this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
109 points (87.1% liked)

Technology

34429 readers
177 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Chetzemoka@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We have to pay for the services we use somehow. I'd rather it be cash than the details of my entire life. But the money to operate those services has to come from somewhere

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's fair, but I think they're charging too much.

Bitwarden stores my passwords, and they only ask $10/year for their "advanced" plan, and i use them almost as much as search. Mullvad VPN is privacy respecting and costs $5/month for unlimited usage.

I understand search is more compute intensive than password storage, and more R&D intensive than a VPN, but $10/month is a hard pill to swallow for that service. I could see $10/month for a combined search, VPN, TOTP, and password storage service, but just search doesn't feel like enough for that cost. Also, I have no guarantees aside from their word that they're not selling my data. If they were a nonprofit, I might be more interested.

If this page is accurate, DuckDuckGo makes $0.0027/search, so if we directly converted that to Kagi's 300 searches/month, it would take 1850 searches for DDG to get the same revenue (Kagi essentially charges $0.0166/search at the $5/month plan). I know they're not directly comparable because of how they work (I don't think DDG has its own search model), I just think they're overcharging, especially since Kagi doesn't advertise (DDG absolutely does). I wish I could just pay per search. I think $0.01/search is more than fair since it's ~4x higher than DDG to account for dev efforts, and I'd like to see that go down as usership goes up. That's a ~33% discount vs the 300 search plan (which I doubt many get full use of), and it's transparent pricing. They could add prepayment or subscription discounts on top.

[–] drwho@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

Careful! That's dangerously close to expressing an understanding of nuance on the Internet! /s