No, see Rule 3.

Didn’t recognize the Patreon link at first, thanks!

I’m tbh. glad we don’t got Karma on the Fediverse.

No sources were provided. Sources are behind a paywall (Patreon). 😑

Their website seem very sketchy: https://www.gboxlab.com/

And the App has A LOT of critical permissions: https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/6fcbaafbcb033b9e0cc03a5d6acaa54ca6b6cb06d16ce3c2d0657d7addfba257/details

I think you confuse search engines with AI. Search engines are supposed to index, not “steal”. I also questioned the legality, not what your moral compass is saying.

Companies like DuckDuckGo, Ecosia, and StartPage pay Bing and Google to use their search index/API to get search results.

DuckDuckGo, Ecosia, and StartPage fund themselves through search advertising.

Brave Search uses its own search index, which they also sell access to, and they fund themselves through search advertising or an optional ad-free premium subscription.

SearXNG scrapes the search results without providing any monetary value to the search engine providers who are offering the service.

I would much rather not depend on businesses who had manipulate search results in the past. :)

I’m questioning the legality of SearXNG, as it scrapes results from other search engines without paying, from my understanding.

I appreciate the comment, thank you!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Source?

deleted by creator

Following words were mentioned that many times:

Actually: 2 (excluding one quote) Theoretically: 1 Technically: Never.

You don’t even make money with this?

Accurate. I have received zero donations, and do not get paid by the German government or any other entity for this. :) I also didn’t receive any tax reductions by writing and sharing it.

Note: I’ve deleted by previous comment as I believed it didn’t accurate addressed what you’ve said.

Raid does not have such a precise definition; most neutral journalists would only describe the execution of a search warrant that way if it was more forceful than average, but there isn’t a bright line.

I think if someone knocks at your door and shows you a search warrant, and then not even proceeding with it, because the accused cooperated is I think clearly distinguishable from someone storming your house.

I think what you’re trying to say is that appointing a special rapporteur is one of the mildest actions that might reasonably be described as “the U.N. has launched an investigation”. True but mild is not “completely false”.

I’m not. I’m clearly highlighting that the claim that the U.N. has launched an investigation is, based on the material I have reviewed and provided, false. If there is official information that proves the investigation was indeed launched by the U.N. itself, then you’re right.

Hey there, I appreciate your detailed response!

The focus.de article is by Zitelmann himself (…)

Indeed, that is why I specifically stated: “(…) but was unable to independently verify R. Zitelmann’s claims.” As every other source I could find just repeated statements by him, so I though taking a guest article that is directly by him is the most accurate we can currently find. If there is a press release by the police, or similar I would like to see it.

It’s obviously a comparison of Putin to Hitler and I think any reasonable viewer would conclude that both are portrayed unfavorably. If that’s really what triggered a letter from the police, it’s cause for concern about freedom of expression in Germany.

I also represent the point of view that it was unjustified since it’s clearly satire. I actually was surprised, that it wasn’t about a different law I had in mind. But the comparison Nate has made is still misleading. I now think that including it wasn’t worth it, and that I should’ve rather addressed the Stasi report system comparison Nate has made.

The word “raid” might be a little strong here, but so is “false” when the police actually did show up and seize his tablet because he called a politician an idiot on social media.

Let me make a comparison: If someone break somebody’s leg, and a third party then makes a news coverage where they claim that someone has killed somebody. Would you still say that this is strongly worded? I think it’s a completely false representation of what has happened.

The special rapporteurs is an independent human rights experts appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council and are independent of any government or organization, including OHCHR and the UN, Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the UN or OHCHR.

Quote from the document:

Let me begin by thanking the German Government for the invitation and for facilitating this official country visit.

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/statements/20260206-eom-stm-europe-central-asia-region-sr-protection-right-en.pdf

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

https://infosec.space/@voxel/117049622457946867

Simple answer: read the privacy policy from DuckDuckGo. That will hopefully address your concerns.