|
| ▲ | greggoB a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| > If you ask them what guarantees you have that they won't someday decide to sell your search history, their response will be "well, it doesn't make financial sense for us to do so. Now drop it" and ban you. Can you provide any evidence of them having done this? As a paying Kagi subscriber, I am surely interested in knowing more. |
| |
| ▲ | margalabargala a day ago | parent [-] | | If you click the link in my earlier comment, the author of that post goes into that including screenshots from the Kagi discord. It's the last thing before the postmortem. > and ban you I was wrong about the banning; I misremembered that. | | |
| ▲ | greggoB a day ago | parent [-] | | Strange, I don't remember seeing the blog post link there - I must have just skipped over that. In general I found some parts provided interesting info (e.g. Kagi bought a t-shirt producer, Kagi started out as an AI company in 2018), both with links to Kagi's own blog articles; some I found a bit naive (the tax stuff, which can easily be the case and doesn't have to be a conspiracy); and some just politics between the author and the Kagi founder. In general a lot of it came down to how the author feels about Kagi, by my estimation at least. > I was wrong about the banning; I misremembered that. Sort of a big thing to accuse them of and then realize you just "misremembered". At a min you could edit your earlier comment to note this. | | |
| ▲ | margalabargala 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | The blog post certainly has a number of unrelated gripes about Kagi. At the end, though, it's very much concretely the case that the CEO of Kagi feels that "A lot of Kagi customers care about privacy. Therefore Kagi would never do something anti-privacy, because we would lose customers". That is to say, Kagi's stance is financial, not out of actually valuing privacy. Usually when companies are in this situation, it winds up being that they care more about appearances than reality, and will do what they think they can get away with. It's a wholly untrustworthy position for them to be in and for the CEO to present it otherwise decreases my confidence that he'll do the right thing. > Sort of a big thing to accuse them of and then realize you just "misremembered". At a min you could edit your earlier comment to note this. HN comments are not able to be edited (or deleted) after a somewhat brief period of time, which had already passed before I realized my error. The best I can do is correct myself in a followup comment, which is what I did. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | ethanhawksley a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They can give me as good a guarantee as any search engine can that they pinkie promise they aren't selling your data.
What keeps me with kagi is the quality. It is night and day using it and using other search engines. Even if they sold my searches, I'd still use them in a heartbeat. |
| |
| ▲ | margalabargala a day ago | parent [-] | | That's fair. Personally I don't find their searches to be sufficiently better than DDG that I will open my wallet. I did have a former job that would pay for Kagi for employees and I used Kagi for well over a year via that. When I left the job I went back to DDG to see if I would notice a quality drop, and I did not, so I decided not to pay for a personal account. |
|
|
| ▲ | Cyberdog a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Is this the same "Kagi" that used to manage shareware license purchases (primarily for Mac) 30 years ago? I assumed it was as this Kagi also seems to be Apple-centric, but that Kagi was run by a man named Key (Key Netherly or something like that), not Vlad. |
| |
| ▲ | datakan a day ago | parent [-] | | Different companies and leaders. Kagi Shareware shutdown in 2016 I think. |
|
