[Info-vax] [OT] Real Usenet clients, was: Re: backups and compaction or nocompaction might be better

[Phillip Helbig---undress to reply]

In article <nospam-F98707.12261930012013 at news.chingola.ch>, Paul Sture
<nospam at sture.ch> writes: 

> Call me a cynic if you will, but I see it as a deliberate policy to 
> persuade people to start using Google Groups, having Javascript turned 
> on at all times, and being logged into Google at all times.

Definitely.

One can argue whether personalized searches are good or not, and there 
are different strokes for different folks.  I think this should be 
clear, though.  Of course, Google wants to earn money, so they make 
their business decision, but a user can decide he doesn't want to work 
with that.

Personally, I am not very concerned with "privacy" issues.  However, I
usually don't like results to be tailored to (what Google thinks) is
better for me.  As a result, I might move to DuckDuckGo or something. 
(I did test some alternative search engines a while back, but they
either missed easy-to-find stuff or did silly things like opening a new
window by default for each link displayed).  I signed up to Blogger only
to be able to comment on blogs which required this (which I can 
understand, though other forms of authentication would be better), but 
recent changes by Google mean that if I am logged in there, I am logged 
in to all Google services.  I don't have any others, but it means I am 
"logged in" to the search engine as well, which is normally what I don't 
want.  However, constantly logging in and out is a pain.

I read today about Google INTENTIONALLY USING A BUG in Safari to 
INTENTIONALLY CIRCUMVENT a Safari user's "no cookie" setting.  That 
might have been the straw to break the camel's back.  I am not 
interested in dealing with a company which resorts to such tactics.