That's false. It's evidence, but it isn't conclusive. Someone thought that the law suit was worth filing, and that could be because the law suit has a chance of succeeding. It could also be some other reason, and it could also fail even if completely good faith -- this is why the evidence is non-conclusive.
Kagi's business model also aligns incentives better than an ad and/or data mining fueled business model. Of course, this isn't proof, but it is evidence. One can also try the search in areas that one knows deeply and compare it to other search engines to see if it's truly better (I have not done this, but it is possible and isn't just trusting marketing.).
I don't use Kagi primarily because I'm quite averse to subscriptions if I can find another way.
They may have a bespoke deal with someone. They may be losing money. They may have believed a claim from Deepseek about not storing things more than they should. It may be something else. AFAIK no third party audit has been done so all that we have is what they say.
The Chinese api prices are already so cheap that that is arguably not needed.
You can also get $10/month opencode go (which officially can be used with any harness) with basically every major open weight model running inference in a place that I deem more trustworthy than the subject-to-Chinese-law inference options (but research this for yourself, there are some asterisks). This is what I use (in opencode) when I want an agent for personal use. Even if I'm being fairly intense with my usage by my standards anyway), I haven't managed to run out (yet), although I usually use the cheaper models (deepseek v4 is my favorite, and I've used both flash and pro).
From the FAQ:
> The plan is designed primarily for international users, with models hosted in the US, EU, and Singapore for stable global access. Our providers follow a zero-retention policy and do not use your data for model training.
And:
> Yes, you can use Go with any agent. Follow the setup instructions in your preferred coding agent.
This is a terrible way to learn. Lecture halls are uncomfortable and synchronous, which are objectively less convenient than reading or watching videos at home. If someone wants that then they can organize watch parties, without forcing it on anyone else. Synchronous and uncomfortable should be reserved for interactive things, like in a flipped classroom
They're running code on users' computers that it would not be reasonable to think that the user consented to running on their computer. This is CFAA-violation-shaped. Of course, they won't be prosecuted if it is indeed a violation, and I do not know for sure if it meets the specific legal criteria. However, it is something that I think should be illegal. Make it so if software does something that would be unreasonable to think that the user wants to happen, it needs to make that abundantly clear before it does it, otherwise it's a CFAA or similar violation. This would, of course, have very broad consequences. However, this Claude issue feels particularly violating to me.
> you will use for a very long time. Very non repairable tho
This seems moderately contradictory, because as the time that you use something increases the chance of some physical damage increases, especially for a portable device where dropping, an imperfect bag holding, or someone else bumping it, and the like, are all more likely than a stationary device (like a desktop).
This is a huge reason that I don't use many Apple devices, so if they somehow effectively addressed this without reparability, I'd be interested to know. However, I suspect that that's impossible because just making it durable only delays the need to repair, so you end up up shit creek maybe 2 years after buying it instead of 1 year (made up numbers).
There are other reasons that an employee may comply with a leader's instructions than some highly subjective and deeply irrational notion of social status. For example, they might comply because they're paid to, or because they want company to succeed (for stocks, or for other reasons). Some performance of authority isn't a perquisite for humans choosing to organize.
Making justice available only to people with monetary (and in US courts at least, wealth is a strong predictor of outcome) and other relevant resources is not the kind of thing that I want society getting worse on.
DMCA enforcement of copyright is thus fundamentally a good law, and in my opinion should only be tweaked to deal with the pathological cases on platforms like YouTube, and even more so what's happening in YouTube.
Some mild disincentive against incorrect DMCA takedown requests being filed seems reasonable to me, as long as it scales with the level of inflicted damage. A few dollars per false claim seems like a good starting point to consider from. That makes a legitimate mistake by a human not a major issue, but also maked unleashing inaccurate mass bots and performing extremely overly broad blocking deeply unprofitable.
Of course, the broad EU blocks aren't governed by US's DMCA, but the basic incentive argument applies there too I think.
One option is to get home prices to stop rising faster than wages by having wage growth speed up while real estate value growth slows down (not necessarily becoming negative). Then, no one is underwater on their mortgage, but buying a house becomes more accessible year over year. Of course, you'll need to eventually stop to address the normal problems with deflation, or address those in some other way.
What specific policies achieve this is also a separate question.
While this is true, for many customers who aren't technical (in a computer sense, since they may have significant highly technical expertise in another field, such as agriculture), "tech" (meaning computers) just means what we'd call anti-features since from their vantage point everything with a computer (or with "tech") isn't respecting their ownership rights. And, even among people who understand the distinction, there's a reasonable expectation that computers embedded in products that don't specifically market otherwise will have such anti-features.
So, even if computers in and of themselves are completely valid in such product categories saying "No Tech" (which means "no computers") is a great way to market to people who really just want to avoid anti-ownership anti-features.
Lastly, I find it mildly amusing that a tractor (which is very clearly a form of technology, in the traditional definition of the word where fire and printing presses are technology too) is now being marketed as having no technology.
Why isn't self hosting (even just renting a GPU server, not necessarily on premise) at large companies or hosting via something like together AI to run the open weight models not more common? I've tried the open weight models and the premium models like Opus and Gemini Pro, and I find that the latter are a little better, but not nearly to the degree to justify the extreme price difference, since the differences largely don't matter for what I've tried them for, and I expect that many other users likely have similar use cases.
What's the purpose of using EC2 over something much cheaper, like OVH, digitalocean, or Hetnzer?
Usually the argument is for scalability, but a single VM for personal use doesn't need that, and even if you do want that, you'll need more than a bare repo.
Everything about matrix is cumbersome and glitchy. I have last tried to use it a few years ago and it seemed that Riot/Element had the only decent clients, and those were all Electron on desktop and also seemingly for profit. Signal has the electron problem, as well as many others (like the backup UI being abhorrent), but at least the core functionality works without fuss.
More practically, this means (in America) that you need a JD degree (4 year grad school), to pass an exam, and pass a(n oftrn horrifically thorough) character background check.
> I like it when different producers select a different subset of priorities for their offer. Competition at work. One of the reasons we witnessed such an awesome evolution in the smartphone market.
>
> I hate it when a bureaucrat dictates a set of demands with absolutely zero regard to the cost or the tradeoffs involved in product decisions and market competition.
I generally agree with that sentiment, except we don't have a vibrant market of many options with many different trade offs. Finding headphone jack, solid reparability, user swappable battery, easily replaceable USB port, and all the other things that one might want is basically impossible. The vast majority of phones are highly unrepairable, have no headphone jack, have everything soldered to a tiny number of internal boards, and are full of anti repair dark patterns.