Stories with Tag Alternative Search Engines

• Try Switching to Kagi

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-04-29 07:08:50

  Verbose tl;dr

  Daring Fireball's John Gruber highly recommends switching to Kagi, a paid search engine. He argues that Kagi offers significantly better results than Google, Bing, and DuckDuckGo, primarily because it's designed to prioritize relevance over advertising revenue. Kagi also provides useful features like custom lenses for tailoring searches and universal search across numerous sites. While acknowledging the cost ($10/month), Gruber believes Kagi’s improved search quality and ad-free experience are worth the price, particularly for those who value their time and rely heavily on search. He concludes that the experience is so superior it’s changed his search habits entirely.

  John Gruber, in his blog post titled "Try Switching to Kagi," enthusiastically advocates for readers to consider transitioning their default web search engine to Kagi. He meticulously details his own positive experiences with the service over several months, emphasizing its superior search results compared to Google. He portrays Google's current search quality as significantly degraded due to an over-saturation of advertising and search engine optimization (SEO) manipulation, arguing that genuine, relevant information is often buried beneath layers of sponsored content and gaming of the algorithm.

  Gruber elaborates on Kagi's distinct advantages, including its commitment to privacy by avoiding the extensive user tracking prevalent in other search engines. He points out Kagi's novel approach to advertising, which involves a single, unobtrusive banner at the top of the results page, contrasting sharply with Google's pervasive and often misleading ads. This, he argues, creates a cleaner, less cluttered, and more trustworthy user experience.

  He further describes Kagi's unique features, like "Universal Summarizer," which provides concise summaries of web pages, and the ability to customize search results by promoting or demoting specific domains and even blocking entire domains outright. This granular control, Gruber suggests, allows users to tailor their search experience to their specific needs and preferences, effectively filtering out unwanted or low-quality sources.

  While acknowledging Kagi's subscription-based model, Gruber posits that the cost is justifiable given the demonstrably improved search quality and enhanced privacy. He portrays the subscription not as an expense but as an investment in a more efficient and enjoyable online experience, free from the distractions and manipulations that plague mainstream search engines. He ultimately encourages readers to take advantage of Kagi's free trial to experience these benefits firsthand and form their own informed opinion about its value proposition. He implicitly suggests that, like himself, they might find Kagi a superior alternative to their current search engine and deem the subscription cost worthwhile.

  • Kagi
  • search engines
  • search
  • web search
  • Alternative Search Engines
  • Daring Fireball
  • John Gruber
  • Technology
  • Internet
  • privacy
  • Paid Search
  • Subscription Services

  Summary of Comments ( 172 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43829490

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discussed Kagi's privacy, cost, and search quality. Several commenters praised Kagi's clean interface and lack of ads, while also appreciating its effective filtering of low-quality results. Some expressed concern about the subscription cost, particularly for users with limited search needs. The discussion touched on Kagi's reliance on other search engines' indexes, and its potential vulnerability to censorship as a smaller entity. Some users offered alternative search engines, while others noted that Google search had improved recently, diminishing Kagi's relative advantage. Overall, sentiment towards Kagi was positive, though tempered by pragmatic considerations.

  The Hacker News post "Try Switching to Kagi" spawned a lively discussion with 49 comments at the time of this summary. Many commenters shared their experiences with Kagi, both positive and negative, and discussed its potential as a Google alternative.

  Several users praised Kagi's superior search results compared to Google, highlighting its ability to filter out spam, affiliate links, and SEO-optimized content. They appreciated the focus on delivering relevant information rather than commercially driven results. Some mentioned Kagi's useful features like customizable lenses and the ability to personalize results by blocking specific sites. The effectiveness of Kagi's AI chatbot, which some users compared favorably to ChatGPT, was also a point of positive discussion. One commenter specifically mentioned valuing Kagi's summarization feature for research.

  However, the cost of Kagi was a recurring concern. While many acknowledged the value provided, the subscription fee was seen as a potential barrier for wider adoption. Some users expressed a desire for a free tier or a more flexible pricing model.

  Privacy was another topic of discussion. Some commenters expressed concerns about the data Kagi collects and its reliance on third-party providers. The lack of transparency regarding Kagi's internal workings and data handling practices was a point of concern for a few users.

  Performance issues were also mentioned, with some users reporting slow loading times and occasional instability. One user suggested these issues might stem from Kagi's smaller infrastructure compared to Google.

  Beyond the core features, the discussion touched upon Kagi's business model and its long-term viability. Some expressed skepticism about the sustainability of a subscription-based search engine in a market dominated by free alternatives. Others were optimistic about Kagi's potential to disrupt the search landscape and offer a viable alternative to Google.

  Finally, the conversation drifted towards broader topics related to search engine technology and the future of online search. Several comments highlighted the problems with current search engines and the need for alternatives that prioritize user experience over advertising revenue.

• Ecosia is teaming up with Qwant to build a European search index

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-09 17:40:38

  Verbose tl;dr

  Ecosia and Qwant, two European search engines prioritizing privacy and sustainability, are collaborating to build a new, independent European search index called the European Open Web Search (EOWS). This joint effort aims to reduce reliance on non-European indexes, promote digital sovereignty, and offer a more ethical and transparent alternative. The project is open-source and seeks community involvement to enrich the index and ensure its inclusivity, providing European users with a robust and relevant search experience powered by European values.

  In a significant stride towards bolstering European digital sovereignty and promoting ethical, privacy-respecting online practices, the Berlin-based search engine Ecosia, renowned for its commitment to environmental sustainability through tree planting initiatives, has announced a strategic partnership with Qwant, a French search engine equally dedicated to user privacy. This collaborative endeavor aims to construct a novel, independent European search index, thereby diminishing reliance on established, predominantly non-European players in the search market.

  This ambitious project, identified by the acronym EUSP (European Search Project), seeks to address the growing concern over the concentration of power within the global search landscape, where a limited number of companies control the vast majority of information access. By developing a distinctly European alternative, Ecosia and Qwant aspire to offer users greater choice and control over their online experiences, specifically concerning data privacy and the potential influence of algorithmic biases. This initiative recognizes the importance of diversifying the search ecosystem, fostering competition, and ensuring that European values are reflected in the digital tools its citizens utilize.

  The joint venture will leverage the combined expertise and resources of both organizations. Qwant brings its established experience in building and maintaining a privacy-focused search engine, while Ecosia contributes its substantial user base and its innovative model of reinvesting profits into environmental projects. The resulting European search index will not only provide an alternative to existing dominant search engines but will also serve as a foundation upon which further innovation in search technology can be built, potentially extending beyond basic web search to encompass other domains such as academic research, specialized information retrieval, and more.

  While the technical specifics of the EUSP are still under development, the core principles of privacy, transparency, and European digital independence will underpin the project. This collaboration represents a crucial step towards a more pluralistic and democratically controlled digital future for Europe, offering users a genuine alternative that aligns with their values and respects their fundamental rights. The long-term vision of this partnership extends beyond simply creating a new search engine; it envisions a shift in the digital paradigm, empowering users and fostering a more equitable and sustainable internet ecosystem.

  • Ecosia
  • Qwant
  • Search Engine
  • European Search Index
  • EUSP
  • European Union
  • internet search
  • Search Technology
  • privacy
  • Competition
  • Antitrust
  • Google Search
  • Bing
  • Alternative Search Engines
  • Open Source
  • Data Privacy
  • online privacy
  • Tech News
  • Europe
  • Technology

  Summary of Comments ( 147 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43311573

  Verbose tl;dr

  Several Hacker News commenters express skepticism about Ecosia and Qwant's ability to compete with Google, citing Google's massive data advantage and network effects. Some doubt the feasibility of building a truly independent index and question whether the joint effort will be significantly different from using Bing. Others raise concerns about potential bias and censorship, given the European focus. A few commenters, however, offer cautious optimism, hoping the project can provide a viable privacy-respecting alternative and contribute to a more decentralized internet. Some also express interest in the technical challenges involved in building such an index.

  The Hacker News post titled "Ecosia is teaming up with Qwant to build a European search index" generated several comments discussing the partnership and its potential implications.

  Several commenters expressed skepticism about the viability of a "European" search index, questioning what that truly entailed and whether it offered significant advantages over existing options. One commenter pointed out the difficulties of determining what constitutes "European" content and questioned the feasibility of filtering the index based on such criteria. Another commenter highlighted the dominance of American companies in search technology, suggesting that building a truly competitive European alternative would be a challenging endeavor. The practicality and cost-effectiveness of crawling and indexing the web independently were also questioned, with some suggesting that relying on established players might be a more realistic approach.

  There was discussion regarding the existing infrastructure and resources of both Ecosia and Qwant. Commenters noted that Qwant's previous struggles and reliance on Bing's index raise concerns about the new venture's potential for success. The commenters questioned the technical expertise and resources available to the partnership, highlighting the massive infrastructure and continuous development required to compete with established search giants.

  Some commenters expressed concerns about potential biases in a "European" search index. They questioned how the index would handle controversial topics and whether it would prioritize European perspectives, potentially leading to a skewed or incomplete view of information.

  Several users discussed the importance of competition in the search market and expressed hope that this partnership could offer a viable alternative to the dominant players. However, there was also a degree of cynicism, with some commenters suggesting that the partnership was more about marketing and branding than about genuine technological innovation.

  Finally, some commenters focused on the technical aspects of search engine development. They discussed the challenges of natural language processing, information retrieval, and the development of effective ranking algorithms. These comments highlighted the complex technical hurdles involved in creating a competitive search engine. Overall, the sentiment in the comments was a mixture of cautious optimism, skepticism, and pragmatic concerns about the technical and logistical challenges faced by the partnership.