On the other hand, a lot of the search results bias stems from the search query itself. "Does X cause Y" for example will show results that echo the search, and not show opposite results. Simply because you did not ask the opposite or a more open/unbiased query like "X Y".

This way you get anonimity and custom results

Yes, the server has access to the information the client has, but it doesn't have any way to confirm that's true. It also could avoid storing that information all together if the client sends it again every time

On the point about payments, there are some potential approaches to handling this, but they tend to be a bit complex and technical. I"m not sur ethis is really a technical problem though (or at least one where a technical solution is what's needed).

A challenge of taking traditional payments is that the identity of the payer is inherently "linked" (to some extent) to the transaction. You could maybe use a privacy.com type intermediary or similar.

What you could do however, is buy a "kagi voucher" or similar, which would be an RSA-blind-signed token that you generated client-side in JS. You'd send it to the server during the payment transaction, and be given back a signed version of the token, which you unblind client-side, then give a backup copy to the user to save, and set it as a cookie to authenticate payment has been made.

That should, in theory, at least un-link the payment from the user. Ultimately though, a bad actor can still trivially correlate your searches (and payment, if you used same IP or browser fingerprint), and all your searches are linked by a common cookie.

So you decide to create some kind of token fountain, which you can auth to with a blind-signed token, and get 50 "search passes" from. Those could be unique per-search, and just be "bearer tokens" you can use. You'd have to trust that this token fountain doesn't record which search passes were issued to which "blind token".

Ultimately, it feels like this problem then becomes "do you trust your search engine?" - I'm not sure this is a problem that technology needs to solve, as ultimately your search provider is seeing your queries and IP, and most users won't realistically change this. A provider that isn't incentized to act against your interests (i.e. something like Kagi which isn't advertising to you or selling data) seems to address this for most user scenarios.

We already know that Google is in fact cooperating with these entities. Not only by giving out user data but also by actively censoring certain things. So there is a precedent.

This made internet completely unusable for discovery. A big shiny window into another tiny room. Absolute BS.

Recently I discussed it here on HN and was advised to like, dislike, subscribe and so on on youtube (things I rarely have done on my old account) to break out of this bubble. Well, it doesn’t work. It just suggests the content I immediately dislike or ban entire channels and it all settles to the same echo chamber as before.

Same for google search, really. It turned from “I’ll find you that if it exists” into “Look, if you change your query to ‘cool products if at all barely relevant to …’, I have literally billions of results for that”.