Good Alternative to Google?

[Devil's Due]

Sorry if such a thread already exists. Didn't see anything on search.

After the NSA fiasco, I want to stop using Google as my search browser. Is anyone able to recommend an alternative, that isn't linked to the NSA?

Oh for fuck's sake. What are you afraid of, getting sent to Guantanamo bay because Google passed along the kind of porn you search for? What exactly are you searching for that's so unique and dangerous that you think you even stand a chance of standing out in a database larger than you could ever imagine even if the US decides to start using people's Internet search histories to kidnap them in the night? I really don't get this logic at all.

Why are you unable to understand, then? They just proved they will violate ANY amendment in the name of "security," so if they already proved they will violate it illegally, what is to stop them from violating any other amendment? My right to free speace? My right to a fair trial (news flash: They've already violate this right too)? My right to humane treatment? My right to vote?

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/06/why-i-have-nothing-to-hide-is-the-wrong-way-to-think-about-surveillance/

Read that link. If you don't read it, I will not bother responding to you. Thank you for your cooperation.

As for the OP, the restorethefourth.com movement has compiled a website that links alternatives to all the current browsers, operating systems, phone services and more that are currently supplying the government all your data.

This website below is also compiled to help you protect your human right to privacy.
http://prism-break.org/

Be safe.

 

[Terramax]

Oh for fuck's sake. What are you afraid of, getting sent to Guantanamo bay because Google passed along the kind of porn you search for? What exactly are you searching for that's so unique and dangerous that you think you even stand a chance of standing out in a database larger than you could ever imagine even if the US decides to start using people's Internet search histories to kidnap them in the night? I really don't get this logic at all.

I didn't start this thread to discuss the NSA. I started it because I, personally, don't want anything to do with the NSA. If you, or anyone, has got a problem with that, in the politest possible way-- go away.

Also, big thank you to those who recommended the Prism-Break website. Very useful.

 

[Dimitriov]

Oh for fuck's sake. What are you afraid of, getting sent to Guantanamo bay because Google passed along the kind of porn you search for? What exactly are you searching for that's so unique and dangerous that you think you even stand a chance of standing out in a database larger than you could ever imagine even if the US decides to start using people's Internet search histories to kidnap them in the night? I really don't get this logic at all.

I didn't start this thread to discuss the NSA. I started it because I, personally, don't want anything to do with the NSA. If you, or anyone, has got a problem with that, in the politest possible way-- go away.

I certainly don't have a problem with it. Though I hate to tell you I think you might be SOL.

 

[Lilani]

Yes because if the government ever became an entity that served only the needs of itself and its rich friends, having the power to be aware of any political activist to lay serious challenge to them and put it to rest before any challenge ever happened is a good thing.

In all honesty, your trust in the government is outstanding. Do you really believe there's no potential for this power to be misused?

It's not that I trust the government. It's that I realize there are 300 million people in this country, and if the government were to become an entity that only serves itself (well, more than usual) I recognize that in their grand scheme I am but a peon that they wouldn't have the manpower or give enough fucks to deal with on such an individual basis. The government isn't going to individually incarcerate everyone and have a look at everyone's personal "file" of political allegiances. Given the fact they at least know they're dealing with America they know pretty much nobody is going to be keen on the idea of becoming a dictatorial plutocracy. No need for a fancy database to figure that one out.

Why are you unable to understand, then? They just proved they will violate ANY amendment in the name of "security," so if they already proved they will violate it illegally, what is to stop them from violating any other amendment? My right to free speace? My right to a fair trial (news flash: They've already violate this right too)? My right to humane treatment? My right to vote?

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/06/why-i-have-nothing-to-hide-is-the-wrong-way-to-think-about-surveillance/

Read that link. If you don't read it, I will not bother responding to you. Thank you for your cooperation.

As for the OP, the restorethefourth.com movement has compiled a website that links alternatives to all the current browsers, operating systems, phone services and more that are currently supplying the government all your data.

This website below is also compiled to help you protect your human right to privacy.
http://prism-break.org/

Be safe.

Everybody seems pretty okay with Guantanamo bay still being open and operational, so I think it's rather disgusting that THIS is suddenly the straw that break's the camel's back, and that THIS is the one violation of human rights we simply cannot stand. Suspected terrorists being incarcerated indefinitely and tortured without due process? It's necessary for our security! Or, my favorite excuse: This is what happens during wartimes!

But the government having a database with a few emails and text messages? ERMAHGERD, that is WAAAAAAAY too far guys! NOT cool.

 

[flarty]

It's not that I trust the government. It's that I realize there are 300 million people in this country, and if the government were to become an entity that only serves itself (well, more than usual) I recognize that in their grand scheme I am but a peon that they wouldn't have the manpower or give enough fucks to deal with on such an individual basis. The government isn't going to individually incarcerate everyone and have a look at everyone's personal "file" of political allegiances. Given the fact they at least know they're dealing with America they know pretty much nobody is going to be keen on the idea of becoming a dictatorial plutocracy. No need for a fancy database to figure that one out.

Of course there is, but our country's government doesn't abuse power to serve itself, it abuses power to serve multi-billion dollar corporations. And anyway, even if there was a chance the US would use the information they gleam to begin abusing citizens for their political interests, there's also a chance that they'll start doing a lot of other, positive stuff for people who do stupid things (I can't be arsed atm to come up with examples), but it'd be equally irrational to go out of my way to prepare for that possibility. It's the same reason I'm not arming up to prepare for the day when the US tries to force me off my farm: they could, but they won't. The US gov. learned long ago that if you must abuse people for political gain, do it to people who can't vote you out of power, hence why slavery is only legal when it's done to illegal mexicans (LOOK IT UP) or why they commit genocide in other countries, all of which is done not for the benefit of the US government, but for the benefit of the corporations that keep corrupt US senators in power.

So you both acknowledge the dangers of this power and are both fine with an already corrupt entity (which you have both exemplified) just because they haven?t turn their sights on you as of yet, though the handling of the occupy protest demonstrated nothing but contempt for citizens who practised their right to legal dissent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45VGFgiFu7Y

Also since we seem to be sharing your surveillance, i think it would be naive to think America didn?t have a similar list to this. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/25/undercover-police-domestic-extremism-unit

 

[xDarc]

The NSA doesn't just have direct server access to a handful of companies, they have offices and broom closets at service provider locations that patch them directly into telcos and ISPs. Basically if it's digital, they've got it. I've been paying 45 bucks a year for a VPN called Private Internet Access.

They use shared IP addresses and keep no logs so nothing can be traced directly back to you.

I also have Comcast and youtube loads horribly... until I flip on the VPN and then it's fine. Net neutrality my ass. So far they haven't throttled me. All my ISP or anyone else sees is encrypted packets going to the VPN server.

Basically you're going to want to start using something like that, encryption does work.

 

[Lilani]

So you both acknowledge the dangers of this power and are both fine with an already corrupt entity (which you have both exemplified) just because they haven?t turn their sights on you as of yet, though the handling of the occupy protest demonstrated nothing but contempt for citizens who practised their right to legal dissent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45VGFgiFu7Y

Also since we seem to be sharing your surveillance, i think it would be naive to think America didn?t have a similar list to this. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/25/undercover-police-domestic-extremism-unit

Really? You're going to compare this to the occupy protests? The fed wasn't censoring or abusing protestors. Any abuse that happened was at a local level. It was officers overreacting to the situation at hand, not men in black suits whispering in their ears saying "Hit harder, beat them to a pulp!" Overreactions happen. The fact that it's caught on video doesn't suddenly make it a national conspiracy. And besides, if the government were going to censor the dissent, they would have gone after videos like that.

And honestly, I had assumed they were already doing stuff like this. The fact that the government has databases which they use to search out and keep track of stuff they are interested in on the Internet does not surprise me at all. What does surprise me is the fact that so many seriously thought they weren't doing something like this already. The private information thing does surprise me a bit, but again with Guantanamo being open and the Patriot act we already knew they have a history of bending the rules of human rights for the sake of "security." Perhaps I'd take this as more of an outrage if everyone else who was outraged cared more about the people incarcerated in Guantanamo than the government having their emails in a database.

 

[flarty]

Really? You're going to compare this to the occupy protests? The fed wasn't censoring or abusing protestors. Any abuse that happened was at a local level. It was officers overreacting to the situation at hand, not men in black suits whispering in their ears saying "Hit harder, beat them to a pulp!" Overreactions happen. The fact that it's caught on video doesn't suddenly make it a national conspiracy.

That was not a comparison, that was an example of how us citizens rights have already been trampled upon. Also there?s no shouts of conspiracy in my post. If it was officers over reacting, it seemed to be on a horrendously large scale (especially in New York) and the video i posted even demonstrated what seems to be cold and calculated instances of brutality. But if you want to get in to the conspiracy side of stuff, there are leaked documents that insinuate that the fbi and banks we're working together to coordinate a crackdown on the occupy occuppy protests. Now before you jump down my throat again, note i used the word insinuate, as the documents are so poorly written and ill defined.

And honestly, I had assumed they were already doing stuff like this. The fact that the government has databases which they use to search out and keep track of stuff they are interested in on the Internet does not surprise me at all. What does surprise me is the fact that so many seriously thought they weren't doing something like this already. The private information thing does surprise me a bit, but again with Guantanamo being open and the Patriot act we already knew they have a history of bending the rules of human rights for the sake of "security." Perhaps I'd take this as more of an outrage if everyone else who was outraged cared more about the people incarcerated in Guantanamo than the government having their emails in a database.

There's an incredible amount of people outraged by Guantanamo bay, just as they are outraged by in-discriminatory use of attack drones. Your apathy towards such matters is not a fair basis to judge everyone else's feelings and thoughts on the issue. As is your lack of concern for your privacy, if you are fine being monitored by your government on the whim you may do something wrong in the future.

I for one do not trust an organisation that is tasked with security and surveillance, yet can not keep its surveillance secure. Never mind the fact that after all the efforts of restricting access to this information after said leak, they are still going to have to ultimately trust their employees and contractors (that worked out well for them with Mr Snowden didn?t it). I do not believe that such a program is worth the money or the violations of citizens privacy, especially when it even allows one terrorist attack (Boston).

Basically, the US government has shown it is perfectly happy to violate human rights, the NSA is incompetent, and PRISM doesn?t even work for what they said it was designed to do.

But hey opinions.......

 

[Weaver]

I use DuckDuckGo. They do not track or bubble users.

 

[thesilentman]

DuckDuckGo. It's pretty cool, and it doesn't track history. I use it all of the time now, unless I need to make sure that my friends who use Google can find anything.

 

[LauriJ]

Can I recommend Bing?

 

[DoPo]

Can I recommend Bing?

I suppose you could but why would you do it? I don't see it as an alternative that would satisfy OP.

 

[Auron225]

I dunno, Google it ;D

In all honesty I have no idea - I've never even considered using something else.

 

[Schadrach]

It's not that I trust the government. It's that I realize there are 300 million people in this country, and if the government were to become an entity that only serves itself (well, more than usual) I recognize that in their grand scheme I am but a peon that they wouldn't have the manpower or give enough fucks to deal with on such an individual basis. The government isn't going to individually incarcerate everyone and have a look at everyone's personal "file" of political allegiances. Given the fact they at least know they're dealing with America they know pretty much nobody is going to be keen on the idea of becoming a dictatorial plutocracy. No need for a fancy database to figure that one out.

You make it sound like there's some need to do individual examination of files to do bad things. You literally just filter down the vast bulk of it by looking for suspicious things, then do only slightly deeper research on them. No need to look at everyone individually, just look at people who've done a handful of things that might be suspicious in combination, but which the government shouldn't be able to examine without already having suspicion in the first place. Not just that, but using the data mining as evidence that one needs a warrant to search their person and property.

To use an example you'd probably go for, you could take your massive amount of data you are keeping on everyone and, say, look for people who've flown to certain SE Asian countries, spent over $X per day of the trip, and searched for one of a dozen or so search terms (some of which also have entirely innocent meanings). These people are clearly guilty of child sex tourism.

Let me ask you this: Do you believe that someone with open book access to everything you've ever done online doing "routine checks" to red flag "criminals" will under no conditions ever see your name? None of your behaviors in any way align with combinations of things that are "suspicious"?

Everybody seems pretty okay with Guantanamo bay still being open and operational, so I think it's rather disgusting that THIS is suddenly the straw that break's the camel's back, and that THIS is the one violation of human rights we simply cannot stand. Suspected terrorists being incarcerated indefinitely and tortured without due process? It's necessary for our security! Or, my favorite excuse: This is what happens during wartimes!

Who is OK with Guantanamo again? Certainly not I. Personally, they need to eradicate the whole "enemy combatant" that somehow isn't an enemy soldier bullshit entirely, and then sort out Guantanamo into "these are POWs" and "these are merely criminals" and apply the appropriate standards to them. I find it both ridiculous and kind of appalling whenever I hear someone claim that they can't treat Guantanamo prisons like normal criminals because then they'd get lawyers and trials and some of them might go free (you'd be shocked how often I've heard people make that argument).

But the government having a database with a few emails and text messages? ERMAHGERD, that is WAAAAAAAY too far guys! NOT cool.

A few emails and text messages? You *really* underestimate how much of a trail you leave online. Realistically (assuming that the largest ISPs are included in this), the government could very readily have every page you viewed, every search you've done, every email and text, your account names on every site you've visited, and roughly where you've been accessing the internet from (and thus a rough gauge on your movements from place to place if you frequently access the internet). If they've got the cell companies in on it then include your movements to GPS accuracy.

There's no reason for them to have this information, and the government having information it doesn't need on its citizens is never a good thing.


That said, you can miprove your privacy quite a bit with the use of things like Truecrypt, TOR, and the like.