I’ve been using this search engine and I have to say I’m absolutely in love with it.

Search results are great, Google level even. Can’t tell you how happy I am after trying multiple privacy oriented engines and always feeling underwhelmed with them.

Have you tried it? What are your thoughts on it?

  • LWD@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    9 months ago

    If Kagi Corp’s goal is to create a user profile on you, then whether they’re using your data to serve you ads or not is irrelevant.

    This is the Privacy community, not the “You will give them your data and be happy” community

    • sudneo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      In reality I did not read anywhere that they intend to create a profile on you. What I read is some fuzzy idea about a future in which AIs could be customised to the individual level. So far, Kagi’s attitude has been to offer features to do such customisations, rather than doing them on behalf of users, so I don’t see why you are reading that and jumping to the conclusion that they want to build a profile on you, rather than giving you the tools to create that profile. It’s still “data” given to them, but it’s a voluntary action which is much different from data collection in the negative sense we all mean it.

      • LWD@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        It’s still data given to them, no scare quotes needed. And if that data includes your political alignment, like they say in their manifesto, a data breach would be catastrophic. Far worse has been done with far less. (And even if there isn’t one, using their manifesto to promise a dystopia where you are nestled in a political echo chamber sounds like a nightmare).

        And even corporate brand loyalty is mentioned in their manifesto.

        When DuckDuckGo complained about Google’s filter bubble, even Google had the good sense to downplay it. Kagi seems giddy about it.

        • sudneo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          It’s still data given to them, no scare quotes needed.

          It is if you decide to give it to them. If it’s a voluntary feature and not pure data collection, that’s the difference. Which means if you don’t want to take the risk, you don’t provide that data. I am sure you understand the difference between this and the data collection as a necessary condition to provide the service.

          And if that data includes your political alignment, like they say in their manifesto, a data breach would be catastrophic.

          Which means you will simply decide not to use that feature and not give them that data?

          And even if there isn’t one, using their manifesto to promise a dystopia where you are nestled in a political echo chamber sounds like a nightmare

          It depends, really. When you choose which articles and newspapers you consider reputable, you consider that an echo chamber? I don’t. This is different from using profiling and data collection to provide you, without your knowledge or input, with content that matches your preference. Curating the content that I want to find online is different from Meta pushing only posts that statistically resonate with me based on the behavioral analysis they have done on top of the data collected, all behind the scenes. I don’t see where the dystopia is if I can curate my own content through tools. This is very different from megacorps curating our content for their own profit.

          • LWD@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I think there may be a miscommunication here, because I fundamentally also find great distaste with

            Meta pushing only posts that statistically resonate with me based on the behavioral analysis they have done on top of the data collected

            … Because based on their manifesto, that’s exactly what Kagi wants to do with you as a search engine; show you the things it thinks you want to see.

            if you don’t want to take the risk, you don’t provide that data

            Every giant corporation has a privacy policy; the same could be said for what Mark Zuckerberg calls the “dumb fucks” who use Facebook.

            • sudneo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              … Because based on their manifesto, that’s exactly what Kagi wants to do with you as a search engine; show you the things it thinks you want to see.

              no, based on your interpretation of the manifesto. I already mentioned that the direction that kagi has taken so far is to give the user the option to customize the tools they use. So it’s not kagi that shows you the thing you want to see, but you, who tell kagi the things who want to see. I imagine a future where you can tune the AI to be your personal assistance, not the company.

              Every giant corporation has a privacy policy

              It is not having a policy that matters, obviously, it’s what inside it that does. Facebook privacy policy is exactly what you would expect, in fact.

              • LWD@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                I’ve been quoting the Kagi Corp manifesto. In fact, across this entire thread, you’ve had nothing but total charity for the corporate entity and its leadership, even accusing eyewitnesses of the CEO’s bad behavior of being liars.

                But your comment did allow me to find another corporate manifesto, so let’s take another crack at this.

                You said this is bad:

                Meta pushing only posts that statistically resonate with me based on the behavioral analysis they have done on top of the data collected

                Kagi Corp says this is good:

                In this future, instead of everyone sharing the same Siri, we will own our truly own Mike or Julia, or maybe Donald - the AI. And when you ask your own AI a question like “does God exist?” it will answer it relying on biases you preconfigured. When you ask it to recommend a good restaurant nearby, it will do so knowing what kind of food you like to eat. The same will happen when you ask it to recommend a good coffee maker - it will know the brands you like, your likely budget and the kind of coffee you usually drink.

                What you say is bad for Facebook, is what Kagi Corp wants to do.

                • sudneo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I’ve been quoting the Kagi Corp manifesto.

                  Yes, but you have drawn conclusions that are not in the quotes.

                  Let me quote:

                  But there will also be search companions with different abilities offered at different price points. Depending on your budget and tolerance, you will be able to buy beginner, intermediate, or expert AIs. They’ll come with character traits like tact and wit or certain pedigrees, interests, and even adjustable bias. You could customize an AI to be conservative or liberal, sweet or sassy!

                  In the future, instead of everyone sharing the same search engine, you’ll have your completely individual, personalized Mike or Julia or Jarvis - the AI. Instead of being scared to share information with it, you will volunteer your data, knowing its incentives align with yours. The more you tell your assistant, the better it can help you, so when you ask it to recommend a good restaurant nearby, it’ll provide options based on what you like to eat and how far you want to drive. Ask it for a good coffee maker, and it’ll recommend choices within your budget from your favorite brands with only your best interests in mind. The search will be personal and contextual and excitingly so!

                  There is nothing here that says “we will collect information and build the thing for you”. The message seems pretty clearly what I am claiming instead: “You tell the AI what it wants”. Even if we take this as “something that is going to happen” (which is not necessarily), it clearly talks about tools to which we can input data, not tools that collect data. The difference is substantial, because data collection (a-la facebook) is a passive activity that is built-in into the functionality of the tool (which I can’t use it without). Providing data to have functionalities that you want is a voluntary act that you as a user can do when you want and only for the category of data that you want, and does not preclude your use of the service (in fact, if you pay for a service and don’t even use the features, it’s a net positive for the company if that’s how they make money!).

                  even accusing eyewitnesses of the CEO’s bad behavior of being liars.

                  What I witnessed is the ranting of a person in bad faith. You are giving credit to it simply because it fits your preconception. I criticized it based on elements within their own arguments, and concluded that for me that’s not believable. If that’s your only proof of “bad behavior” and that’s enough for you, good for you.

                  What you say is bad for Facebook, is what Kagi Corp wants to do.

                  Let me reiterate on the above:

                  you will volunteer your data, knowing its incentives align with yours

                  Now, let’s be clear because I have absolutely no intention to spending my evening repeating the same argument. Do you see the difference between the following:

                  • I use a service to connect with people, share thoughts, read thoughts from others, and the service passively collects data about me so that it can serve me content that helps the company behind it maximizing their profits, and
                  • I use a service that I can customize and provide data to in order to customize what I see and what is displayed to me, which has no financial incentive to do anything else with that data because I - the user - am the paying customer.

                  ?

                  If you don’t, and you don’t see the difference between the two scenarios above, there is no point for me to continue this conversation, we fundamentally disagree. If you do see the difference, then you have to appreciate that the nature of the data collection moves the agency from the company to the user, and a different system of incentive in place creates an environment in which the company doesn’t have to screw you over in order to earn money.

                  • LWD@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    It’s pretty clear that you only draw your conclusions from a predetermined trust in Kagi, a brand loyalty.

                    The CEO is good, therefore when he moved a public conversation to a private Discord server, anything he says about the private conversation is now true, and anyone who disagrees with him is a liar.

                    Kagi Corp is good, so feeding data to it is done in a good way, but Facebook Corp is bad so feeding data to it is done in a bad way.

                    Kagi’s efforts to show you only things you want to see are good, because Kagi itself is good. When Facebook does it, it is bad.