- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Cool. As if the over-promotion of AI garbage wasn’t enough of a reason to stop using it.
Google begins recommending DuckDuckGo.
I just wish they wouldn’t use Apple Maps.
Is there a search engine where the maps tab uses Openstreetmap?While I guess I’d prefer if they used openstreetmaps, is there anything wrong with Apple Maps other than being less open?
I find it’s close to useless in comparison. It doesn’t even show house numbers on the map.
Or SearXNG. I run an instance, you can check it out: search.gregtech.eu
That or Startpage
Me, to Google right now:
If only I could replace YouTube…
Being a parasite is the Google business model
yt-dlp direct to > peertube. Never google/yt again, i would prefer books instead cooperate with them
Curious if this going to affect google results in Searx. Not sure how it works (scraping page, API, etc)
I’ve been using search xng for about 6 months now. It’s been great
You can also use Startpage, which copies google’s results.
deleted by creator
MetaGer
“Ehrnagawd! Meta ger!” - Slid Snack
Kagi too.
I like the results, especially for research. Definitely worth it for me.
Yacy Run your own alternative. With the possibility p2p that others find your crawled pages the other way around. Screwed in p2p that you only get results from others but don’t share any yourself. Complete island mode - no p2p takes place and can also be operated offline locally. You control the crawler, the results well just anything.
DuckDuckGo
Kagi for me
🥱
I fucking hate how these companies get so bloated and then start doing whatever the fuck they want.
Never use google to search. There are many other options and all of them are better than google.
I don’t know about better but people just start understanding that going to the guy with the largest market share is saying that you are satisfied with being abused by a monopoly.
There other options, use 'em
Just makes me realize that I haven’t used Google search in like over a year now because I use Kagi. Even before that i was using searx-ng.
deleted by creator
I didn’t know they allowed you to search without JS before. If you’re at the point of disabling JS, presumably for security or privacy reasons, why not just use DDG which works perfectly well without JS?
Old browsers.
Do these old browsers not support DuckDuckGo?
DuckDuckGo forces TLS while google doesn’t, so you can use IE5 or an old Safari with Google, but not with DDG.
Do you think their owners know of duckduckgo?
How many users are using browsers that are old enough they don’t even support JS? It’s one thing to disable it for security/privacy (which the OP was talking about), because those users are probably more tech savy.
Lynx is my daily driver
What’s the experience like when reading threaded conversations like Lemmy? Is it possible for you to post a screenshot?
Honestly, JS is such a core part of the web, I’m surprised it took this long.
One logo, one input field, one button, nothing requires JS. They could have kept a simple solution for disabled people but they don’t even care about that.
Search suggestions require JS. Also, why would Google spend the resources supporting the 5 people that block JS when virtually all websites and users rely on JS. This is a nothingburger of a story.
who the fuck needs google’s suggestions? It’s not a necessity
You are vastly underestimating the popularity of uBlock Origin’s JS blocking feature.
the 5 people
i dont think there are only five guys disabling JS on google search, but just by noscript without exceptions, it’s only 200k on firefox… but who would use evil chromium today?
There is no need for any JS to simply POST a query to a web server, and receive an HTML response. This is to force tracking, ad, and AI bullshit on people.
Google is a lot more than just the one google.com page. And even if it were, JS adds some nice features like predective text / suggested searches.
Tracking, ads, and AI can be done without JS. They may be slightly less granular in the same way as the user experience will be slightly worse, but disabling JS won’t stop it.
I’d bet the biggest reason Google decided to do this is so that they don’t have to support a version of the site that virtually nobody uses.
Imo, the most compelling reason for non-JS versons of typically JS-driven sites is to support lower power devices. But it’s 2025 and even a 10 year old phone you found in a dumpster behind a decaying Radio Shack can run modern websites without issue.
Even the article is grasping at straws for why this might be bad. “It might make accessibility more difficult or add security issues”. One of the most valuable companies in the world, with some of the best engineers in the world, is going to have problems adding aria attributes and updating dependencies? Give me a break.
If you want to block tracking, ads, and “AI”, there are plenty of ways to do that without disabling literally all JS. If you want to construct your google search request without the rest of the stuff on google.com, use your browser’s search bar.
I’m as anti-google/tracking/etc as the next guy, and I’ve been using DDG almost exclusively for years, but I’m not going to pretend like asking companies to make HTML/CSS-only versions of their sites is a reasonable request in the modern web environment. It can be really fun and cool to build a site without JS, but there aren’t many scenarios where it’s actually beneficial.
The replies in this thread are just plain ignorant. Basically every website uses JS heavily and disabling all JS with something like noscript is just a plain bad time.
Even in your comment, every sentence is wrong. Google searches are done with GET requests, and there are plenty of reasons to force JS other than tracking, ads, and ai.
These days, the “suggested searches” are ads in the shape of searches of companies or products, many of which nobody ever heard of. Gone are the days of the genuine “other people searched for this.” It was only a matter of time, I guess.
But it’s 2025 and even a 10 year old phone you found in a dumpster behind a decaying Radio Shack can run modern websites without issue.
since google is pure evil, i use dillo daily.
but I’m not going to pretend like asking companies to make HTML/CSS-only versions of their sites is a reasonable request i
believe me, its over a reasonable request, it’s a duty, a respect for technology : javascript towards to enshitification, pure html/css is heaven while JS became now pure evil.
But it’s 2025 and even a 10 year old phone you found in a dumpster behind a decaying Radio Shack can run modern websites without issue.
What about a server without a GUI where your only interface is a terminal using the Lynx browser? I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve done that.
The background world of the Internet infrastructure nobody ever sees or thinks about still very much looks like the 1980s.
You’ve seriously been in situations where you had no access to the internet except through a terminal, and you had to do a google search? No phone or other computer that you’re remoting in from?
Even so, there are terminal-based browsers that support javascript like brow.sh or links (not lynx).
I doubt the nothing-but-terminal users comprise a significant enough portion of Google’s userbase to justify the extra costs to test and maintain non-JS functionality.
Yes, I have. Searching for mirrors to get an installation package of some sort or ISOs to set up virtual machines and downloading it directly to the server, for example. Don’t need USB, don’t need another PC or phone, just do it all on the same server you’re working on.
Interesting that that is the workflow that works best for you. I’ve personally always found it a much better experience to do my searching/browsing off of the server and wget whatever I need to download. If that’s truly your situation, then you may just need to use another browser that supports JS or use a different search engine. I prefer DDG anyway, lol. Not a huge deal.
I grew up on DOS. I am equally as comfortable doing practically everything in a terminal as I am in a graphical environment. I’m sure I’m not alone among other IT folks.
I’ve been known to keep text based IRC clients or text based Tetris or some shit open on another virtual terminal for shits and giggles while I’m working an a different one, flipping back and forth between tasks. Just like a user on a multitasking graphical OS would do.
A lot of people turn off js to avoid tracking, or for performance, or they are calling the search in scripts, or they are doing illegal deals in their browser. There are dozens of reasons to do this.
I’m USA based and this will impact future protests : not just the search but all google services must be avoided in the future.
This will also break tens of thousands of scripts
deleted by creator
I remember using NoScript extension ages ago for what I believe was at least a year. Occasionally sites had problems with loading certain elements even if I allowed 1st party scripts by default. It was way too often when I had to allow domains of various 3rd party scripts when I finally realized this workflow just sucks and benefit is so miniscule that I just got rid of it. Only blocking extension I am using right now is uBlock.
I know it does not matter, but it pains to see that perfectly normal comments like yours that add to conversation get downvoted just because some people do not agree with its narrative.
If the British civil service, even operating under previous administrations, can put together a multi-functioning government domain that runs reasonably well without JavaScript, there’s no reason Google can’t continue to do the same with a ducking web search.
The former works better with JavaScript, that’s true, but it works OK without and that’s the point.
Then again, the civil service were ordered to do it largely out of spite because the government didn’t want to give the plebs any excuse for not being able to use the site.
I’m not sure how to get Google to lose the need for scripting in the same way.
I think this isn’t a case of if Google can, but rather of why they should. Do enough people really use the modern web without JavaScript to justify spending the resources to test and maintain functionality without JS? And they probably don’t want to let the few people that don’t have JS to open support tickets or write articles about how google.com is broken. Easier to just block it on purpose than to let it decay.
It makes more sense that a government website would support it, since they can’t let even a single person fall through the cracks, and changing laws/regulations is more difficult than making a company decision.
