And it’s also client-side. Kagi filters them server-side AFAICT, so from your POV it’s instant and without client-side filtering jank.

There’s also the option of just leaving an offline disk at someone’s and visiting them regularly to update the backup.

Having an entirely offline copy also protects you/mitigates against a few additional hazards.

If you don’t process any user data beyond what is technologically required to make the website work, you don’t need to inform the user about it.

It uses the same technology but that’s it.

On the one hand yes but on the other hand this would also kind of set wrong incentives: to use Kagi search less because you’d need to pay more.
That’s not an incentive they or you would want.

I think what I’d like is how my mobile carrier handles their data limits: It’s not an entirely fair comparison because in that case, contrary to Kagi, there is no real cost associated with my degree of usage of the service, making them entirely arbitrary and unnecessary but besides that the unused data rolls over to the next month and that’s something Kagi could mirror.

I hover around 600-1000 searches per month but sometimes exceed 1000. If I could pay for 1000/month and accumulate a little buffer in the months where I search less, that would work for me. Though perhaps I’d still want to just simply pay for unlimited usage for peace of mind.

This sounds like FUD. Do you have a source for that?

As a paying member, I know that they started charging (and presumably transferring) VAT last year.

Before that, they claimed they were simply too insignificant to even be eligible for VAT.
I looked it up and there appears to be an exception for such cases where VAT is charged in the company’s jurisdiction rather that the customer’s (it’s usually the other way around) until you reach 10000€ annual turnover. Information on this is extremely intransparent however, so this might be wrong.

They do. The $10/month search plan is unlimited.

The only LLM stuff in their search product is the quick answers which can be turned off and page summaries which you have to explicitly click on in a submenu in any case.

As someone aware of how limited LLMs are, I’ve actually found both of these features to be useful for gauging whether a site is worth visiting or not at times which is part of the core feature set of a search engine IMHO.

A good while back they claimed that Google search index fees make up the vast majority of their costs, so I doubt any of your money is going towards LLM BS unless you actually pay for their assistant product.
I doubt Google has given them any discounts since then.

I’d expect the development of all of their product to be mostly funded by VC. If they can get VC idiots who fell for the “”“AI”“” hype to subsidise building an actually useful thing (the search product), that’s a win in my book, even if they also have to build the AI crap on the side to keep said VC idiots happy.

Should have just been a reply.

I doubt most user have any need for great nc performance.

I also doubt those “super performant nextcloud flakes” are actually any faster than a plain old default nc deployment; especially for our use-cases.

Using NixOS is a good recommendation though. Just don’t do flakes unless you actually understand what problem they intend to solve and how catastrophically bad they are at it.

I’d suspect the bots would just try again with a masked user agent when they receive a 403.

I think the best strategy would be to feed the bots shit that looks like real content.

The web version works without an account? That’d be news to me.

I wouldn’t go ARM unless you really like tinkering with stuff.

I bought a used Celeron J4105-based system years ago for <100€ and it’s doing just fine. The N100 is its successor that should be better in every way.

Don’t be afraid to buy cheap used hardware. Especially things like RAM or cases that don’t really ever break in normal usage.

Two 4TB HDDs for 120€ each is a rip-off. That’s twice what you pay per GB in high capacity drives. Even in the lower capacity segment you can do much better such as 6TB for 100€.

If you have proper (tested!) backups and don’t have any specific uptime requirements, you don’t need RAID. I’d recommend getting one 16TB-20TB drive then. That would only cost you as much as those two overpriced 4TB drives.

I generally prefer to not get shit in my mouth at all but you do you.

Sure but that won’t do anything about software issues :p

Whatever I put on Lemmy or elsewhere on the fediverse implicitly grants a revocable license to everyone that allows them to view and replicate the verbatim content, by way of how the fediverse works. You may apply all the rights that e.g. fair use grants you of course but it does not grant you the right to perform derivative works; my content must be unaltered.

When I delete some piece of content, that license is effectively revoked and nobody is allowed to perform the verbatim content any longer. Continuing to do so is a clear copyright violation IMHO but it can be ethically fine in some specific cases (e.g. archival).

Due to the nature of how the fediverse, you can’t expect it to take effect immediately but it should at some point take effect and I should be able to manually cause it to immediately come into effect by e.g. contacting an instance admin to ask for a removed post of mine to be removed on their instance aswell.

In order to put something in the public domain, you need to explicitly do that. Publicising is not the same as putting something in the public domain.

This comment I’m writing here is not in the public domain and I don’t need to explicitly mention that. It’s “all rights reserved” by default in most western jurisdictions. You’re not allowed to do anything whatsoever with it other than what is covered by explicit exemptions from copyright such as fair use (e.g. you quote parts of my comment to reply to it).

Encoding my comment into the weights of a statistical model to closer imitate human writing is a derivative work (IMHO) and therefore needs explicit permission from the copyright holder (me) or licensee authorised by said copyright holder to sublicense it in such a way.

Feel free to go back to the post and read the edits. They may help shed some light on this. I also recommend checking Perplexity’s official docs.

You’re aware that it’s in their best interest to make everyone think their “”“AI”“” can execute advanced cognitive tasks, even if it has no ability to do so whatsoever and it’s mostly faked?

Taking what an “”“AI”“” company has to say about their product at face value in this part of the hype cycle is questionable at best.

sites like Reddit whose entire existence is due to user content, deciding they can police and monetize my content. They have no right

Um, not they do in fact have “every right” here. It’s shitty of course but you explicitly gave them that right in form of an perpetual, irrevocable, world-wide etc. license to do whatever they like to everything you publish on their site.

They also have every right to “police” your content, especially if it’s objectionable. If you post vile shit, trolling or other societal garbage behaviour on the internet, nobody wants to see it.

Modern thorium reactors don’t exist on the power grid.

You will likely still hear the cell broadcast. Alerts of this level make every phone give off a piercing sound and even if your phone is dead, you will hear it from your neighbours’ because it’s loud.