Search Engine Default

lem729

lem729

It's not about programming, even one letter. It's about forced control over something, where reasons are for speculations. And if safety would be primary issue, even attitude would be much different.

Every piece of software, every institution that you are a member of, every profession that you may work in may require something of you different than others. And in a free marketplace, this is not a "forced control" issue. Nor is this a "liberty" issue as you described it elsewhere in a post on the general subject matter (I'm not sure whether in this thread or a related one). Because you can go elsewhere. You are free to do that. I cannot state that more strongly. When you mixup/confuse a liberty issue or a forced control issue, you distort the terms, and make almost meaningless real "liberty" issues, or real "forced control" issues, where the person generally has nowhere else to go. If you want to participate -- that is, use the software, be in a profession, join a club, become a member of an organization, you follow the procedures, or as blackbird71 said with regard to Opera 22 (which is a browser, where there is competition, and you are by no means trapped), "you have to make your own choice about what to do with the Opera browser as it currently is, or select a different browser."

blackbird71

blackbird71

...
It's not about programming, even one letter. It's about forced control over something, where reasons are for speculations. And if safety would be primary issue, even attitude would be much different.

Forced control would be Opera prohibiting any custom search engine from being installed by a user. Providing a rigid selection of defaults is a convenience feature, if an easy alternative is included for use of any other search engine... and typing one additional letter in a search bar is an easy alternative. I agree that it might be a convenience issue, but it hardly rises to the level of a "freedom" issue.

And by the way, I use Opera 12.14 instead of 12.15-12.17 (where the default behavior was changed to the same as now is in Blink Opera) for precisely this default search engine reason... that is, for the convenience it affords me to use StartPage as my default browser. But I'd hardly describe my freedom as having been infringed by what they did in removing the custom ability from the default choices. I deal with any increased search-engine hijacking risks other ways (safe hex). Nevertheless, I respect Opera's design choice in doing what they have with the seach engines, and the reasons they've provided.

stealth789

stealth789

It's not about programming, even one letter. It's about forced control over something, where reasons are for speculations. And if safety would be primary issue, even attitude would be much different.

Every piece of software, every institution that you are a member of, every profession that you may work in may require something of you different than others. And in a free marketplace, this is not a "forced control" issue. This is not a liberty issue. Because you can go elsewhere. I cannot state that more strongly. When you mixup/confuse a liberty issue or a forced control issue, you distort the terms, and make almost meaningless real "liberty" issues, or real "forced control" issues. If you want to participate, you follow the procedures, or as blackbird71 said, "you have to make your own choice about what to do with the Opera browser as it currently is, or select a different browser; Opera will make its own decision regarding your suggestion and whether, when, or how to implement it. In the meantime, the browser remains what it is.

It's not liberty issue? Other browser allows it. Allow me to choose safe engine. Opera is deciding for many. Even for some that don't change engine ever. And if they want to, are restricted to do so. It's no restricting? And follow the procedures? Do you know what liberty is?
In any other forums, I give suggestion, and I can argue. Here you're arguments are most time just distraction.

And you thing that approach aka: I know what's best. If you want change it, I don't care. Go elsewhere... You think this is the way how Opera will be better product for everybody? With this approach to things. When you can't argue, you are firing someone away. Oh sure. Liberty...

And sure, if this will be statement of Opera, and their way of dealing with things, to force their way, ignoring things, doing decisions without right reasons, some even behind users back, it will change my position. And also position of others. Hope it won't come to this. Also this is about finding reasons, where they can be. You're arguing just the way, who won't care, come on board. You who don't, go away. Even when your reasons are right. Basically this approach is just about loosing freedom.

stealth789

stealth789

...
It's not about programming, even one letter. It's about forced control over something, where reasons are for speculations. And if safety would be primary issue, even attitude would be much different.

Forced control would be Opera prohibiting any custom search engine from being installed by a user. Providing a rigid selection of defaults is a convenience feature, if an easy alternative is included for use of any other search engine... and typing one additional letter in a search bar is an easy alternative. I agree that it might be a convenience issue, but it hardly rises to the level of a "freedom" issue.

It's about freedom, when even this default list cannot be expanded. Because then there's no argument about security. And then there are totaly different reasons for this. And it has nothing to do with security. It's just excuse to use forced list.

And by the way, I use Opera 12.14 instead of 12.15-12.17 (where the default behavior was changed to the same as now is in Blink Opera) for precisely this default search engine reason... that is, for the convenience it affords me to use StartPage as my default browser. But I'd hardly describe my freedom as having been infringed by what they did in removing the custom ability from the default choices. I deal with any increased search-engine hijacking risks other ways (safe hex). Nevertheless, I respect Opera's design choice in doing what they have with the seach engines, and the reasons they've provided.

It's just deceiving. Correct question is, why then they didn't add StartPage. Ixquick,... to default serach engines, when it's safe, better much safer than engines they provide, and many are asking for it? It's lot of work? It's safer?

Deleted User

Deleted User

Any chance you might consider just taking your paranoia elsewhere? Give it a rest for crying out loud. You've beaten it to death and no one is really that concerned.

blackbird71

blackbird71

...
It's about freedom, when even this default list cannot be expanded. Because then there's no argument about security. And then there are totaly different reasons for this. And it has nothing to do with security. It's just excuse to use forced list.
...
It's just deceiving. Correct question is, why then they didn't add StartPage. Ixquick,... to default serach engines, when it's safe, better much safer than engines they provide, and many are asking for it? It's lot of work? It's safer?

Hmm... let's see now. If I use one of many free-of-charge browsers that requires me to insert a prefix letter before my search term in order to use a custom search engine, or else I have to either install an extension or use another browser, that has infringed on my "freedom". I'm sorry, but that concept of freedom either cheapens the kind of real freedom so many have died for worldwide, or it's a woefully exaggerated misuse of the term.

And no, there is no "correct" question involved... there's only just a question that you've asked. At the time Opera removed the custom default search engine capability (12.15), Opera was already in a Presto wind-down phase... Presto developers either were leaving or being re-assigned to Blink development, initially for the mobile markets. You and I are free (real "freedom") to speculate in hindsight what they could have done, how complex or difficult it might have been, or whether they "shoulda, coulda, woulda" done it under other circumstances. But they didn't do it. End of story. Our opinions on that are pure speculation.

lem729

lem729

It's not liberty issue? Other browser allows it. Allow me to choose safe engine.>

Just because others do something or believe something doesn't make it right. It's fallacious reasoning to argue like that. Everyone in the world at one point thought the world was flat. Were the people who thought the world flat, right? One person said it was round. (And it was the one person, not the many, who had it right). Or when you tell your child he can't do something, and he cites other parents. They're letting their kids do it. What's right isn't necessarily something for majority vote. As for allowing you to choose the safe engine, I look for Opera to make the determination as to what's safe -- not to you.

You think this is the way how Opera will be better product for everybody? With this approach to things. When you can't argue, you are firing someone away. Oh sure. Liberty...>

You can argue all you want. That's what a forum is for. But not one argument you have yet made has been compelling or persuasive to me. I trust Opera, in part, because this is an area where they have a lot of expertise, and they have set up the architecture and code of the browser. They are in the best position to determine if something is safe or not. Now if we had more information about the nature of their thinking, and prestigious experts to dispute it, we might have more of a basis to second-guess. But at this point, we don't.

And sure, if this will be statement of Opera, and their way of dealing with things, to force their way, ignoring things, doing decisions without right reasons, some even behind users back, it will change my position. And also position of others. Hope it won't come to this. Also this is about finding reasons, where they can be. You're arguing just the way, who won't care, come on board. You who don't, go away. Even when your reasons are right. Basically this approach is just about loosing freedom.

Oh, please. You're ignored? You're posting in a forum for "suggestions." And as for "behind the users' back," Opera develops a product, takes huge amounts of input at every phase of it, as the product moves from beta to general user mode. The characterization that anything has been done behind the users' back is crazy. And on the "freedom" thought, no way is this a "freedom" issue. Does the developer of every product have to build into it freedom for a user to do anything? Not at all. You're not losing your freedom. In an open market place, you have freedom to use another product. And these products all cost you nothing, nada, zero, zip, rien. And yet you're angry if you don't get absolute freedom to do what you want in that free product. Ha! Please, no offense, but I do find it very funny. It's an argument more fitting for a Marx Brothers comedy. You know very surreal.

stealth789

stealth789

...
But default search engine is not the biggest issue, like you proclaim it to be. Also as I wrote. Take a look at these default search engines. How "safe" they really are. Still you're excusing change due to security reasons. You're mixing layers and priorities of security and customization. Default search engine is "big" deal (you don't care in what way it can be changed), but you don't care about JavaScript, Cookies, and o lot of other things. But default search engine sure, it's something different? No it's not.
...
Hijacking is here from long time ago. Still it didn't stopped browsers from changing default search engines, and reduce itself to useless software. You're proclaiming, like it's something that was invented just now. So now we have to force you, restrict? ... So where is the security here? I should be glad? That I can't change engine to safer one? Ok, you maybe are. I and many others are not. Fact that I'm stuck with default settings is not making anything safer like you said.

I nowhere "proclaimed" default search engines to be the 'biggest' issue. I simply noted that it is a security-related issue, and explained that Opera took the design action that it did regarding that for the reasons it has long-ago stated. Other security issues are just that: other ones, and whether Opera should address them or has addressed them, and how, are subjects for other discussions. Neither am I "excusing" anything, I'm simply explaining what Opera has multiple times stated, and some added aspects of the situation that I know to be true.

So don't argue like it is biggest security issue, when other settings are open, and are also dangerous the same way like this one. You can't use argument about one thing, and ignore other that are almost the same. Just because it suit your argumentation here. Then argument of security is useless. That's my point. Also other things are security issues, but are allowed. So why this one cannot be? What is exact difference here? If you're telling about security here, then sure argue it as complex thing. Not taking only one thing you like, and don't accept other, that are the same.

You started this thread (and your other one) on the subject of default search engines, and I've merely discussed it within the confines of that topic. Either there's something of a language difference between us, or I've somehow not expressed myself clearly. I certainly care about other security issues, but what Opera (or any other browser maker) does or does not do with regard to them seems, IMO, to lie outside the topic at issue here. Or are you suggesting that the topic for your thread now is to include a general discussion of all the possible security elements and choices made in the design of Opera's Blink browser?

To be accurate, I started only other one. And I'm not making it general. But when you can use security argument, I can use other, that are similar. So it can be judged complex. Because if you claim A cannot be, because of B. I can ask, so why is it that C is allowed because of B, and A not? I thin it's correct question.

Indeed, other browsers elect to deal with the possibility of search-engine hijacking differently, if at all. That's their choice, for whatever their reasons. Opera does a number of things differently than other browsers, as it has for a very long time... and this is simply one more such thing.

It's not about how Opera decided. But how it's practically presented and applied. Because there are ways to make everybody "happy". But not this way.

As far as "being stuck" with Opera's default settings situation, that situation is whatever you make of it. I outlined earlier that you have 4 choices available, going forward. Again, I must state that you have made your suggestion and given your reasons; responses to some of your comments have been given here by users. Now a couple of realities remain: you have to make your own choice about what to do with the Opera browser as it currently is, or select a different browser; Opera will make its own decision regarding your suggestion and whether, when, or how to implement it. In the meantime, the browser remains what it is.

This is just summary of facts, I knew just before. My point is try to make things better, when there's a way. And sure here's a way. Here are options to make it even safe, and even possible to use by everyone. I won't advocate someone/something, when I know it can be made better. And current situation is not so safe, like you proclaim it to be, by using this closed approach. It's just deceiving.

lem729

lem729

I haven't heard one thing, stealth789, that persuades me that additional search engines are safe and cost-effective for Opera, but you are seemingly filibustering, by going on posting forever it would seem, with a lot of totally scatter-gun argumentation, that is, at the least, very confusing. It's as if, for you, this is a "power" issue, and you are going to post forever. I mean, I write/post something, and five seconds later is a two page response. There is a very beautiful expression: "brevity is the soul of wit."

Deleted User

Deleted User

There is a very beautiful expression: "brevity is the soul of wit."

I doubt he would understand the truth of that maxim.

blackbird71

blackbird71

... You can't use argument about one thing, and ignore other that are almost the same. Just because it suit your argumentation here. Then argument of security is useless. That's my point. Also other things are security issues, but are allowed. So why this one cannot be? What is exact difference here? If you're telling about security here, then sure argue it as complex thing. Not taking only one thing you like, and don't accept other, that are the same.
... But when you can use security argument, I can use other, that are similar. So it can be judged complex. Because if you claim A cannot be, because of B. I can ask, so why is it that C is allowed because of B, and A not? I thin it's correct question.
...
It's not about how Opera decided. But how it's practically presented and applied. Because there are ways to make everybody "happy". But not this way.
...
My point is try to make things better, when there's a way. And sure here's a way. Here are options to make it even safe, and even possible to use by everyone. I won't advocate someone/something, when I know it can be made better. And current situation is not so safe, like you proclaim it to be, by using this closed approach. It's just deceiving.

On the contrary, I've come to the conclusion you simply want to argue. To reprise: you made a complaint about the way Opera has dealt with default search engines, and made a suggestion here and elsewhere about what they should do to improve things. I responded with an explanation of what Opera has said regarding why they did what they did, indicated that indeed there is a security issue regarding browser hijacking, along with making some further comments about possible design complexities, workloads, prioritization, etc. that may have a bearing on implementing your suggestion. You then have dragged in all sorts of security-related things you don't agree with Opera about, and ultimately argued that any counter-discussion here supports Opera's infringing on your "freedom". The sum of it is that you've found something in Opera you don't like, made a suggestion, and now want to argue endlessly by invoking all manner of irrelevant things that only serve to keep your argument alive. Enough. I'm out of here... have a nice evening.

Deleted User

Deleted User

It is about security, they provide only 5 default search engines to avoid malware which changes the search engine.

Deleted User

Deleted User

... You can't use argument about one thing, and ignore other that are almost the same. Just because it suit your argumentation here. Then argument of security is useless. That's my point. Also other things are security issues, but are allowed. So why this one cannot be? What is exact difference here? If you're telling about security here, then sure argue it as complex thing. Not taking only one thing you like, and don't accept other, that are the same.
... But when you can use security argument, I can use other, that are similar. So it can be judged complex. Because if you claim A cannot be, because of B. I can ask, so why is it that C is allowed because of B, and A not? I thin it's correct question.
...
It's not about how Opera decided. But how it's practically presented and applied. Because there are ways to make everybody "happy". But not this way.
...
My point is try to make things better, when there's a way. And sure here's a way. Here are options to make it even safe, and even possible to use by everyone. I won't advocate someone/something, when I know it can be made better. And current situation is not so safe, like you proclaim it to be, by using this closed approach. It's just deceiving.
On the contrary, I've come to the conclusion you simply want to argue. To reprise: you made a complaint about the way Opera has dealt with default search engines, and made a suggestion here and elsewhere about what they should do to improve things. I responded with an explanation of what Opera has said regarding why they did what they did, indicated that indeed there is a security issue regarding browser hijacking, along with making some further comments about possible design complexities, workloads, prioritization, etc. that may have a bearing on implementing your suggestion. You then have dragged in all sorts of security-related things you don't agree with Opera about, and ultimately argued that any counter-discussion here supports Opera's infringing on your "freedom". The sum of it is that you've found something in Opera you don't like, made a suggestion, and now want to argue endlessly by invoking all manner of irrelevant things that only serve to keep your argument alive. Enough. I'm out of here... have a nice evening.

I agree with you blackbird71.

stealth789

stealth789

Any chance you might consider just taking your paranoia elsewhere? Give it a rest for crying out loud. You've beaten it to death and no one is really that concerned.

I'm sorry if it's bothering you, but you're not forced in any way to read any of this. Also if you know more about possible dangers, the more you care. From your point things can look like paranoia maybe. Also I don't think, that you represent everybody, to be able to tell who is how much concerned.

stealth789

stealth789

...
It's about freedom, when even this default list cannot be expanded. Because then there's no argument about security. And then there are totaly different reasons for this. And it has nothing to do with security. It's just excuse to use forced list.
...
It's just deceiving. Correct question is, why then they didn't add StartPage. Ixquick,... to default serach engines, when it's safe, better much safer than engines they provide, and many are asking for it? It's lot of work? It's safer?
Hmm... let's see now. If I use one of many free-of-charge browsers that requires me to insert a prefix letter before my search term in order to use a custom search engine, or else I have to either install an extension or use another browser, that has infringed on my "freedom". I'm sorry, but that concept of freedom either cheapens the kind of real freedom so many have died for worldwide, or it's a woefully exaggerated misuse of the term.

We're talking about default search engine no custom one. In other browsers there's no requerment to prefix anything, or install specific extension. So make it simpler:

Why do I have to prefix searches or install additional extension?

And no, there is no "correct" question involved... there's only just a question that you've asked. At the time Opera removed the custom default search engine capability (12.15), Opera was already in a Presto wind-down phase... Presto developers either were leaving or being re-assigned to Blink development, initially for the mobile markets. You and I are free (real "freedom") to speculate in hindsight what they could have done, how complex or difficult it might have been, or whether they "shoulda, coulda, woulda" done it under other circumstances. But they didn't do it. End of story. Our opinions on that are pure speculation.

If you stated, that security is main issue here, than it's correct question. Still rather that speculate, you can answer it

Why Opera can't add StartPage, Ixquick,... to default search engines, when it's safe, probably much safer than engines they provide, and many are asking for it? When it's not big deal to expand one configuration file?

lem729

lem729

I agree with blackbird71. Let it go! Take the paranoia elsewhere. Stop the repetitive posting.

stealth789

stealth789

It's not liberty issue? Other browser allows it. Allow me to choose safe engine.>

Just because others do something or believe something doesn't make it right. It's fallacious reasoning to argue like that. Everyone in the world at one point thought the world was flat. Were the people who thought the world flat, right? One person said it was round. (And it was the one person, not the many, who had it right). Or when you tell your child he can't do something, and he cites other parents. They're letting their kids do it. What's right isn't necessarily something for majority vote. As for allowing you to choose the safe engine, I look for Opera to make the determination as to what's safe -- not to you.

Sure, then it also doesn't mean, that Opera is correct. But as you mentioned (more times) you trust only them. So basically you're not opened to any suggestions. In correct debate, you have to doubt everything.
You also rather than argument on specific thing revert back to - you trust only one. So you're acting just opposite to philosophy you just mentioned.
This way you cannot review this thing deeply enough. Because on any point of opposite opinion you simply ignored it. Even on altering of suggestion, or trying to find some way. Any way. And here are many aspects you need to consider.

You think this is the way how Opera will be better product for everybody? With this approach to things. When you can't argue, you are firing someone away. Oh sure. Liberty...>

You can argue all you want. That's what a forum is for. But not one argument you have yet made has been compelling or persuasive to me. I trust Opera, in part, because this is an area where they have a lot of expertise, and they have set up the architecture and code of the browser. They are in the best position to determine if something is safe or not. Now if we had more information about the nature of their thinking, and prestigious experts to dispute it, we might have more of a basis to second-guess. But at this point, we don't.

First you have to be opened also to different point of view.

And sure, if this will be statement of Opera, and their way of dealing with things, to force their way, ignoring things, doing decisions without right reasons, some even behind users back, it will change my position. And also position of others. Hope it won't come to this. Also this is about finding reasons, where they can be. You're arguing just the way, who won't care, come on board. You who don't, go away. Even when your reasons are right. Basically this approach is just about loosing freedom.

Oh, please. You're ignored?

I said ignoring thing like facts, other view, .... You're personifying it.

You're posting in a forum for "suggestions." And as for "behind the users' back," Opera develops a product, takes huge amounts of input at every phase of it, as the product moves from beta to general user mode. The characterization that anything has been done behind the users' back is crazy.

I meant fraud check. And yeah, I know a little about development ;). Also you're talking, like Opera already made any change based on this suggestion, and even by force, and lost milions. No they didn't.

And on the "freedom" thought, no way is this a "freedom" issue.

You can't say no way, just because it's not your point of view.

Does the developer of every product have to build into it freedom for a user to do anything? Not at all. You're not losing your freedom. In an open market place, you have freedom to use another product. And these products all cost you nothing, nada, zero, zip, rien.

All products cost you nothing? For sure you're living somewhere else than me. Again it's business model of browsers, and circle of money flow. We can talk about royalties, or whatsoever in other forum about economy if you like. Yeah I remember times, when Opera cost money. Then they realized this is better way. So please stop this debate about "free" browser. They're free to decide to sell it. It's off the primary topic.

And yet you're angry if you don't get absolute freedom to do what you want in that free product. Ha! Please, no offense, but I do find it very funny. It's an argument more fitting for a Marx Brothers comedy. You know very surreal.

We're talking about specific suggestion. Not about anything, absolute, ...

stealth789

stealth789

I haven't heard one thing, stealth789, that persuades me that additional search engines are safe and cost-effective for Opera, but you are seemingly filibustering, by going on posting forever it would seem, with a lot of totally scatter-gun argumentation, that is, at the least, very confusing. It's as if, for you, this is a "power" issue, and you are going to post forever. I mean, I write/post something, and five seconds later is a two page response. There is a very beautiful expression: "brevity is the soul of wit."

First there's need to listen. You simple ignore any of variation, possibility, without even considering that there even can be other way for both sides. What I'm used for, is that if there's any suggestion or need, I'm trying to find a way. You're telling there's no way. As I can see it, there's simple way in change of 1 file.

From my point bigger problem is, that in current situation I'm not persuaded that current engines are safe. No matter how much of them there is.

And you know about exact changes, or anything when you're talking about costs of this hypothetic change? And yes, I'm trying to answer and react to any argument you're giving, there's a little difference. Even the fact that some are not primary topic. And the same option are here for you. So I don't understand what is it that your complaining about?

And there's also "Sweep in front of your own door first". But ok, if you measure something by number of words or whatever.

stealth789

stealth789

... You can't use argument about one thing, and ignore other that are almost the same. Just because it suit your argumentation here. Then argument of security is useless. That's my point. Also other things are security issues, but are allowed. So why this one cannot be? What is exact difference here? If you're telling about security here, then sure argue it as complex thing. Not taking only one thing you like, and don't accept other, that are the same.
... But when you can use security argument, I can use other, that are similar. So it can be judged complex. Because if you claim A cannot be, because of B. I can ask, so why is it that C is allowed because of B, and A not? I thin it's correct question.
...
It's not about how Opera decided. But how it's practically presented and applied. Because there are ways to make everybody "happy". But not this way.
...
My point is try to make things better, when there's a way. And sure here's a way. Here are options to make it even safe, and even possible to use by everyone. I won't advocate someone/something, when I know it can be made better. And current situation is not so safe, like you proclaim it to be, by using this closed approach. It's just deceiving.
On the contrary, I've come to the conclusion you simply want to argue. To reprise: you made a complaint about the way Opera has dealt with default search engines, and made a suggestion here and elsewhere about what they should do to improve things. I responded with an explanation of what Opera has said regarding why they did what they did, indicated that indeed there is a security issue regarding browser hijacking, along with making some further comments about possible design complexities, workloads, prioritization, etc. that may have a bearing on implementing your suggestion.

It would be much more helpful, if you come to conclusion about default search engines thing :). But let's look at it this way. I'm giving suggestion. When there is any argument against it, sure I'm trying to respond to it, and defend the idea. Also trying to find a way, other options,...
You and other also responded with same issues that are not directly connected to default search engine itself. Also often generalizing things, that leads away from topic rather than arguing about specific option.
Also you started to bring whole security as an issue. I mean generalized it too much, so you can't wonder, and blame me for it. So I started to show, that if you want to generalize, there are also other security issues, but dealt with differently. Just to argue to some of your arguments, that was going too far.

You then have dragged in all sorts of security-related things you don't agree with Opera about, and ultimately argued that any counter-discussion here supports Opera's infringing on your "freedom".

And freedom is one aspect or point of view to problem.

The sum of it is that you've found something in Opera you don't like, made a suggestion, and now want to argue endlessly by invoking all manner of irrelevant things that only serve to keep your argument alive. Enough. I'm out of here... have a nice evening.

And from your point it is security issue. Why do you thing that this is something about what I "don't" like"? There's also strong security aspect to change engine. So don't deceive it as option of like/dislike please.

stealth789

stealth789

It is about security, they provide only 5 default search engines to avoid malware which changes the search engine.

Sure it is. But also from other side you know. And it's not about number (5). Also if security is main issue, then there should be question "How can I change search engine?". Not only like is it now "Can I even change search engine?"

My point is, there is possible space for compromise. Not only restricting. I'm just used to rather look for a beteer way, than use the easier one. I'm sorry if it's bothering you, but from my point bigger problem is, that in current situation I'm not persuaded that current engines are safe. No matter ho much of them there is.