Hi!
Kagi had a rough couple months on the PR side, and a comment from another Lemmy user arguing that they aren't using Google's index set me off... because I had just read a couple weeks ago on their own websites that they primarily use Google's search index.
Lo and behold, that user was "right": No mention of Google whatsoever on Kagi's Search Sources page. If that's all you had to go off of, you'd be excused for thinking they are only using their internal index to power their web search since that's what they now strongly imply. The only "reference" to external indexes is this nebulous sentence:
Our search results also include anonymized API calls to all major search result providers worldwide, specialized search engines like Marginalia, and sources of vertical information [...]
... Unless one goes to check that pesky Wayback Machine. Here is the same page from March 2024, which I will copy/paste here for posterity:
Search Sources
You can think of Kagi as a "search client," working like an email client that connects to various indexes and sources, including ours, to find relevant results and package them into a superior, secure, and privacy-respecting search experience, all happening automatically and in a split-second for you.
External
Our data includes anonymized API calls to traditional search indexes like Google, Yandex, Mojeek and Brave, specialized search engines like Marginalia, and sources of vertical information like Wolfram Alpha, Apple, Wikipedia, Open Meteo, Yelp, TripAdvisor and other APIs. Typically every search query on Kagi will call a number of different sources at the same time, all with the purpose of bringing the best possible search results to the user.
For example, when you search for images in Kagi, we use 7 different sources of information (including non-typical sources such as Flickr and Wikipedia Commons), trying to surface the very best image results for your query. The same is also the case for Kagi's Video/News/Podcasts results.
Internal
But most importantly, we are known for our unique results, coming from our web index (internal name - Teclis) and news index (internal name - TinyGem). Kagi's indexes provide unique results that help you discover non-commercial websites and "small web" discussions surrounding a particular topic. Kagi's Teclis and TinyGem indexes are both available as an API.
We do not stop there and we are always trying new things to surface relevant, high-quality results. For example, we recently launched the Kagi Small Web initiative which platforms content from personal blogs and discussions around the web. Discovering high quality content written without the motive of financial gain, gives Kagi's search results a unique flavor and makes it feel more humane to use.
Of course, running an index is crazy expensive. By their own admission, Teclis is narrowly focused on "non-commercial websites and 'small web' discussions". Mojeek indexes nowhere near enough things to meaningfully compete with Google, and Yandex specializes in the Russosphere. Bing (Google's only meaningful direct indexing competitor) is not named so I assume they don't use it. So it's not a leap to say that Google powers most of English-speaking web searches, just like Bing powers almost all search alternatives such as DDG.
I don't personally mind that they use Google as an index (it makes the most sense and it's still the highest-quality one out there IMO, and Kagi can't compete with Google's sheer capital on the indexing front). But I do mind a lot that they aren't being transparent about it anymore. This is very shady and misleading, which is a shame because Kagi otherwise provides a valuable and higher quality service than Google's free search does.
Guys just use SearXNG . Stop relying on paid services from companies.
I'm just gonna block the word kagi on my lemmy client. I've been seeing a trend of people trying to create a big deal out of non issues trying to sell kagi for a long time. The amount of votes and some of the replies are always sus too.
It's really disingenuous to mud sling people with a different view by implying they themselves don't exist/are astroturfing/are bots.
I'm a real human who decided to use their service for kicks and actually like some of the benefits and control over the results compared to other search engines.
Especially when I'm doing research, which is usually half of all my time searching anyways.
Enough that I decided to pay for the service. I'm happy with it and want to share that happiness with others. Are you saying that because I liked a service that I can't seem to get anywhere else I'm now the bad guy? Because I like something and want to share it with others, that's bad?
Is the alternative that you might prefer to be corporate astroturfing instead of organic discussion and growth? Like, really, seriously, what's the alternative here if people talking about and sharing something they like is not acceptable?
This type of thing has made reddit unusable lately and I hope ~~it doesn't show up here~~ lemmy has a better defense against "subtle spam."
Thing is how do you differentiate between a bunch of people who genuinely like a product and are happy to say so because it's solved a problem for them that they see other people having, and "subtle spam"?
For instance, I'm a Kagi subscriber and have been for some months now as it's doing a good job for me, and I've had the odd person leap down my throat accusing me of being a corporate shill etc, and I am absolutely not (but that's what a shill would say!!!)
How does anyone get a product recommendation from a product that's genuinely growing in popularity so people are recommending it? I get there needs to be a healthy dose of cynicism but where does the line get drawn to the point where that cynicism is no longer "healthy" and simply means everyone distrusts everything that's made by a company if somebody on the internet says it's good?
Where's the equal cynicism when somebody says something is shit and it could be a corporate shill from a competitor?
I've even seen people saying that any brand mention will be compensated, even slightly negative. I think some sort of web of trust is the only answer.