I searched torrent sites on DDG just to test what you are saying and this isn't true or maybe I am not understanding but it shows me torrent sites links so I am not aware what you might be talking about.
Interestingly, I did find that DDG isn't scrubbing Russian torrent sites from it's results. I think this makes sense if DDG is trying to compete with Yandex (who doesn't censor like DDG).
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site:uztracker.net
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site:rutracker.org
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site:piratesparadise.org (eng, hosted in Moldova)
To be fair, 1337x.tw is a fake 1337x domain [1, 2]. It's bad that it's even indexed by DDG higher than the official one, I think it would be better if it was completely hidden from results. The .tw is a malicious website that actively tries to mislead users. For example, on the main page it says "1337x.to is our main domain", but when you click on that, you get redirected to "1377x.to" (notice the swapped digit), yet another fake clone website that conveniently lists the .tw as one of the official mirrors.
Searching for site:1337x.to, which is the official domain, does give results.
I had just searched 1337x and nothing too much else so it seems that duckduckgo may (sensor?) the site:1337x.tw or similar but also I feel like ddg doesnt really censor the ability to find the website by just searchign 1337x
Although I still agree that this is interesting discovery but I didnt know that these sites allowed to be indexed in the first place and that the issue was from ddg site, I always thought it was the opposite or didnt really give much too thought into it but interesting, I would love to discuss more about why you might think so this is the case or how it can meaningfully impact I suppose.
I think that the issue here could be that there might be some censorship from big upstream or that ddg does it to prevent any legal issues which I am sure can open a load ton of questions if you scrape something tangentially related to copyright/similar so it might be understandable why they might do this I suppose.
And the reason for believing these lies is because it's easier to listen to disgraced news outlets instead of reading a book or asking questions. It's a double edged sword: duped on one side and willful ignorance on the other.
Some might say, who cares about what idiots think? Well, these idiots get one vote, just like the rest of us.
> And the reason for believing these lies is because it's easier to listen to disgraced news outlets instead of reading a book or asking questions.
If it was just laziness, their belief wouldn't persist in the face of better information.
Willfully clasping onto an absurd premise this way strongly implies to me there is some sub-optimal psychology in play. There is a needful relationship inside that is being sustained (at a starvation level) by these exploitive external forces.
Your response, to me, is profound. I've lived in a deeply red voting state (OK) all my life. I never could understand how voters could vote against their best interests and to the harm of others. Perhaps your "sub-optimal psychology in play" is a reasonable answer.
The War On Ivermectin – Jenna McCarthy
Written with Jenna McCarthy, Dr. Kory’s story chronicles the personal
attacks, professional setbacks, and nefarious efforts of the world’s major
health agencies and medical journals to dismiss and deny ivermectin’s
efficacy.
jennamccarthy.com/portfolio-items/the-war-on-ivermectin-cloned
“Everyone who does this work has depended on the records database
that Ancestry controls,” said David Gurney, who runs Ramapo College’s
Investigative Genetic Genealogy Center in New Jersey.
“Without it, casework is going to be a lot slower,
and there will be some cases that can’t be resolved at all.”
No where in here is there even a hint of acquiring the consent of the people who's data this is. Nor does the word consent appear in the article.
People who don't even think about getting consent are poor choices to be in positions of power or accountability.
In August, Ancestry revised the terms and conditions on its site to make it
clear that its services were off-limits "for law enforcement purposes"
without a legal order or warrant
Good. This is the minimum I expect from Ancestry (I have >30k names in it). If cops want to leverage the data compiled by volunteers, get a warrant and get the oversight that comes with that.
a legal order or warrant ... can be hard to get,
because of privacy concerns.
"A legal order" implies a subpoena; they require a signature from a magistrate. This is typically the opposite of hard to get.
A warrant can be hard to get if police do not provide sufficient cause or are asking for and excessively broad scope.
The difficulty level of getting a warrant goes way, way down when police submit the information the judge needs to properly evaluate it.
But police really really prefer to search without agreeing to boundaries. Including cold case officers, it seems.
The story arc is about a lost airtag that is living it's secret life in Mexico.
The link is for a post where Apple decides the distance to it's location in Mexico is greater than the circumference of the Earth.
reply