Wonder why this all - here on HN - is not part of the readme .md which says absolutely nothing about how and why this all would work.

The whole approach to representing the work, including the writing here, screams marketing, and the paid offering is the only thing made absolutely clear about it.

p.s. I absolutely understand why a knowledge graph is essential and THE right approach for RAG, and particularly when vector DBS on their own are subpar. But so do know many others and from the way the repo is presented it absolutely gives no clue why yours is _something_ in respect to other/common-sense graph-RAG-somethings.

You see, there are hundreds of smart people out there who can easily come to conclusion data needs to be presented as knowledge in graph-ontological way and then feed the context with only the relevant subgraph. Like, you could’ve said so much rather than asking .0084 cents or whatever for APIs as the headline of a presumably open repo.

HN is “for” startups. This is a startup. What’s the problem?

I completely agree that the README could do a better job explaining the implementation details and our reasoning behind key design choices. For instance, we should elaborate on why we believe using PageRank offers a more effective exploration strategy compared to other GraphRAG approaches.

FastGraphRAG is entirely free to use, even for commercial applications, and we’re happy to make it accessible to everyone. The managed service is how we sustain our business.