Comment 16 for bug 405350

Martin, as I opened this bug I think we should at least try to reach an agreement of its status before you employ your authority to close it.

I don't know if you have read the previous discussion, but this argument "it *is* google" has been already brought. Though, no one DARED replying to some simple questions, or just argumenting their claims. So no, just saying "it is google" does not suffice, you need to prove it. Otherwise, I could just claim that it's a KGB service (without being bound to proving it), and the discussion could go on forever.

Here are some simple questions:

0) If the search is google as you claim, why is the submit URL different? This is a rethorical question. Of course we all can see that the service provider is google, but in a very evident way, this IS NOT the google search service that we all use every day. It is a different service, called Custom Search Engine, which can be administered by an entity DIFFERENT THAN GOOGLE. However, the Google logo camps on the search box. That's what I find very wrong (and I can assure you, I am not the only one).

Let us get to real questions:

1) Is it true or not that ubuntu, *if* he or she wished, *could* alter these search results without the users knowing at all? I mean, is it true or not that a CSE can be customised to alter the search results? I think that's its main purpose. So, why should users NOT be informed that their data provider is google, but the results can be customised by ubuntu? Can you argument on this "why not"? I am *sure* most users would continue using the search form. They already trust ubuntu.

2) Is it true or not that ubuntu makes money from the CSE, by providing more advertising? I think this was made very clear in various places recently - probably this is the reason for not using yahoo in the end.

3) You seem the first developer in ages to care about this bug, can you provide an official justification of this fundamental issue: if you ARE making money by letting user search in YOUR CUSTOM SEARCH, why do you think that the users SHOULD not be informed? Just tell us.

I am open to an explanation, just provide it. Say: "there is no reason to inform the users that they are letting us make money, and that if we wanted we could alter their search result, even though I can swear we are not doing it. The reason for not letting users know is...". In all this time, I never saw such a simple sentence. I think someone ordered everyone to just avoid this discussion. But that's evident too.

Or otherwise, convince me that you are NOT making money or taking any advantage from the CSE, and that you COULD NOT alter these search results. This is going to be even more difficult :)

Or finally, recognise this bug, fix it in the simplest possible way (just a link to explanations in the page), and save your reputation.

Don't think I am trolling. I exposed myself (e.g. in my department when I was in Italy) in the past to encourage people to adopt ubuntu. I spent my time in helping people do the switch, and teaching them how to teach other people. I was seriously disappointed when I saw the wall of silence that lasted until your post. Because that means, the "humans" around ubuntu can provide man-power, but decision-power is still in the hands of few.

Now I am exposing myself once again, to encourage ubuntu to be transparent to people. Hopelessly.