for the article, Martin. I use DuckDuckGo exclusively.
      I am happy to learn that DuckDuckGo has not changed its no-track policy.

    4. Tom Hawack said on July 1, 2016 at 7:39 pm
      Reply

      DuckDuckGo
      StartPage (Google results)
      ixquick.eu (Results from other search engines, but not Google)
      -> ixquick.com opens the Startpage interface (powered by Google) .. a bit misleading
      Disconnect Search (for top level/secret/less queries)
      Qwant (because I’m a patriot)

      Google only for maps (and its Google Street View which I love almost as much as chocolate) and images only.
      For maps, OpenStreetMap as well.

      To have the time, the first nice gal I see in town.

    5. Sylvio Haas said on July 1, 2016 at 10:32 pm
      Reply

      Hello, Martin. I will continue using Google for one simple reason: WOT (Web Of Trust) shows on Google which links are OK and which are dangerous and this — basic in my opinion — does not happen on DuckDuckGo. WOT and DuckDuckGo should get together in order to fix this. Best regards.

      1. Tom Hawack said on July 1, 2016 at 10:46 pm
        Reply

        Pardon me for interfering Martin.

        Sylvio Haas : DuckDuckGo has ‘Site icons’ as well as ‘WOT icons” as options in its Settings / Appearance page.

        1. Sylvio Haas said on July 2, 2016 at 12:09 am
          Reply

          Tom Hawack, thank you very much for this good news (positive interference!), I will check it on DuckDuckGo.

        2. Geoff said on July 2, 2016 at 1:02 am
          Reply

          I personally abandoned WOT years ago. Sites being blocked for political or religious reasons became far too commonplace. I don’t need to be protected by the “dangers” of words and ideas.

          I’ve been mostly using DuckDuckGo for a long time. The instant access to other websites through “bang” searches (i.e., !w searches wikipedia, !yt searches youtube, etc.) is so incredibly convenient, along with the privacy built into DuckDuckGo. But I still occasionally use ixquick because the advanced search page is so clearly laid out and easy to use for complex searches.

    6. hdfh said on July 2, 2016 at 12:48 am
      Reply

      fools they have partnership and you think your searches are private

    7. Aaron Abraham N said on July 2, 2016 at 6:59 am
      Reply

      I use bing or yahoo almost exclusively. I use duck duck go too occasionally when bing fails me and when I need to use the !bang function. I love the interface of duck duck go and I would use it more regularly if it had a better image news, search and video search capability. Other than these two I use Teoma also occationally (yes it still exists) and till recently I used to search in Hotbot atleast once daily mainly for its news search functionality which surprisingly good and I liked the interface (oldschool but cool) but they dropped the news search feature and I stopped using it.
      Google isnow mostly limited to image search and that too rarely.

    8. MarkCB said on July 2, 2016 at 4:41 pm
      Reply

      Been using DuckDuckGo for years now, very happy with the Firefox DDG+ extension. I particularly like the !bangs

    9. someone said on July 2, 2016 at 6:08 pm
      Reply

      R.I.P. Duckduckgo…

    10. Christoph Wagner said on July 6, 2016 at 7:50 am
      Reply

      Still using Google. Why? Because of the bubble so many are afraid of. I’m quite often searching for programming/IT related stuff and many words are also common normal words. Google knows that I want the CS stuff at the top.

    11. carbunkle said on September 30, 2016 at 6:37 am
      Reply

      ugh. Duckduckgo, you didn’t need yahoo! why????? Noooooooo. -1 Trust

    Leave a Reply