Introducing DuckDuckHack(gabrielweinberg.com) |
Introducing DuckDuckHack(gabrielweinberg.com) |
I remember suggesting ages ago that Intel's ark.intel.com should be integrated, so if you searched for Q6600 or 2600k or i7 980 it would show you details of the processor.
I might have a shot at integrating that. Does anyone know about the legality of doing so? I'm sure Intel wouldn't care, but showing the info in a zero click box would seem to be different than merely scraping the pages in order to return search results.
(1) Operator did not directly infringe on author's copyrighted works;
(5) Search engine fell within protection of safe harbor provision of Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
wouldnt the same rules applies IF the government comes after The Pirate Bay? Or even the guy who is now being extradited to US for his linking website?
Sadly it seems to no longer be supported.
* http://yubnub.org/ - one of the first if not first to create a community around web commands. Primitive string substitution
* http://queri.ac (disclaimer: I maintained it for awhile) - a small community of web commands. Supported options, bookmarklets and more. Browser-independent.
* ubiquity, https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Ubiquity, - improved on web commands by having them written in javascript and had an awesome API for combining commands and rendering command output. However, it was firefox-specific.
The main innovation I see with duckduckhack is that they're using github to foster contribution.
# hackernews / hn
"hn url" - See if a URL has been posted to HN. If so show the title and link to post + comments
"hn keywords" - Show HN search results with linked title and link to comments
hn could be an alias to hackernews.
Reddit's native search sucks in every way possible. Add a reddit keyword with similar functionality.
Matt Cutts: "An easy way to add new features to Google" http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/adding-new-features-to-google/
Actually, one could make a pretty good search engine that was just a frontend for mycroft that was able to extract results and figure out which plugins to use for which queries.
And no spying on its users! Google, you can go f-ck yourself from now on.
I love this engine. Thanks so much for creating it!
Although aim is same to make search engine a platform, technologically it is rather different. Would love to hear feedback on this.
We have a bit of an answer for conflicts on this in the FAQ: http://duckduckhack.com/#faq
"What if there are plugin conflicts? The ultimate arbiter is the user, and that's the perspective we take, i.e. what is best for the user experience? That said, often times it makes sense to combine ideas into one, better plugin."
sorry, i guess this reads really negative. it's not my intent - as i said i use it. i just wish it could be better.
I have but one problem, and it's with the site (DuckDuckHack) itself.
Could the author just make the tutorial section scrollable with the rest of the page? The current functionality is quite awkward. It's also ignorant of (most of) the keyboard (home, end, page up, page down, etc.), which is the quickest way to traverse a page.
I have more than a few ideas for hacks, after reading the very nice tutorial. Look forward to playing with it.
Looks good, guys!
Why would I do 'ddg !g "my" "search" "terms"' as opposed to 'g "my" "search" "terms"'??
Or is this using ddg as start page for your browser, or ...
Just curious.
First, all I have to do is set up DDG as the default search engine in my browser, and then I get tons of search shortcuts working without any more effort on my part. I don't have to worry about syncing between different computers, browsers (I use Chrome and Firefox at different times), and operating systems.
Second, there are many more shortcuts than I'd ever think to maintain myself, and somebody else has already put the work into defining them. I can do !{relatively popular site} and even if I'm guessing, it almost always works. (In fact, I can't remember the last time it didn't.)
I have it set there as my default search engine, and within the browser and without having to type too much (and frankly, the less I have to type on it the better) I get access to a vast amount of sites.
Since I'm using Chromium, I could probably do without the !bang-syntax on the desktop, but being able to consistantly use the same syntax on both mobile and desktop is lovely and a definitive advantage for me.
That, and the no-tracking-policy is a big bonus as well, I suppose.
2. The purpose and character of Google's summaries and cached pages is quite different from The Pirate Bay's links. (In particular, Google has no intention of totally replacing the original site with an unauthorized copy, and its content is not generally useful as such.)
3. The Pirate Bay is not covered by the DMCA's safe harbor provisions (as, again, it isn't open to the idea of taking down content at the request of copyright holders).
I'm going to guess "yes" but perhaps for others it would be no?
I'm not saying this just to be argumentative (honest!). Just that when I tried DDG as my search provider before (which was a while back now) I found that !bang looked like a great idea but just made searches slower for me. But then I've got quite a few years of established search keywords.