this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2024
433 points (89.3% liked)

memes

10450 readers
2397 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Many "alternative" search engines are better for privacy, but they are still vulnerable to censorship, because they rely on g**gle and m*crosoft's indices for their search results. This isn't a deep-hidden secret either, many of them disclose what search index they use on the "about" page, for example:

There are still search engines that (claim to) maintain their own index. Most surprisingly, br*ve:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 55 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (5 children)

I use Kagi, and while it does use google index, it also uses many other indexes and its own index. I wonder how this impacts censorship.

https://help.kagi.com/kagi/search-details/search-sources.html

Edit : Not much detail here but they do comment on it here :

https://help.kagi.com/kagi/search-details/search-quality.html

Avoiding Censorship and Bias

We do our best to avoid censorship and bias. Some results from traditional sources will reflect biases, but they’ll be balanced by results from other sources. Also, we have built product features to help with bias reduction. For example, our "World News" Lens includes articles from respectable media outlets across the globe.

One of the signals that does influence our ranking is the presence of ads or trackers. We penalize bloated sites regardless of their agendas.

[–] balderdash9 93 points 9 months ago (5 children)

I like the idea, but I can't justify $10 a month. Downvote me or whatever, but I'm broke and need to cut as many subscriptions as possible.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 9 months ago

That’s fair.

You could argue that it’s worth the money to get better results and avoid Google, but with so many companies trying to take $10 a month you have to draw the line somewhere.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No, I'm with you. $120 a year is too steep for searching for me. I like what they are trying to do but I don't think the average person will spend that much.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

People spend thousands of dollars a year on coffee which they use less frequently. If you can afford it it absolutely is worth it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think we got spoiled with Google which is their goal. Undercut competitions then when there's no competition then enshitificate.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I absolutely do not spend more than $999.99 a year on coffee and I drink it every day. I'm sure some people do.

Both of those things are outside of my budget.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I don’t know how many qualifiers I need in order to avoid responses like this but I feel like it was pretty clear.

I get a good deal doesn’t make something affordable. The point of my comment is that plenty of people - not necessarily you - can afford to pay for it and it is well worth it at $120/yr.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Why downvote? That's a fair point. There is a free tier with a few free searches per year (2000 or something). You could sign up and use this budget whenever your search engine of choice fails you.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The free tier is 100 searches one time only.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Really? Dangit, I'm misremembering stuff then it seems. Sorry.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Your partly right, when I just started using Kagi it was a certain number of free searches per month.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Ignore the magic internet points.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

make it $1 per month and i'm game, i'm not paying more for a search engine than i do for email holy shit

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Why not? It’s a tool you sometimes use dozens of time in a single day.

I mean this is the entire problem. You were used to free searches, we all were. But It wasn’t free. We are dealing with the repercussions now. So now you can pay to have a search engine that doesn’t give you those repercussions if you value it. If you don’t then of course $120 a year doesn’t make sense. That means you keep using Google search, or a free competitor like DDG. But to complain about the quality dropping and disregard for privacy or whatever bone you have to pick with Google and then be unwilling to spend $.30 USD a day on a concrete solution? I’m not sure what you want here.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yea, I just think I either pay for something like Kagi, or I am subject to something like Google. I'm not sure there is a third way that pays for the servers and talent needed to deliver search results, but my imagination might just be limited.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I swear to God you people must work for Kagi.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Lol, I know how you feel. Not long ago there was suddenly a bunch of chatter about it on Lemmy and I was thinking the same thing, that it had to be marketing. But I'm a curious sort and I was so sick of bad google results so I tried it.

Now that I have used Kagi I'm convinced it was organic chatter. I really do like it, I think it's better, and if they offered money for posts I'd take that money because I'm paying $10 a month for a search engine, lol.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago

I thought this was a possibility at first, then I used it. The lad time is basically instant, the results are always good and it has a bunch of features with AI etc.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Or people just like it? This isn't hard to understand and has always been a thing. When people find something they really like they will tell other people about it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

That’s possible, but when every comment mentioning it has a 1000 word count, it screams advertisement to me.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago

As sure as flies on shit! Any time search engines are mentioned there will be people in the comments writing about Kagi.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

How does it compare to DuckDuckGo?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

With Kagi I get what I want and sort through way less to no junk. With their lenses I can push reliable sources up and other sources down. I really like it.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yeah. I hope that they provide a way to exclude Brave from the search engines (not optimistic considering the libertarian tech bro tantrum the lead dev threw but...).

But I think the advantage is really the personalized results over anything else. Sometimes you get some REAL fucked up SEO-heavy results. So you just block that site. And then everything works.

It DOES make me more than a bit concerned over how much data they have on me (especially as you need to use an access token to use it in an incognito window... where you are searching for the sketchiest shit) but... google already has that so...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

They claim that no information on searches is a saved to an individual for now.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Companies claim a lot of things. Let's see how the first legal issue plays out

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I will say part of the reason I find them more trustworthy is that their business model hinges on some sort of ounce of privacy. Google's hinges on exactly the opposite.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent 8 points 9 months ago

I strongly encourage reading up on the various VPNs and the like that charge people while still monitoring and tracking everything they do.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Ok that sounds neat thx

[–] hexortor 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Similar yes. Kagi has more features and no ads (because paid) but yes, it's a similar idea.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

That and kagi does its own indexing unlike startpage, as well as its own page and data analysis for enriched queries and research.

IMHO they add enough of their own value that you're not going to get elsewhere that it's worth paying for.