It’s possibly the single most impactful thing in my digital life.
Thanks for everything, and please keep doing what you’re doing.
Nice try, LLM! I'm onto you!
My comments are on the open, and I can answer any question or comment you have about any of them. :)
No offense taken though. Made me smile while drinking my tea. :)
Likely, the "It's not X, it's Y" phrasing is what probably rang the LLM alarm bells.
I am one of those people that used to write em dashes – and now I self-censor them out of my writings :(
I personally like the ability to filter my own results by promoting, demoting or blocking certain domains to filter lower quality results further. Same for image search which can also filter out AI generated images.
Also, I find lenses very useful (which is a way to limit your search radius) to search for specific things in the specific parts of the internet. i.e. you can define a lens with specific websites for a subject, and if you need something precisely, you can only search these websites.
I recently started to use SlopStop reporting to weed out AI generated webpages from search results, too.
Lastly, all AI features are opt-in. No summaries, no widgets, no extra "bells and whistles" if you don't want on your result page.
I had an annual Kagi subscription that I let lapse not long ago. That was hands-down the best feature, so I vibecoded a small userscript that replicates it for DuckDuckGo. DDG also lets you turn off ads.
I'd gladly return once they fix the integration issues. In Safari, the redirect via the extension is a bit wonky at times.
I know that we live in a world where tech increasingly sucks, and positive comments on tech are (correctly!) seen as suspicious. The thing, though, is that Kagi is genuinely just a great product, and search is such a central part of using the Internet that good, trustworthy search makes a huge difference.
That's the rub. Today on the internet, no one can validate that there exists any "trustworthy search". If we don't control the servers and validate the software on it, then we are taking someone's word for it. Most often that someone is a marketing person at the hosting organization. Occasionally it's a random comment on the internet behind a pseudonym we know nothing about.
People are becoming more and more, justifiably, cynical. And it's good for society that they are.
I don't use Kagi primarily because I'm quite averse to subscriptions if I can find another way.
That's what trust is, though. I find Kagi worthy of trust since I have no evidence that they are doing anything that would violate my trust in them, and their incentives align with mine. I give them money, they give me good search results.
> People are becoming more and more, justifiably, cynical. And it's good for society that they are.
I do not believe that this is good. Democracies are built on trust. Without trust, they die, as we can plainly see in the US right now, where people are so distrustful of each other that it is starting to destroy the very fabric holding together society itself.
The reason we need these and many more is that we don't trust each other. And it's wise that we don't.
This doesn't mean trust is bad, only that the founders, rightfully, knew that it leads to complacency.
What's landed us where we are is not a lack of trust. (We've lacked trust from day one, that's how we got the Constitution in the first place). What's landed us here is complacency.
At the root of all you lament is not lack of trust, it is complacency. Decades long complacency.
Lack of trust is what our republic was founded on, and the entire reason it was structured the way it was. Our republic is specifically designed to function in a trust-free environment.
But no republic, nor any other organizational construct, no matter how well designed, will survive complacency.
It sucks. But there's just too much astro-turfing.
What do you want me to do? :)
I can answer your questions if you want? :D
Edit: Heh, I saw your other comment, too.
Wanna bet? =]
I just want to bang my head to the keyboard.
On the other hand, I'm not new in the internet, and have relatively thick skin. I'm very amused today by the unintentional attention I got with my cloudy, morning brain.
Nevertheless, regardless of what we do, believe or say, we shall be kind first and remember https://xkcd.com/438/ dearly.
This is what I'm trying to do all the time, but I'm not perfect. Just a human, trying his best.
It's one thing to throw in a, "hey, I've used this service and I recommend it to others," but this is just gross, blatant advertising.
> It’s possibly the single most impactful thing in my digital life.
Even if this is true, only an LLM would ever believe posting this sentence would come off as anything other than bullshit lol
If you can provide me your contact details, I'd love to send my similar comments to you and get them cleared by you to satisfy your standards of endorsement.
For your information and entertainment, ZeroGPT returns 97% human for that whole comment which I wrote while having my breakfast and my phone was laying on the table.
Unbelievable.
Thanks again for everything!
And now they are cencoring everything. Like somewere was a page of tiktok removing requests by country and holy-lheehlll, every day, constantly.
* "The Sad Fate of Yandex: From Independent Tech Startup to Kremlin Propaganda Tool", from the Centre for East European and International Studies - https://www.zois-berlin.de/en/publications/zois-spotlight/th...
* "Different platforms, different plots? The Kremlin-controlled search engine Yandex as a resource for Russia’s informational influence in Belarus during the COVID-19 pandemic", from the NIH - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10130930/
* "How the Kremlin Subjugated Yandex", from GWU's Russia Post - https://russiapost.info/articles/yandex_kremlin
There's lots and lots more out there too on the topic, just a Google search away.
Ridiculous statement.
First, there is no requirement for "consistency". Every person chooses where to draw their moral line. The world is not black and white, but the unprovoked invasion of Ukraine by Russia, and subsequent (ongoing!) murdering, raping, and bombing of civilians is pretty clearly on one side of the line in my world.
Note that this in itself says nothing about the United States or any other country. You may consider every other country and choose not to support its economy, and this in no way makes the above point weaker.
You may note that when US goes to war nobody boycott the US.
It's rough that it's so hard to be an ethical consumer these days. Mullvad gone, Kagi gone.
https://korben.info/en/mullvad-cofounder-funding-far-right.h...
Mullvad has tried to paint it as, "this does not represent Mullvad the company, this is a private political donation" and stuff like that. I don't buy it. Funding Mullvad funds the CEOs.
On a secondary point, if we want more ethical things to exist, we have to create them. If we want an ethical alternative to Mullvad it's on us to do it.
There's no clear reason why someone couldn't have qualms about one but not the other.
Half the screen is the kagi sign up ad. Not a good show of the product.
Then it’s all black on white. 2026. Color. Contrast. It’s one of the pillars. Google figured this day 1:Dark blue links. Then the line spacing is too high. Information density doesn’t feel right.
Overall 2/10 experience for a 10/10 product.
I had to use post-nerf, post-lobotomy 2026 Google in quite a few cases.
Similarly, I want to continue to use the platforms that have all the users, content, and network effects.
BUT - I'd like my own personal agent to sit between everything and strip out the nonsense before it hits my eyeballs.
Ad block used to be good enough, but we can clearly take this much further.
Ads are not the only toxic thing. The algorithm is. Attention seeking from any entity is. The whole internet is adversarial, not just one screen of one product.
An agent could sit between us and the web (or us and our apps) and strip out all the ads, strip out all the clickbait, filter out all the negativity, algo-spam, and low-value content. Calls to upgrade, cookie banners, MrBeast, whatever.
I want an agent that knows me and acts on my behalf as I browse the internet. It should see everything in my browser (or even everything on my screen) and whittles down the bullshit before it ever reaches me.
This kind of tool could focus the whole of the internet into perfect crystal clarity - into an internet whose only objective is to serve me. Certainly not an internet that can make me mad or that tries to convince me to buy things.
Something flexible like this goes beyond just search. It fixes everything on every corner of the internet.
If we treat this as a technology/browser/OS problem, then it can fix everything wholesale. I can continue to use the social media platforms and technology everyone else is using, but I won't be subjected to the bullshit. I don't have to switch to Kagi or BlueSky or whatever small alternative tries to go up against titans, loses the network effects, and winds up as smaller, less-functional offering.
A butler-like agent is a new pane of glass. An internet condom. A judge, jury, and executioner whose only goal is to make sure one stays focused and happy.
This is a product I would pay a thousand dollars a year for.
More incentive to keep up enshittification, lest your appreciation of de-shittification wane.
Technological solutions to societal problems is one of the shortest paths to hell.
So, no, thanks.
Sincerely though, can you explain?
"There's a bunch of us now and barter isn't cutting it anymore" is a technical problem, not a societal one. You can solve it with coinage and banks or whatever.
"The internet used to be fun and useful but now it sucks" is a societal problem, not a technical one. You can't solve it with a federated twitter clone or yet another secure messaging protocol or whatever.
People bullying other people is not a technical problem. People driving dangerously is not a technical problem. People shoplifting is not a technical problem. All of them have different reasons deep down, and preventing the symptom doesn't solve the problem.
When you effectively prevent bullying, the bully might damage something else or may do self-harm to soothe their demons. Same for people driving dangerously or have to shoplift to survive.
When you cure the root problem, which is generally harder BTW, the problem you're technically trying to prevent disappears, too.
Hope this helps.
Complete bullshit. This problem can be completely solved by a technical, not societal solution: actually working self-driving cars. Once they are available, all your imperfect societal solutions to the problem are not needed anymore.
I don't believe many understands the complexity of a self-driving car. It's not like programming a couple of agents with simulated sensors on a computer.
For example, how do you ensure everyone on the road has a self-driving car? We've sufficiently developed electric cars, but they're not nearly the majority.
Just to further support your point, sufficiently developed electric cars' batteries still doesn't have the energy density of fossil fuels, so they can't replace any and every use case.
For example, can we carry or generate the energy these cars requires to move unimpeded like ICE vehicles yet? Or, did we improve the procedures and materials so these cars can be extinguished faster, more reliably and securely then their previous generation counterparts? Or did battery recycling methods became cheap and efficient enough yet, so we can reuse these batteries and at least not increase mining on our planet? Etc. Etc.
I'm not against renewables or electric cars, but even in their current form, we need to solve many problems to make them more practical and even less impactful when compared to their ICE counterparts.
We are highly adoptable, highly social creatures whose behavior is greatly impacted by our environment, which includes the people around us, the culture in which we live, and the things that technology enables (or prevents) in that environment.
I just think there’s no bright line at all between societal and technical problems, they’re just labels we apply based on our internal views of how they should be solved.
A great event has happened a couple of days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49045159 (Google may soon restrict on-device ADB).
So, people rushed to propose technical solutions to this. I noted that on-device ADB was the primary vector for sideloading applications and touted as the "ultimate solution" to Google's tightening of Android ecosystem.
Now, the ADB door is closing, yet people are proposing technical solutions, but the problem is not technical in nature. Google's mindset and agenda is restricting Android step by step, and the trend will continue.
At every step, Android power users adapt, will find new technical workarounds and comfort themselves, but the problem is not technical in nature. No technical solution can stop Google from closing this doors because decisions are managerial and rooting from human-nature.
So this is a great example to what I pointed out. Technical solutions can't solve societal problems. The problem is not restricting ADB. The problem is Google's desire to restrict and close-down Android ecosystem. You can't solve it with a patch, but maybe relieve symptoms for a short amount of time.
If one considers this solving, then it's just deluding yourself.
This is an unjustified blanket opinion. Sometimes, societal problems can be solved by technological progress. I think you simply lack imagination if you cannot think of any societal problem that would be solved by better technology.
I work at a datacenter. We provide compute resources to researchers, and while our datacenter is not small or low energy, one of our systems have Green500 certification and we try to do things as efficient as possible.
When I look at our racks, some of them are DLC BTW, and imagine each of them can pack a MW system now, I shudder. Not because of us, but what AI datacenters gonna do with that energy density and how much heat will these systems put out.
Even though you do have less greenhouse gases to trap the heat, you will be pumping more of that heat into the atmosphere, seas and oceans, warming everything up.
You're removing one aspect of climate change but not all aspects of it, still affecting the climate and ecosystems.
Also, for example, we still can't fly passenger and cargo planes with electricity for now, so you won't be able to remove all greenhouse gases, yet.
Look at the data [0]. Yes, energy production and heating is the biggest contributor, and even if you manage to remove it completely with the transportation sector via electrification, half of the emissions are still there.
The amount of heat pumped out by humans this way is so miniscule compared to natural flows that this is a complete non-issue on a global scale, and will be for a very long time.
Your solution is probably the worse pipe dream I've ever seen articulated.
You state that current alternatives are too rubbish because you want to use the services you seem to despise. And your willing to pin your hopes on yet another technology to do it because this one is definitely trustworthy and has your best interests at heart... Naivety doesn't quite cover this.
Why pay Kagi or whatever at all? How can you trust them or anyone, if this is your belief?
Why even pay your ISP? Just go back to candlelight and corn flakes and stay away from radio waves.
You'd better not own a smart phone if this is truly how you feel about the world, because it clashes with what you just said.
Come on.
You solution is to hope that a better technology will be invented that won't be subject to what every technology before it has been subject to. You rally against "the algorithm" and beg for another algorithm to save you. You want to live in a filter bubble and not be challenged on you believes. I can't think of anything worse, but I wish you the best.
Also I don't know what comment you read but it's clearly not mine...
You're not going to do anything about big tech by sitting on the sidelines. I don't see anyone doing anything about it. Nobody's built websites that show people how to contact their legislators. Nobody's building alternative tech.
We have a chance to use this tech to cut off the big tech overlords. I don't see how you're all missing this. We can literally build new browsers now. It reasons that we can place filters at every level of the stack to catch the stuff we don't like and prevent it from reaching us.
For people who supposedly care so much about tech and privacy and digital freedoms, I just see complaints.
I propose a solution to neuter big tech and you label it as a filter bubble instead of a victory.
But you're probably right - I'd like to filter out every grumpy HN person with a negative outlook sentiment score and move on with my day. It'd save me time. I shouldn't be wasting any energy responding to this den of depression.
Also I find it ironic that you would state no one is building alternatives when you previously lambasted the alternatives (blue sky, kagi, etc). What are you doing? Apart from engaging in fantasy.
Your solution is to have big tech filter out the stuff you don't like. These agents are a product of big tech. They need massive resources in terms of money, hardware, and resources to run. This isn't tech for the poor and downtrodden, it's tech for the rich and privileged. By the time the poor can afford it (if it doesn't destroy the environment first) it'll already be infected by what you despise in current big tech; if it isn't already.
Once a proof of concept exists you can distill it down to something that might execute on CPU alone.
With open weights models you can build systems that rend big tech apart.
Last-gen tech has been tried for twenty years. It's not working and it has never gotten distribution.
You know what does work? Adblock. It reasons that we could build a new form of it.
I would pay for someone to build this because I'm busy building other things. I would literally commit money to anyone who suggests they would build this.