▲ 787 ▼ Kagi now has a Fediverse Forums search toggle (media.piefed.social) submitted 2 weeks ago by jarmitage@piefed.social to c/fediverse@lemmy.world 153 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago (34 children) I’d pay for it if their $5 a month tier wasn’t so limited permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 34 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] SirHaxalot@nord.pub 15 points 2 weeks ago Im okay with it tbh. The everything must be free on the internet mindset is what led ads working its way in everywhere. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 30 points 2 weeks ago (14 children) It costs money to maintain software? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago I block all ads from all sites on the internet. I pay money to the fediverse hosting foundation because hosting software costs money. I pay creators to create content because creating content costs them time and if they are going to do that thing, they need money. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago No, but if you DON'T want ads then they need to get money from somewhere? I RARELY use YouTube permalink fedilink source parent [–] aksdb@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Ahh. So you’re fine with all the ads on YouTube? No, that’s why I pay for YouTube too. If I wouldn’t use it as much that the price is worth it, I would likely not use it at all (besides the irregular link thrown over my fence ever once in a while). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies) [–] Hal@piefed.nz 12 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) I Kagi's case they are paying per search to connect to APIs to search other search engines and aggregate the results. They have a very real cost per search that isn't only maintaining software. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Wouldn't that be part of the "maintenance" cost? If I run an ice cream cart, I need to keep purchasing supplies to keep selling ice cream. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Technically yes I guess, but I would expect "maintenance" to refer to the cost of keeping the ice cream cart working and looking good, I wouldn't expect the wholesale cost of ice cream to be in the "maintenance" column of my cart finances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago Sure! I mean, my point was this stuff costs money. Wasn't meant to be as technically correct as possibly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago I'm dying hahahahah! Yeah, depending on where you work that word carries a lot of baggage permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies) load more comments (1 reply) [–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago I think your first sentence is a valid opinion to hold, but I disagree that they’re just as bad when they’re very upfront about what you’re paying for. Google et all meanwhile don’t make it clear that they monitize user data unless you’re paying attention permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) Same tbf. 5$ for 300 searches is so limited. I just checked my DDG history for the month and I average between 2500 and 3500 searches a month. I don't even use it professionally, its just general consumer use. Honestly I likely would pay for it if it was 5$ for 3k-4k searches. I would just swap to another engine for the remainder but, 1$/1k searches up to 10$ which moves to unlimited would be more than fine, even if they decided to remove the bloat like lens, and translation from the package. but they are likely hoping more people are not like me and will just pay the 10$ a month to have unlimited rather than just not use the service at all. Especially considering how many other services that I get way more value of are not much more than the unlimited plan... I can have internet browsing for 10$ which i already have for free, or I can pay a couple $'s more and get a streaming service or a news site which contains content that I don't already have access to. I like the mentality but, it's just not worth it for me for a non-essential service that adds nothing of value to me outside one less site harvesting my data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 9 points 2 weeks ago (4 children) Ok sorry ignoring the rest of your comment but how do you do 2500-3500 searches a month? That's 100 a day, and you explicitly excluded work related searching. You're doing a search every 10 minutes of every waking hour of every day, not including searches done for work. You barely have time to read what you are searching. Why so many searches? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Glitchvid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I hit about 1,250 searches per month on average. I once did 2K in a month. Probably a good number of those are refinements on an initial search query. Like if I search for a movie title, but there are multiple that go by the same name, I'll append the year the one I care about came out. Doing that it's easy to get like 3–6 searches in a single minute. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 child) is it really that much? I search a lot about my current desktop, and some about my proxmox server. I also like to search about ongoing tech trends like currently ive done a lot of research on the current ps5 jailbreak. I just went and checked my current month usage at the moment and You are right though with the average. For this month so far I'm sitting at 2209 searches, my daily range is 28-308 queries (if I search "duckduckgo" as the keyword) the majority of them are in the 40-90 query range. A good chunk of them falls into gaming questions and linux questions. for fun I just checked septembers, page total is 2627 queries and ranges between 40 and 167 pages a day with an average of 87.56 a day august is 2445 with range of 29-189 and an average 78.87 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 7 points 2 weeks ago The average searches per user on Google is something like 30 a month lol. But I'm a 500-1000 kind of guy. Depending on what I'm doing it can get higher, especially if I'm doing dev stuff. I guess I'm just surprised that you do that many searches and think paying for search is a waste of money. Being able to customise search results (block Pinterest, have MDN ranked higher, rewrite reddit.com to old.reddit.com, etc) is easily worth $10 a month to me. But as I said to someone else, $10USD can be a coffee or a weeks wages depending on where you are in the world, so it's probably going to hugely sway people's views on if it's worth it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Steve@communick.news 2 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Are you rephrasing searches often? Not getting what you wanted the first time? Because that's a ton of queries. DDG gets to show more ads that way. It might not be you, but part of the plan to make you run more queries. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago yea a lot of my searches are technical in nature so I need to reword them in order to have the right critera show. Like looking for a linux virtual display will require 3 different types of searches depending on how its phrased, and will try to show queries about vGPU setups or KVM which are not related to that type of virtual driver (but it technically could be). and sometimes it needs to be narrowed down to specifically your setup as well which adds more searches to it. Specific error codes such as CRTC errors require multiple searches until you can find the right code, gaming wikis and questions can be similar especially if its about more secretive parts of it such as easter eggs or secret endings. permalink fedilink source parent [–] boatswain@infosec.pub 5 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) The $5 a month tier is more than enough for me; I don't think I've gone over the 300 queries a month in almost a year, and I feel like I search a lot. Those couple of times I have, all it means is starting a new 30 day period a little early. It's painless. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) 300 searches is ten per day, they aren't that many. Most days I think I'd do less than that but then there are days that I'm looking for something specific and might do many times that. It is definitely not something to use instead of bookmarks like most people use google. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Does this mean it's effectively $0.0167 per search, and you have to buy batches of 300 searches, but they have an expiration date? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] boatswain@infosec.pub 3 points 2 weeks ago Basically, yeah permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (2 replies) load more comments (2 replies) [–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 96 points 2 weeks ago (18 children) This attitude is why the internet is full of ads. Doing shit for free doesn't happen on an empty stomach. I'd rather pay a fair price for software and services I use. I'm not saying anyone's pricing is fair, just pointing out I don't agree with this behavior. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago Youtube also didn't have a subscription option back in the day, and it also limited the length of videos you could upload. Things cost money to run, and something on the scale of Youtube costs a lot of money to run. Now to be clear, I don't pay for Youtube or watch ads, but that's more because I object to directly giving Google my money with how much value they already generate just tracking and selling what browsing habits I am unable to obscure from them. If there was an option to pay Google $5-10 a month with the enforceable assurance that it came with absolutely no personal tracking and data collection, I would strongly consider it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] IdleSheep@lemmy.blahaj.zone 49 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Most platforms usually start ad free and with no restrictions. That's how they capture a chunk of the market. Then, once they have an established customer base, they typically introduce ads or a subscription so they can actually pay for the hardware and bandwidth the service runs on. This is what YouTube, Google, and pretty much everyone did. It's the standard play book. One-time fees are not feasible for this type of business model. If the server costs are ongoing, meaning you have to pay for the user's usage constantly, then you need to either constantly charge them too, take money out of your own pocket to subsidize it, or sell customer data to once again subsidize it. Nothing is free. A one-time fee would have to be absurdly high (think hundreds of dollars) to take into account multiple years of usage, otherwise it's too risky and you're most likely losing money. This mindset that subscriptions are all evil when hardware and bandwidth are billed to you every month/year is ridiculous. Kagi at least is honest from the get go and never tried to trick customers into believing their service would be free forever. That's what's actually shitty behavior, when companies put out a product that they then enhsittify for the purposes of extracting profit. Kagi was a subscription from the get go and told you that's how they pay their bills, and in return you get the service they promised with no compromises. I'm not arguing whether the price is fair, but at least the business model is honest and doesn't try to take advantage of me and my data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Kangae_Hishiryo@scribe.disroot.org 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago) At least make prices fucking progressive. If you're under certain poverty threshold, you don't pay anything. If you're over that same threshold, you pay an amount equivalent to what you actually have, so if you're barely over the threshold, then you pay drastically less than the ones that have the more money. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 18 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) You would understand a one-time fee for an active, ongoing, online service?? I'm a fucking communist, please don't make me defend capitalism... Even back in the day, people would buy versions of software on disks and updates were limited. There's a reason why the idea of perpetual licenses died hard and fast and every company everywhere either reneged or died. I pay for Kagi. If they offered a "one-time lifetime purchase" I'd probably just stop because that would be a giant red flashing neon warning sign. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago That's not really my point, but for what it's worth I don't mind if I was paying for something and it allowed you to use it because you can't afford it. Nothing in life is free, someone's paying for it. If I use a service, I think it's fair for me to pay a fair price. permalink fedilink source parent [–] TrackenDaKracken@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I'd rather, and I do, donate to apps like Blender, LibreOffice, Wikipedia, and Lemmy, etc. Free to use for people who can't afford to donate. I donate monthly to those because I use them a lot and I can afford it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago Sounds like we're in agreement, great. Not everything can have that scheme but I support things as best I can, again as long as it's fair. Affordability is different for everyone. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Over a decade of running at a loss. That is only possible for companies, like Google, that are already very rich. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago Yes, that's quite typical, if you manage to find a rich investor. But that only happens if you have a way to eventually make a profit. If you say from the start you're never going to have ads or subscriptions so you're never going to make money with this, you're not going to find an investor. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] otter@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 weeks ago* YouTube started with a lot of angel funding, which is why it eventually monetized in the way that it has YouTube began as an angel-funded enterprise working from a makeshift office in a garage. In November 2005, venture firm Sequoia Capital invested an initial $3.5 million,[20] and Roelof Botha (a partner of the firm and former CFO of PayPal) joined the YouTube board of directors. In April 2006, Sequoia and Artis Capital Management invested an additional $8 million in the company, which had experienced significant growth in its first few months. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_YouTube permalink fedilink source parent [–] Seimhe@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago It ran at a financial loss every year until more recently. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Guilvareux@feddit.uk 5 points 2 weeks ago* Costs that they’re now paying for with ads and subscriptions. So I’ll ask again. What would you do differently? permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (5 replies) [–] Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago I'd rather pay for the product than be the product myself and a search engine is the thing I use the most on the internet. And so I became a subscriber. Then I discovered their lens feature and now no other search engine even comes close for me on this and it's another thing I use multiple times per day. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago (4 children) I would pay, for my personal use. But a lot of the time I’m on my company corp network, on a company device. And I don’t mix that with my personal logins and personal devices. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children) Petition your IT for a subscription. Worst they can say is no right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) “Just use chatGPT.” -IT permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] skaffi@infosec.pub 2 points 1 week ago I think this deserves: “jUsT uSe cHaTgPt.” -iT permalink fedilink source parent [–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago I’m guessing you haven’t worked for a big company before. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bretton.dev@coves.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (3 children) They have a free tier with 100 searches! It doesn't sound like a lot but I usually don't cross it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) the free tier is a static 100 not a monthly 100 isn't it? The pricing page says limited to 100 total searches and 100 AI interactions with standard models. I read that as once you hit your total 100 you need to get a sub. The page isn't super clear but older update logs state they moved from a "monthly 50" to a "one time 100" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mrmaplebar@fedia.io 3 points 2 weeks ago I don't know for sure, but it seems to say "100 searches total", which is pretty lame. If it was 100 searches a month, or even 50, then I would certainly try it. But I'm not gonna go through the process of making an account and changing my habits just to do 100 searches one time. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (9 children) I'd pay if it wasn't based in the US. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] Joliprout@jlai.lu 5 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Uruki presents itself as a European alternative to Kagi. They seem to have a different vision, however (no AI and just focused on a search engine). On the other hand, I didn’t try because I find the price a bit high for the little comfort it brings me, but it’s still good to test! About Uruky permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] tal@lemmy.today 5 points 2 weeks ago* Kagi is European. Not in the EU: they're based in Serbia. But they are European. The US address that's associated with them is just their founder's home address. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago* I have never heard of that before but, they have a really weird requirement for source release. Source code will be made available to customers who have been paying for at least 12 months. I don't think I've heard of any software doing that before, also I really don't like how the "how do you know we don't track queries" is basically referring to pay them to see the source code once you hit the 12 month req. That being said I just tried the trial account on it, it is pretty cool. I like the anonymity feel to it, even if the UI isn't super friendly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (3 children) I was paying for Kagi and quite happy with it, but I’m gonna try Uruki for a few months since my Kagi subscription was almost coming to an end. Then I’ll see if I stick with Uruki or go back to Kagi. Thabks for letting us know about that product! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies) load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago (34 children) I’d pay for it if their $5 a month tier wasn’t so limited permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 34 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] SirHaxalot@nord.pub 15 points 2 weeks ago Im okay with it tbh. The everything must be free on the internet mindset is what led ads working its way in everywhere. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 30 points 2 weeks ago (14 children) It costs money to maintain software? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago I block all ads from all sites on the internet. I pay money to the fediverse hosting foundation because hosting software costs money. I pay creators to create content because creating content costs them time and if they are going to do that thing, they need money. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago No, but if you DON'T want ads then they need to get money from somewhere? I RARELY use YouTube permalink fedilink source parent [–] aksdb@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Ahh. So you’re fine with all the ads on YouTube? No, that’s why I pay for YouTube too. If I wouldn’t use it as much that the price is worth it, I would likely not use it at all (besides the irregular link thrown over my fence ever once in a while). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies) [–] Hal@piefed.nz 12 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) I Kagi's case they are paying per search to connect to APIs to search other search engines and aggregate the results. They have a very real cost per search that isn't only maintaining software. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Wouldn't that be part of the "maintenance" cost? If I run an ice cream cart, I need to keep purchasing supplies to keep selling ice cream. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Technically yes I guess, but I would expect "maintenance" to refer to the cost of keeping the ice cream cart working and looking good, I wouldn't expect the wholesale cost of ice cream to be in the "maintenance" column of my cart finances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago Sure! I mean, my point was this stuff costs money. Wasn't meant to be as technically correct as possibly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago I'm dying hahahahah! Yeah, depending on where you work that word carries a lot of baggage permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies) load more comments (1 reply) [–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago I think your first sentence is a valid opinion to hold, but I disagree that they’re just as bad when they’re very upfront about what you’re paying for. Google et all meanwhile don’t make it clear that they monitize user data unless you’re paying attention permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) Same tbf. 5$ for 300 searches is so limited. I just checked my DDG history for the month and I average between 2500 and 3500 searches a month. I don't even use it professionally, its just general consumer use. Honestly I likely would pay for it if it was 5$ for 3k-4k searches. I would just swap to another engine for the remainder but, 1$/1k searches up to 10$ which moves to unlimited would be more than fine, even if they decided to remove the bloat like lens, and translation from the package. but they are likely hoping more people are not like me and will just pay the 10$ a month to have unlimited rather than just not use the service at all. Especially considering how many other services that I get way more value of are not much more than the unlimited plan... I can have internet browsing for 10$ which i already have for free, or I can pay a couple $'s more and get a streaming service or a news site which contains content that I don't already have access to. I like the mentality but, it's just not worth it for me for a non-essential service that adds nothing of value to me outside one less site harvesting my data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 9 points 2 weeks ago (4 children) Ok sorry ignoring the rest of your comment but how do you do 2500-3500 searches a month? That's 100 a day, and you explicitly excluded work related searching. You're doing a search every 10 minutes of every waking hour of every day, not including searches done for work. You barely have time to read what you are searching. Why so many searches? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Glitchvid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I hit about 1,250 searches per month on average. I once did 2K in a month. Probably a good number of those are refinements on an initial search query. Like if I search for a movie title, but there are multiple that go by the same name, I'll append the year the one I care about came out. Doing that it's easy to get like 3–6 searches in a single minute. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 child) is it really that much? I search a lot about my current desktop, and some about my proxmox server. I also like to search about ongoing tech trends like currently ive done a lot of research on the current ps5 jailbreak. I just went and checked my current month usage at the moment and You are right though with the average. For this month so far I'm sitting at 2209 searches, my daily range is 28-308 queries (if I search "duckduckgo" as the keyword) the majority of them are in the 40-90 query range. A good chunk of them falls into gaming questions and linux questions. for fun I just checked septembers, page total is 2627 queries and ranges between 40 and 167 pages a day with an average of 87.56 a day august is 2445 with range of 29-189 and an average 78.87 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 7 points 2 weeks ago The average searches per user on Google is something like 30 a month lol. But I'm a 500-1000 kind of guy. Depending on what I'm doing it can get higher, especially if I'm doing dev stuff. I guess I'm just surprised that you do that many searches and think paying for search is a waste of money. Being able to customise search results (block Pinterest, have MDN ranked higher, rewrite reddit.com to old.reddit.com, etc) is easily worth $10 a month to me. But as I said to someone else, $10USD can be a coffee or a weeks wages depending on where you are in the world, so it's probably going to hugely sway people's views on if it's worth it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Steve@communick.news 2 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Are you rephrasing searches often? Not getting what you wanted the first time? Because that's a ton of queries. DDG gets to show more ads that way. It might not be you, but part of the plan to make you run more queries. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago yea a lot of my searches are technical in nature so I need to reword them in order to have the right critera show. Like looking for a linux virtual display will require 3 different types of searches depending on how its phrased, and will try to show queries about vGPU setups or KVM which are not related to that type of virtual driver (but it technically could be). and sometimes it needs to be narrowed down to specifically your setup as well which adds more searches to it. Specific error codes such as CRTC errors require multiple searches until you can find the right code, gaming wikis and questions can be similar especially if its about more secretive parts of it such as easter eggs or secret endings. permalink fedilink source parent [–] boatswain@infosec.pub 5 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) The $5 a month tier is more than enough for me; I don't think I've gone over the 300 queries a month in almost a year, and I feel like I search a lot. Those couple of times I have, all it means is starting a new 30 day period a little early. It's painless. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) 300 searches is ten per day, they aren't that many. Most days I think I'd do less than that but then there are days that I'm looking for something specific and might do many times that. It is definitely not something to use instead of bookmarks like most people use google. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Does this mean it's effectively $0.0167 per search, and you have to buy batches of 300 searches, but they have an expiration date? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] boatswain@infosec.pub 3 points 2 weeks ago Basically, yeah permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (2 replies) load more comments (2 replies)
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] SirHaxalot@nord.pub 15 points 2 weeks ago Im okay with it tbh. The everything must be free on the internet mindset is what led ads working its way in everywhere. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 30 points 2 weeks ago (14 children) It costs money to maintain software? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago I block all ads from all sites on the internet. I pay money to the fediverse hosting foundation because hosting software costs money. I pay creators to create content because creating content costs them time and if they are going to do that thing, they need money. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago No, but if you DON'T want ads then they need to get money from somewhere? I RARELY use YouTube permalink fedilink source parent [–] aksdb@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Ahh. So you’re fine with all the ads on YouTube? No, that’s why I pay for YouTube too. If I wouldn’t use it as much that the price is worth it, I would likely not use it at all (besides the irregular link thrown over my fence ever once in a while). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies) [–] Hal@piefed.nz 12 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) I Kagi's case they are paying per search to connect to APIs to search other search engines and aggregate the results. They have a very real cost per search that isn't only maintaining software. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Wouldn't that be part of the "maintenance" cost? If I run an ice cream cart, I need to keep purchasing supplies to keep selling ice cream. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Technically yes I guess, but I would expect "maintenance" to refer to the cost of keeping the ice cream cart working and looking good, I wouldn't expect the wholesale cost of ice cream to be in the "maintenance" column of my cart finances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago Sure! I mean, my point was this stuff costs money. Wasn't meant to be as technically correct as possibly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago I'm dying hahahahah! Yeah, depending on where you work that word carries a lot of baggage permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies) load more comments (1 reply) [–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago I think your first sentence is a valid opinion to hold, but I disagree that they’re just as bad when they’re very upfront about what you’re paying for. Google et all meanwhile don’t make it clear that they monitize user data unless you’re paying attention permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SirHaxalot@nord.pub 15 points 2 weeks ago Im okay with it tbh. The everything must be free on the internet mindset is what led ads working its way in everywhere. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 30 points 2 weeks ago (14 children) It costs money to maintain software? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago I block all ads from all sites on the internet. I pay money to the fediverse hosting foundation because hosting software costs money. I pay creators to create content because creating content costs them time and if they are going to do that thing, they need money. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago No, but if you DON'T want ads then they need to get money from somewhere? I RARELY use YouTube permalink fedilink source parent [–] aksdb@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Ahh. So you’re fine with all the ads on YouTube? No, that’s why I pay for YouTube too. If I wouldn’t use it as much that the price is worth it, I would likely not use it at all (besides the irregular link thrown over my fence ever once in a while). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies) [–] Hal@piefed.nz 12 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) I Kagi's case they are paying per search to connect to APIs to search other search engines and aggregate the results. They have a very real cost per search that isn't only maintaining software. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Wouldn't that be part of the "maintenance" cost? If I run an ice cream cart, I need to keep purchasing supplies to keep selling ice cream. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Technically yes I guess, but I would expect "maintenance" to refer to the cost of keeping the ice cream cart working and looking good, I wouldn't expect the wholesale cost of ice cream to be in the "maintenance" column of my cart finances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago Sure! I mean, my point was this stuff costs money. Wasn't meant to be as technically correct as possibly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago I'm dying hahahahah! Yeah, depending on where you work that word carries a lot of baggage permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies) load more comments (1 reply)
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago I block all ads from all sites on the internet. I pay money to the fediverse hosting foundation because hosting software costs money. I pay creators to create content because creating content costs them time and if they are going to do that thing, they need money. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago No, but if you DON'T want ads then they need to get money from somewhere? I RARELY use YouTube permalink fedilink source parent [–] aksdb@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Ahh. So you’re fine with all the ads on YouTube? No, that’s why I pay for YouTube too. If I wouldn’t use it as much that the price is worth it, I would likely not use it at all (besides the irregular link thrown over my fence ever once in a while). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago I block all ads from all sites on the internet. I pay money to the fediverse hosting foundation because hosting software costs money. I pay creators to create content because creating content costs them time and if they are going to do that thing, they need money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago No, but if you DON'T want ads then they need to get money from somewhere? I RARELY use YouTube permalink fedilink source parent
[–] aksdb@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Ahh. So you’re fine with all the ads on YouTube? No, that’s why I pay for YouTube too. If I wouldn’t use it as much that the price is worth it, I would likely not use it at all (besides the irregular link thrown over my fence ever once in a while). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Hal@piefed.nz 12 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) I Kagi's case they are paying per search to connect to APIs to search other search engines and aggregate the results. They have a very real cost per search that isn't only maintaining software. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Wouldn't that be part of the "maintenance" cost? If I run an ice cream cart, I need to keep purchasing supplies to keep selling ice cream. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Technically yes I guess, but I would expect "maintenance" to refer to the cost of keeping the ice cream cart working and looking good, I wouldn't expect the wholesale cost of ice cream to be in the "maintenance" column of my cart finances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago Sure! I mean, my point was this stuff costs money. Wasn't meant to be as technically correct as possibly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago I'm dying hahahahah! Yeah, depending on where you work that word carries a lot of baggage permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies)
[–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Wouldn't that be part of the "maintenance" cost? If I run an ice cream cart, I need to keep purchasing supplies to keep selling ice cream. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Technically yes I guess, but I would expect "maintenance" to refer to the cost of keeping the ice cream cart working and looking good, I wouldn't expect the wholesale cost of ice cream to be in the "maintenance" column of my cart finances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago Sure! I mean, my point was this stuff costs money. Wasn't meant to be as technically correct as possibly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago I'm dying hahahahah! Yeah, depending on where you work that word carries a lot of baggage permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Hal@piefed.nz 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Technically yes I guess, but I would expect "maintenance" to refer to the cost of keeping the ice cream cart working and looking good, I wouldn't expect the wholesale cost of ice cream to be in the "maintenance" column of my cart finances. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago Sure! I mean, my point was this stuff costs money. Wasn't meant to be as technically correct as possibly. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago Sure! I mean, my point was this stuff costs money. Wasn't meant to be as technically correct as possibly. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago I'm dying hahahahah! Yeah, depending on where you work that word carries a lot of baggage permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zoloftt@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago I'm dying hahahahah! Yeah, depending on where you work that word carries a lot of baggage permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago I think your first sentence is a valid opinion to hold, but I disagree that they’re just as bad when they’re very upfront about what you’re paying for. Google et all meanwhile don’t make it clear that they monitize user data unless you’re paying attention permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) Same tbf. 5$ for 300 searches is so limited. I just checked my DDG history for the month and I average between 2500 and 3500 searches a month. I don't even use it professionally, its just general consumer use. Honestly I likely would pay for it if it was 5$ for 3k-4k searches. I would just swap to another engine for the remainder but, 1$/1k searches up to 10$ which moves to unlimited would be more than fine, even if they decided to remove the bloat like lens, and translation from the package. but they are likely hoping more people are not like me and will just pay the 10$ a month to have unlimited rather than just not use the service at all. Especially considering how many other services that I get way more value of are not much more than the unlimited plan... I can have internet browsing for 10$ which i already have for free, or I can pay a couple $'s more and get a streaming service or a news site which contains content that I don't already have access to. I like the mentality but, it's just not worth it for me for a non-essential service that adds nothing of value to me outside one less site harvesting my data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 9 points 2 weeks ago (4 children) Ok sorry ignoring the rest of your comment but how do you do 2500-3500 searches a month? That's 100 a day, and you explicitly excluded work related searching. You're doing a search every 10 minutes of every waking hour of every day, not including searches done for work. You barely have time to read what you are searching. Why so many searches? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Glitchvid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I hit about 1,250 searches per month on average. I once did 2K in a month. Probably a good number of those are refinements on an initial search query. Like if I search for a movie title, but there are multiple that go by the same name, I'll append the year the one I care about came out. Doing that it's easy to get like 3–6 searches in a single minute. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 child) is it really that much? I search a lot about my current desktop, and some about my proxmox server. I also like to search about ongoing tech trends like currently ive done a lot of research on the current ps5 jailbreak. I just went and checked my current month usage at the moment and You are right though with the average. For this month so far I'm sitting at 2209 searches, my daily range is 28-308 queries (if I search "duckduckgo" as the keyword) the majority of them are in the 40-90 query range. A good chunk of them falls into gaming questions and linux questions. for fun I just checked septembers, page total is 2627 queries and ranges between 40 and 167 pages a day with an average of 87.56 a day august is 2445 with range of 29-189 and an average 78.87 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 7 points 2 weeks ago The average searches per user on Google is something like 30 a month lol. But I'm a 500-1000 kind of guy. Depending on what I'm doing it can get higher, especially if I'm doing dev stuff. I guess I'm just surprised that you do that many searches and think paying for search is a waste of money. Being able to customise search results (block Pinterest, have MDN ranked higher, rewrite reddit.com to old.reddit.com, etc) is easily worth $10 a month to me. But as I said to someone else, $10USD can be a coffee or a weeks wages depending on where you are in the world, so it's probably going to hugely sway people's views on if it's worth it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Steve@communick.news 2 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Are you rephrasing searches often? Not getting what you wanted the first time? Because that's a ton of queries. DDG gets to show more ads that way. It might not be you, but part of the plan to make you run more queries. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago yea a lot of my searches are technical in nature so I need to reword them in order to have the right critera show. Like looking for a linux virtual display will require 3 different types of searches depending on how its phrased, and will try to show queries about vGPU setups or KVM which are not related to that type of virtual driver (but it technically could be). and sometimes it needs to be narrowed down to specifically your setup as well which adds more searches to it. Specific error codes such as CRTC errors require multiple searches until you can find the right code, gaming wikis and questions can be similar especially if its about more secretive parts of it such as easter eggs or secret endings. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Hal@piefed.nz 9 points 2 weeks ago (4 children) Ok sorry ignoring the rest of your comment but how do you do 2500-3500 searches a month? That's 100 a day, and you explicitly excluded work related searching. You're doing a search every 10 minutes of every waking hour of every day, not including searches done for work. You barely have time to read what you are searching. Why so many searches? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Glitchvid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I hit about 1,250 searches per month on average. I once did 2K in a month. Probably a good number of those are refinements on an initial search query. Like if I search for a movie title, but there are multiple that go by the same name, I'll append the year the one I care about came out. Doing that it's easy to get like 3–6 searches in a single minute. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 child) is it really that much? I search a lot about my current desktop, and some about my proxmox server. I also like to search about ongoing tech trends like currently ive done a lot of research on the current ps5 jailbreak. I just went and checked my current month usage at the moment and You are right though with the average. For this month so far I'm sitting at 2209 searches, my daily range is 28-308 queries (if I search "duckduckgo" as the keyword) the majority of them are in the 40-90 query range. A good chunk of them falls into gaming questions and linux questions. for fun I just checked septembers, page total is 2627 queries and ranges between 40 and 167 pages a day with an average of 87.56 a day august is 2445 with range of 29-189 and an average 78.87 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 7 points 2 weeks ago The average searches per user on Google is something like 30 a month lol. But I'm a 500-1000 kind of guy. Depending on what I'm doing it can get higher, especially if I'm doing dev stuff. I guess I'm just surprised that you do that many searches and think paying for search is a waste of money. Being able to customise search results (block Pinterest, have MDN ranked higher, rewrite reddit.com to old.reddit.com, etc) is easily worth $10 a month to me. But as I said to someone else, $10USD can be a coffee or a weeks wages depending on where you are in the world, so it's probably going to hugely sway people's views on if it's worth it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Glitchvid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I hit about 1,250 searches per month on average. I once did 2K in a month. Probably a good number of those are refinements on an initial search query. Like if I search for a movie title, but there are multiple that go by the same name, I'll append the year the one I care about came out. Doing that it's easy to get like 3–6 searches in a single minute. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 child) is it really that much? I search a lot about my current desktop, and some about my proxmox server. I also like to search about ongoing tech trends like currently ive done a lot of research on the current ps5 jailbreak. I just went and checked my current month usage at the moment and You are right though with the average. For this month so far I'm sitting at 2209 searches, my daily range is 28-308 queries (if I search "duckduckgo" as the keyword) the majority of them are in the 40-90 query range. A good chunk of them falls into gaming questions and linux questions. for fun I just checked septembers, page total is 2627 queries and ranges between 40 and 167 pages a day with an average of 87.56 a day august is 2445 with range of 29-189 and an average 78.87 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Hal@piefed.nz 7 points 2 weeks ago The average searches per user on Google is something like 30 a month lol. But I'm a 500-1000 kind of guy. Depending on what I'm doing it can get higher, especially if I'm doing dev stuff. I guess I'm just surprised that you do that many searches and think paying for search is a waste of money. Being able to customise search results (block Pinterest, have MDN ranked higher, rewrite reddit.com to old.reddit.com, etc) is easily worth $10 a month to me. But as I said to someone else, $10USD can be a coffee or a weeks wages depending on where you are in the world, so it's probably going to hugely sway people's views on if it's worth it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Hal@piefed.nz 7 points 2 weeks ago The average searches per user on Google is something like 30 a month lol. But I'm a 500-1000 kind of guy. Depending on what I'm doing it can get higher, especially if I'm doing dev stuff. I guess I'm just surprised that you do that many searches and think paying for search is a waste of money. Being able to customise search results (block Pinterest, have MDN ranked higher, rewrite reddit.com to old.reddit.com, etc) is easily worth $10 a month to me. But as I said to someone else, $10USD can be a coffee or a weeks wages depending on where you are in the world, so it's probably going to hugely sway people's views on if it's worth it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Steve@communick.news 2 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Are you rephrasing searches often? Not getting what you wanted the first time? Because that's a ton of queries. DDG gets to show more ads that way. It might not be you, but part of the plan to make you run more queries. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago yea a lot of my searches are technical in nature so I need to reword them in order to have the right critera show. Like looking for a linux virtual display will require 3 different types of searches depending on how its phrased, and will try to show queries about vGPU setups or KVM which are not related to that type of virtual driver (but it technically could be). and sometimes it needs to be narrowed down to specifically your setup as well which adds more searches to it. Specific error codes such as CRTC errors require multiple searches until you can find the right code, gaming wikis and questions can be similar especially if its about more secretive parts of it such as easter eggs or secret endings. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago yea a lot of my searches are technical in nature so I need to reword them in order to have the right critera show. Like looking for a linux virtual display will require 3 different types of searches depending on how its phrased, and will try to show queries about vGPU setups or KVM which are not related to that type of virtual driver (but it technically could be). and sometimes it needs to be narrowed down to specifically your setup as well which adds more searches to it. Specific error codes such as CRTC errors require multiple searches until you can find the right code, gaming wikis and questions can be similar especially if its about more secretive parts of it such as easter eggs or secret endings. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] boatswain@infosec.pub 5 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) The $5 a month tier is more than enough for me; I don't think I've gone over the 300 queries a month in almost a year, and I feel like I search a lot. Those couple of times I have, all it means is starting a new 30 day period a little early. It's painless. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) 300 searches is ten per day, they aren't that many. Most days I think I'd do less than that but then there are days that I'm looking for something specific and might do many times that. It is definitely not something to use instead of bookmarks like most people use google. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Does this mean it's effectively $0.0167 per search, and you have to buy batches of 300 searches, but they have an expiration date? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] boatswain@infosec.pub 3 points 2 weeks ago Basically, yeah permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (2 replies)
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) 300 searches is ten per day, they aren't that many. Most days I think I'd do less than that but then there are days that I'm looking for something specific and might do many times that. It is definitely not something to use instead of bookmarks like most people use google. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) 300 searches is ten per day, they aren't that many. Most days I think I'd do less than that but then there are days that I'm looking for something specific and might do many times that. It is definitely not something to use instead of bookmarks like most people use google. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Does this mean it's effectively $0.0167 per search, and you have to buy batches of 300 searches, but they have an expiration date? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] boatswain@infosec.pub 3 points 2 weeks ago Basically, yeah permalink fedilink source parent
[–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 96 points 2 weeks ago (18 children) This attitude is why the internet is full of ads. Doing shit for free doesn't happen on an empty stomach. I'd rather pay a fair price for software and services I use. I'm not saying anyone's pricing is fair, just pointing out I don't agree with this behavior. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago Youtube also didn't have a subscription option back in the day, and it also limited the length of videos you could upload. Things cost money to run, and something on the scale of Youtube costs a lot of money to run. Now to be clear, I don't pay for Youtube or watch ads, but that's more because I object to directly giving Google my money with how much value they already generate just tracking and selling what browsing habits I am unable to obscure from them. If there was an option to pay Google $5-10 a month with the enforceable assurance that it came with absolutely no personal tracking and data collection, I would strongly consider it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] IdleSheep@lemmy.blahaj.zone 49 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Most platforms usually start ad free and with no restrictions. That's how they capture a chunk of the market. Then, once they have an established customer base, they typically introduce ads or a subscription so they can actually pay for the hardware and bandwidth the service runs on. This is what YouTube, Google, and pretty much everyone did. It's the standard play book. One-time fees are not feasible for this type of business model. If the server costs are ongoing, meaning you have to pay for the user's usage constantly, then you need to either constantly charge them too, take money out of your own pocket to subsidize it, or sell customer data to once again subsidize it. Nothing is free. A one-time fee would have to be absurdly high (think hundreds of dollars) to take into account multiple years of usage, otherwise it's too risky and you're most likely losing money. This mindset that subscriptions are all evil when hardware and bandwidth are billed to you every month/year is ridiculous. Kagi at least is honest from the get go and never tried to trick customers into believing their service would be free forever. That's what's actually shitty behavior, when companies put out a product that they then enhsittify for the purposes of extracting profit. Kagi was a subscription from the get go and told you that's how they pay their bills, and in return you get the service they promised with no compromises. I'm not arguing whether the price is fair, but at least the business model is honest and doesn't try to take advantage of me and my data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Kangae_Hishiryo@scribe.disroot.org 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago) At least make prices fucking progressive. If you're under certain poverty threshold, you don't pay anything. If you're over that same threshold, you pay an amount equivalent to what you actually have, so if you're barely over the threshold, then you pay drastically less than the ones that have the more money. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 18 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) You would understand a one-time fee for an active, ongoing, online service?? I'm a fucking communist, please don't make me defend capitalism... Even back in the day, people would buy versions of software on disks and updates were limited. There's a reason why the idea of perpetual licenses died hard and fast and every company everywhere either reneged or died. I pay for Kagi. If they offered a "one-time lifetime purchase" I'd probably just stop because that would be a giant red flashing neon warning sign. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago That's not really my point, but for what it's worth I don't mind if I was paying for something and it allowed you to use it because you can't afford it. Nothing in life is free, someone's paying for it. If I use a service, I think it's fair for me to pay a fair price. permalink fedilink source parent [–] TrackenDaKracken@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I'd rather, and I do, donate to apps like Blender, LibreOffice, Wikipedia, and Lemmy, etc. Free to use for people who can't afford to donate. I donate monthly to those because I use them a lot and I can afford it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago Sounds like we're in agreement, great. Not everything can have that scheme but I support things as best I can, again as long as it's fair. Affordability is different for everyone. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Over a decade of running at a loss. That is only possible for companies, like Google, that are already very rich. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago Yes, that's quite typical, if you manage to find a rich investor. But that only happens if you have a way to eventually make a profit. If you say from the start you're never going to have ads or subscriptions so you're never going to make money with this, you're not going to find an investor. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] otter@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 weeks ago* YouTube started with a lot of angel funding, which is why it eventually monetized in the way that it has YouTube began as an angel-funded enterprise working from a makeshift office in a garage. In November 2005, venture firm Sequoia Capital invested an initial $3.5 million,[20] and Roelof Botha (a partner of the firm and former CFO of PayPal) joined the YouTube board of directors. In April 2006, Sequoia and Artis Capital Management invested an additional $8 million in the company, which had experienced significant growth in its first few months. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_YouTube permalink fedilink source parent [–] Seimhe@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago It ran at a financial loss every year until more recently. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Guilvareux@feddit.uk 5 points 2 weeks ago* Costs that they’re now paying for with ads and subscriptions. So I’ll ask again. What would you do differently? permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (5 replies)
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago Youtube also didn't have a subscription option back in the day, and it also limited the length of videos you could upload. Things cost money to run, and something on the scale of Youtube costs a lot of money to run. Now to be clear, I don't pay for Youtube or watch ads, but that's more because I object to directly giving Google my money with how much value they already generate just tracking and selling what browsing habits I am unable to obscure from them. If there was an option to pay Google $5-10 a month with the enforceable assurance that it came with absolutely no personal tracking and data collection, I would strongly consider it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] IdleSheep@lemmy.blahaj.zone 49 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Most platforms usually start ad free and with no restrictions. That's how they capture a chunk of the market. Then, once they have an established customer base, they typically introduce ads or a subscription so they can actually pay for the hardware and bandwidth the service runs on. This is what YouTube, Google, and pretty much everyone did. It's the standard play book. One-time fees are not feasible for this type of business model. If the server costs are ongoing, meaning you have to pay for the user's usage constantly, then you need to either constantly charge them too, take money out of your own pocket to subsidize it, or sell customer data to once again subsidize it. Nothing is free. A one-time fee would have to be absurdly high (think hundreds of dollars) to take into account multiple years of usage, otherwise it's too risky and you're most likely losing money. This mindset that subscriptions are all evil when hardware and bandwidth are billed to you every month/year is ridiculous. Kagi at least is honest from the get go and never tried to trick customers into believing their service would be free forever. That's what's actually shitty behavior, when companies put out a product that they then enhsittify for the purposes of extracting profit. Kagi was a subscription from the get go and told you that's how they pay their bills, and in return you get the service they promised with no compromises. I'm not arguing whether the price is fair, but at least the business model is honest and doesn't try to take advantage of me and my data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Kangae_Hishiryo@scribe.disroot.org 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago) At least make prices fucking progressive. If you're under certain poverty threshold, you don't pay anything. If you're over that same threshold, you pay an amount equivalent to what you actually have, so if you're barely over the threshold, then you pay drastically less than the ones that have the more money. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 18 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) You would understand a one-time fee for an active, ongoing, online service?? I'm a fucking communist, please don't make me defend capitalism... Even back in the day, people would buy versions of software on disks and updates were limited. There's a reason why the idea of perpetual licenses died hard and fast and every company everywhere either reneged or died. I pay for Kagi. If they offered a "one-time lifetime purchase" I'd probably just stop because that would be a giant red flashing neon warning sign. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago Youtube also didn't have a subscription option back in the day, and it also limited the length of videos you could upload. Things cost money to run, and something on the scale of Youtube costs a lot of money to run. Now to be clear, I don't pay for Youtube or watch ads, but that's more because I object to directly giving Google my money with how much value they already generate just tracking and selling what browsing habits I am unable to obscure from them. If there was an option to pay Google $5-10 a month with the enforceable assurance that it came with absolutely no personal tracking and data collection, I would strongly consider it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IdleSheep@lemmy.blahaj.zone 49 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Most platforms usually start ad free and with no restrictions. That's how they capture a chunk of the market. Then, once they have an established customer base, they typically introduce ads or a subscription so they can actually pay for the hardware and bandwidth the service runs on. This is what YouTube, Google, and pretty much everyone did. It's the standard play book. One-time fees are not feasible for this type of business model. If the server costs are ongoing, meaning you have to pay for the user's usage constantly, then you need to either constantly charge them too, take money out of your own pocket to subsidize it, or sell customer data to once again subsidize it. Nothing is free. A one-time fee would have to be absurdly high (think hundreds of dollars) to take into account multiple years of usage, otherwise it's too risky and you're most likely losing money. This mindset that subscriptions are all evil when hardware and bandwidth are billed to you every month/year is ridiculous. Kagi at least is honest from the get go and never tried to trick customers into believing their service would be free forever. That's what's actually shitty behavior, when companies put out a product that they then enhsittify for the purposes of extracting profit. Kagi was a subscription from the get go and told you that's how they pay their bills, and in return you get the service they promised with no compromises. I'm not arguing whether the price is fair, but at least the business model is honest and doesn't try to take advantage of me and my data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Kangae_Hishiryo@scribe.disroot.org 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago) At least make prices fucking progressive. If you're under certain poverty threshold, you don't pay anything. If you're over that same threshold, you pay an amount equivalent to what you actually have, so if you're barely over the threshold, then you pay drastically less than the ones that have the more money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kangae_Hishiryo@scribe.disroot.org 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago) At least make prices fucking progressive. If you're under certain poverty threshold, you don't pay anything. If you're over that same threshold, you pay an amount equivalent to what you actually have, so if you're barely over the threshold, then you pay drastically less than the ones that have the more money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 18 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) You would understand a one-time fee for an active, ongoing, online service?? I'm a fucking communist, please don't make me defend capitalism... Even back in the day, people would buy versions of software on disks and updates were limited. There's a reason why the idea of perpetual licenses died hard and fast and every company everywhere either reneged or died. I pay for Kagi. If they offered a "one-time lifetime purchase" I'd probably just stop because that would be a giant red flashing neon warning sign. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago That's not really my point, but for what it's worth I don't mind if I was paying for something and it allowed you to use it because you can't afford it. Nothing in life is free, someone's paying for it. If I use a service, I think it's fair for me to pay a fair price. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago That's not really my point, but for what it's worth I don't mind if I was paying for something and it allowed you to use it because you can't afford it. Nothing in life is free, someone's paying for it. If I use a service, I think it's fair for me to pay a fair price. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TrackenDaKracken@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) I'd rather, and I do, donate to apps like Blender, LibreOffice, Wikipedia, and Lemmy, etc. Free to use for people who can't afford to donate. I donate monthly to those because I use them a lot and I can afford it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago Sounds like we're in agreement, great. Not everything can have that scheme but I support things as best I can, again as long as it's fair. Affordability is different for everyone. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago Sounds like we're in agreement, great. Not everything can have that scheme but I support things as best I can, again as long as it's fair. Affordability is different for everyone. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Over a decade of running at a loss. That is only possible for companies, like Google, that are already very rich. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago Yes, that's quite typical, if you manage to find a rich investor. But that only happens if you have a way to eventually make a profit. If you say from the start you're never going to have ads or subscriptions so you're never going to make money with this, you're not going to find an investor. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] otter@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 weeks ago* YouTube started with a lot of angel funding, which is why it eventually monetized in the way that it has YouTube began as an angel-funded enterprise working from a makeshift office in a garage. In November 2005, venture firm Sequoia Capital invested an initial $3.5 million,[20] and Roelof Botha (a partner of the firm and former CFO of PayPal) joined the YouTube board of directors. In April 2006, Sequoia and Artis Capital Management invested an additional $8 million in the company, which had experienced significant growth in its first few months. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_YouTube permalink fedilink source parent [–] Seimhe@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago It ran at a financial loss every year until more recently. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Guilvareux@feddit.uk 5 points 2 weeks ago* Costs that they’re now paying for with ads and subscriptions. So I’ll ask again. What would you do differently? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Over a decade of running at a loss. That is only possible for companies, like Google, that are already very rich. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago Yes, that's quite typical, if you manage to find a rich investor. But that only happens if you have a way to eventually make a profit. If you say from the start you're never going to have ads or subscriptions so you're never going to make money with this, you're not going to find an investor. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago Yes, that's quite typical, if you manage to find a rich investor. But that only happens if you have a way to eventually make a profit. If you say from the start you're never going to have ads or subscriptions so you're never going to make money with this, you're not going to find an investor. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago Yes, that's quite typical, if you manage to find a rich investor. But that only happens if you have a way to eventually make a profit. If you say from the start you're never going to have ads or subscriptions so you're never going to make money with this, you're not going to find an investor. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] otter@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 weeks ago* YouTube started with a lot of angel funding, which is why it eventually monetized in the way that it has YouTube began as an angel-funded enterprise working from a makeshift office in a garage. In November 2005, venture firm Sequoia Capital invested an initial $3.5 million,[20] and Roelof Botha (a partner of the firm and former CFO of PayPal) joined the YouTube board of directors. In April 2006, Sequoia and Artis Capital Management invested an additional $8 million in the company, which had experienced significant growth in its first few months. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_YouTube permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Seimhe@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago It ran at a financial loss every year until more recently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Guilvareux@feddit.uk 5 points 2 weeks ago* Costs that they’re now paying for with ads and subscriptions. So I’ll ask again. What would you do differently? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago I'd rather pay for the product than be the product myself and a search engine is the thing I use the most on the internet. And so I became a subscriber. Then I discovered their lens feature and now no other search engine even comes close for me on this and it's another thing I use multiple times per day. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago (4 children) I would pay, for my personal use. But a lot of the time I’m on my company corp network, on a company device. And I don’t mix that with my personal logins and personal devices. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children) Petition your IT for a subscription. Worst they can say is no right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) “Just use chatGPT.” -IT permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] skaffi@infosec.pub 2 points 1 week ago I think this deserves: “jUsT uSe cHaTgPt.” -iT permalink fedilink source parent [–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago I’m guessing you haven’t worked for a big company before. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children) Petition your IT for a subscription. Worst they can say is no right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) “Just use chatGPT.” -IT permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] skaffi@infosec.pub 2 points 1 week ago I think this deserves: “jUsT uSe cHaTgPt.” -iT permalink fedilink source parent [–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago I’m guessing you haven’t worked for a big company before. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) “Just use chatGPT.” -IT permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] skaffi@infosec.pub 2 points 1 week ago I think this deserves: “jUsT uSe cHaTgPt.” -iT permalink fedilink source parent
[–] skaffi@infosec.pub 2 points 1 week ago I think this deserves: “jUsT uSe cHaTgPt.” -iT permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago I’m guessing you haven’t worked for a big company before. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bretton.dev@coves.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (3 children) They have a free tier with 100 searches! It doesn't sound like a lot but I usually don't cross it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) the free tier is a static 100 not a monthly 100 isn't it? The pricing page says limited to 100 total searches and 100 AI interactions with standard models. I read that as once you hit your total 100 you need to get a sub. The page isn't super clear but older update logs state they moved from a "monthly 50" to a "one time 100" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mrmaplebar@fedia.io 3 points 2 weeks ago I don't know for sure, but it seems to say "100 searches total", which is pretty lame. If it was 100 searches a month, or even 50, then I would certainly try it. But I'm not gonna go through the process of making an account and changing my habits just to do 100 searches one time. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) the free tier is a static 100 not a monthly 100 isn't it? The pricing page says limited to 100 total searches and 100 AI interactions with standard models. I read that as once you hit your total 100 you need to get a sub. The page isn't super clear but older update logs state they moved from a "monthly 50" to a "one time 100" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mrmaplebar@fedia.io 3 points 2 weeks ago I don't know for sure, but it seems to say "100 searches total", which is pretty lame. If it was 100 searches a month, or even 50, then I would certainly try it. But I'm not gonna go through the process of making an account and changing my habits just to do 100 searches one time. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mrmaplebar@fedia.io 3 points 2 weeks ago I don't know for sure, but it seems to say "100 searches total", which is pretty lame. If it was 100 searches a month, or even 50, then I would certainly try it. But I'm not gonna go through the process of making an account and changing my habits just to do 100 searches one time. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (9 children) I'd pay if it wasn't based in the US. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] Joliprout@jlai.lu 5 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Uruki presents itself as a European alternative to Kagi. They seem to have a different vision, however (no AI and just focused on a search engine). On the other hand, I didn’t try because I find the price a bit high for the little comfort it brings me, but it’s still good to test! About Uruky permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] tal@lemmy.today 5 points 2 weeks ago* Kagi is European. Not in the EU: they're based in Serbia. But they are European. The US address that's associated with them is just their founder's home address. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago* I have never heard of that before but, they have a really weird requirement for source release. Source code will be made available to customers who have been paying for at least 12 months. I don't think I've heard of any software doing that before, also I really don't like how the "how do you know we don't track queries" is basically referring to pay them to see the source code once you hit the 12 month req. That being said I just tried the trial account on it, it is pretty cool. I like the anonymity feel to it, even if the UI isn't super friendly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (3 children) I was paying for Kagi and quite happy with it, but I’m gonna try Uruki for a few months since my Kagi subscription was almost coming to an end. Then I’ll see if I stick with Uruki or go back to Kagi. Thabks for letting us know about that product! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies) load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Joliprout@jlai.lu 5 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) Uruki presents itself as a European alternative to Kagi. They seem to have a different vision, however (no AI and just focused on a search engine). On the other hand, I didn’t try because I find the price a bit high for the little comfort it brings me, but it’s still good to test! About Uruky permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] tal@lemmy.today 5 points 2 weeks ago* Kagi is European. Not in the EU: they're based in Serbia. But they are European. The US address that's associated with them is just their founder's home address. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago* I have never heard of that before but, they have a really weird requirement for source release. Source code will be made available to customers who have been paying for at least 12 months. I don't think I've heard of any software doing that before, also I really don't like how the "how do you know we don't track queries" is basically referring to pay them to see the source code once you hit the 12 month req. That being said I just tried the trial account on it, it is pretty cool. I like the anonymity feel to it, even if the UI isn't super friendly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (3 children) I was paying for Kagi and quite happy with it, but I’m gonna try Uruki for a few months since my Kagi subscription was almost coming to an end. Then I’ll see if I stick with Uruki or go back to Kagi. Thabks for letting us know about that product! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies)
[–] tal@lemmy.today 5 points 2 weeks ago* Kagi is European. Not in the EU: they're based in Serbia. But they are European. The US address that's associated with them is just their founder's home address. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago* I have never heard of that before but, they have a really weird requirement for source release. Source code will be made available to customers who have been paying for at least 12 months. I don't think I've heard of any software doing that before, also I really don't like how the "how do you know we don't track queries" is basically referring to pay them to see the source code once you hit the 12 month req. That being said I just tried the trial account on it, it is pretty cool. I like the anonymity feel to it, even if the UI isn't super friendly. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (3 children) I was paying for Kagi and quite happy with it, but I’m gonna try Uruki for a few months since my Kagi subscription was almost coming to an end. Then I’ll see if I stick with Uruki or go back to Kagi. Thabks for letting us know about that product! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies)
