433
With all the talk about privacy, people seem to be forgetting that censorship is also a major problem for today's internet.
(lemmy.world)
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:
- https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/sources/
- https://support.startpage.com/hc/en-us/articles/5138782571796-Why-isn-t-a-particular-site-appearing-in-the-results
- https://www.ecosia.org/privacy
There are still search engines that (claim to) maintain their own index. Most surprisingly, br*ve:
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.
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.
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.
People spend thousands of dollars a year on coffee which they use less frequently. If you can afford it it absolutely is worth it.
I think we got spoiled with Google which is their goal. Undercut competitions then when there's no competition then enshitificate.
100%
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.
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.
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.
The free tier is 100 searches one time only.
Really? Dangit, I'm misremembering stuff then it seems. Sorry.
Your partly right, when I just started using Kagi it was a certain number of free searches per month.
Ignore the magic internet points.
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
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.
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.