this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2025
1172 points (98.3% liked)

Fediverse

30955 readers
1050 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I apologize if this is old news, but I just noticed it. It looks like Kagi has added Fediverse Forums as a default Web search option.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (4 children)

The mandatory signing in to perform any search is a deal breaker. Privacy first

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 hours ago

They have a system for detaching your account info from searches now

[–] [email protected] 20 points 23 hours ago

It's because you have to pay for the search engine. They dont serve ads

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Feel like you’re jumping the gun a bit with this opinion. Kagi is one of the best options if you prioritize privacy. Have a closer look at their policies.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (5 children)

Policies can change, they’re for profit, and I’ve heard leadership may be right wing/trumpy but I can’t find clear evidence of it so I want count that against them at this point.

Either way subscriptions are you giving away your identity essentially. They have you, your name, your credit card, your address, your associated searches, there is a lot to consider here more than just “look at what they say.” You are choosing to give them clear identification of you and your searches. That requires a lot of trust.

TL;DR: A lot of for profit companies say a lot of things. I am not anti-Kagi but you’re being very reductionist and ignoring valid concerns.

Edit: I am not against Kagi or spending money on quality services.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 15 hours ago

And if it changes, I will leave and stop paying. They are a user centric model. They thrive because of paying users.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

This is what their Privacy Pass extension is for. Once it verifies you as an user, it doles out a bunch of generic "arcade tokens", which don't have any identifying information. You lose Kagi's personalization features while using them, but your searches aren't tied to any account beyond just "Kagi", so you and everybody else using the privacy extension are the same person.

At least, as I understand it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Yeah someone else told me about that, looks like it was only rolled out a few weeks ago so in my defense it’s pretty new information lol Looks legit though! Absolutely has me reconsidering that concern now.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Hoping to be constructive: how do you think search engines should operate? Or maybe how would you like one you consider "good" to operate?

Also wondering how you see something like Privacy Pass that Kagi announced recently: https://blog.kagi.com/kagi-privacy-pass

This is particularly useful in the context of a privacy-respecting paid search engine, where the Server wants to ensure that the Client can access the services, and the Client seeks strong guarantees that, for example, the searches are not associated with them.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I did not know about privacy pass - that’s a fantastic step. I need to better understand the protocol they’re using but if they truly cannot link my usage to my account and the account strictly exists for (functionally anonymous) payment then I honestly have no notes. That could be enough to assuage most of my concerns.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

This is the kind of conversation, healthy, back and forth, and conceding instead of doubling down as we learn more that I wish was more common on the internet these days.

Bravo, really.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 22 hours ago

Theu don't verify emails and the CEO has even suggested we can use a random string. Also, you can pay with Bitcoin. No forced KYC anywhere along the way.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

So you won't pay for a subscription to use a search engine. Do you prefer the model that other search engines use where they take the content of your searches and use it to advertise to you?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

I didn’t say anything remotely like you’re accusing me of in your comment. I’m saying making an account is no small thing because you were trivializing it. At no point did I even mention spending money (because that doesn’t bother me. I am happy to spend money on quality things/services).

I introduced nuance to your extremely reduced take and you’re trying to do it again with strawmen directed at me.

The above are valid concerns. That’s all I’ve said. Anything else beyond that is your construction.

Edit: let me ask you this - do you have accounts on porn sites?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Read my comment again, because I neither accused you of anything nor reduced your argument. I'm not the original poster you replied to

[–] [email protected] 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

So you won't pay for a subscription to use a search engine.

When did I say that? Point out one single line that even remotely implies this. Flagrant strawman. What else would you call it?

Do you prefer the model that other search engines use where they take the content of your searches and use it to advertise to you?

It’s a leading question and you know it. You should’ve asked “how do you think search engines should operate?” You’re implying I am content with how Google operates, which I am not.

I’ll even concede the second may have actually been unintentionally accusatory in its implication, but you literally started the comment saying I won’t pay for this service. It’s right there in front of you, you wrote it.

Maybe read your own comment again before being condescending?