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.
this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2025
1212 points (98.3% liked)
Fediverse
31086 readers
927 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
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
From my subscription cost, yes. This aligns my privacy goals with their need for income which is not the case for "free" advertising-supported products.
You can read the myriad of responses/chains this lead to rather than restarting the conversation as if all of this hasn’t been covered. Have a good rest of your weekend
Many blessings on you and your family
And if it changes, I will leave and stop paying. They are a user centric model. They thrive because of paying users.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
Read my comment again, because I neither accused you of anything nor reduced your argument. I'm not the original poster you replied to
When did I say that? Point out one single line that even remotely implies this. Flagrant strawman. What else would you call it?
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?
Perhaps, I dunno, a misunderstanding?? Why do you assume everyone is out to get you? Why do you interpret everything as hostility?
How do you intend to pay for a search engine without signing in to it and having it track your search history?
I’m not interpreting anything. You’re being antagonistic and accusatory.
Read the other comment chains. You’ll see all the answers you need, as well as how to have a conversation like an adult.
I am absolutely not trying to antagonize you. I'm sorry that you interpreted it that way