News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by Nullabillity on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @08:51AM (#39615955)
> they (say) don't store your history

They don't show your history.

> the ad profile Google builds on you is probably more damaging to your privacy than a photo of the entire contents of your wallet.

I can take measures to prevent Google from linking together a full profile. It sucks that it's necessary, but once you log in it's effectively game over. And your payment info has enough stable identifiers that it's trivial to link you to pretty much anything else you've paid for.

---

The core misconception here seems to be the idea that there is such a thing as a honest for-profit corporation.

Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by TheCoelacanth on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @11:34AM (#39617674)
Kagi explicitly promises not to store your history[1] and then takes your money based on that promise. If they do store your history, then they are committing fraud on a grand scale.

[1] https://kagi.com/privacy

Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by Nullabillity on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @11:59AM (#39618008)
I see lots of promises, but very little proof. While, again, running a business model that massively increases the inherent risk compared to the competition.
Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by freediver on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @12:11PM (#39618154)
One of the best things about paid business model for search is that it aligns incentives and decreases the risk of data mining as the business makes money through subscriptions, without any need for ads/selling data.
Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by Nullabillity on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @12:28PM (#39618369)
Doing one doesn't prevent them from doing the other. It gives them more data about you to sell, while limiting the dataset to gullible rich people who think that you can capitalism yourself out of the problems of capitalism (the prime advertising target demographic).
Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by freediver on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @12:30PM (#39618388)
But what is the incentive?
Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by Nullabillity on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @12:35PM (#39618450)
Money?

You are the one claiming that Kagi is somehow special, trustworthy, and immune to the same influences that drags down everyone else.

Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by kiicia on Friday March 08, 2024 @07:36AM (#39640487)
Like all the companies that realized that quietly selling highly targetable user data is more profitable than their actual services? See all the "DNA analysis" companies selling data left and right
Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by Supermancho on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @12:49PM (#39618620)
> I can take measures to prevent Google from linking together a full profile

> I see lots of promises, but very little proof

Yet you trust google and any company that might do business with google? This view is some sort of mind game you're playing alone.

Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by Nullabillity on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @01:04PM (#39618827)
Who said anything about trusting Google in the first place?

My point is that Kagi's business model requires more trust in Kagi than Google's requires in Google.

Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by locuscoeruleus on Thursday March 07, 2024 @04:14AM (#39626882)
How would you go about proving such a thing?
Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by kiicia on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @07:24PM (#39623587)
Evert VPN app promises privacy but actually they don't honour that promise
Re:New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Se... by iamthepieman on Wednesday March 06, 2024 @09:27AM (#39616285)
That's why I said it's an equation, a balance, if you will. Sounds like you are all the way over on one side. We need the Stallman's of the world but most people are not that committed to a single issue.

> The core misconception here seems to be the idea that there is such a thing as a honest for-profit corporation.

And I would say there's degrees. Even if all companies eventually slouch into a google-like organization, at least you can jump on the bandwagon until that happens and find another when it does. And maybe none of the wagons are headed to a strict privacy, user controlled data, and free-software utopia, but maybe not all of them are headed to Gomorrah.