[HN Gopher] Kagi Assistant
___________________________________________________________________
Kagi Assistant
Author : darthShadow
Score : 255 points
Date : 2024-09-04 18:35 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.kagi.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.kagi.com)
| jonathonlacher wrote:
| I wonder what the limits are? Don't see any mention on the
| announcement page.
| freediver wrote:
| The Assistant currently has no hard limits on usage. We would
| like it to stay unlimited and will be monitoring this actively.
|
| Just added to announcement FAQ
| zzanz wrote:
| "Integration with Kagi's legendary quality search results" I
| don't disagree that this is useful, but I personally don't
| consider an assistant to be a chatbot that can tell me the
| weather. Assistants actively engage your daily life and do things
| that are usually considered tedious for people with a lack of
| time. Sure, that's a big ask for A.I in its current generation,
| but now for example I can ask Google Assistant (Gemini?) to save
| the shopping list I just gave it or even answer my calls in some
| cases. It's also certainly not the standard of human assistants,
| but it's closer than a chatbot.
| cstuder wrote:
| So for 25$ a month I get access to ChatGPT and Claude offerings
| in addition to access to Kagi search. This sounds like a good
| deal, compared to the 20$/month access to ChatGPT only. Or am I
| missing something?
| dvh wrote:
| You can not spend the $25 and you will save $25.
| moffkalast wrote:
| It's like Jensen said: The more you buy, the more you save!
| /s
| bangaladore wrote:
| You can use something like OpenRouter, which lets you access
| essentially all commercially available models. Including open-
| source models. There are no rate limits.
|
| You pay a different rate per model (OpenRouter shows the
| pricing transparently). You load your account with credits. I
| use it daily (undoubtedly far more than the average user) and
| loaded 50$ with credits five months ago, but I still have over
| 1/2 of it left.
|
| I think it is hard to believe that Kagi would be any cheaper
| and have no rate limits.
| cstuder wrote:
| Thanks for the hint, a usage based model looks way more
| attractive to me right now.
| exe34 wrote:
| deepinfra is pretty easy to use too, for llamas and other
| "open" ones.
| stavros wrote:
| Keep in mind that, while OpenRouter gives you the upstream
| price for OpenAI/Anthropic models (so you pay the same per
| token), there's a loading charge, so if you want to load $10
| in credits you pay $12 or so.
|
| This means that it's more expensive than calling OpenAI
| directly, even though they have the same price per token.
| bangaladore wrote:
| Where the loading charge is amortized over all the calls
| made.
|
| If you want to use precisely one API, paying directly for
| that API is cheaper. However, that's only true with closed-
| source providers. Anyone can host a server running llama
| 3.1 that OpenRouter could (in theory) use, bringing price
| competition to model cost. Closed-source models have a
| monopoly and can set their price wherever they want.
|
| I'm okay with spending an extra 2$ every six months to
| access the APIs of any model I want.
| stavros wrote:
| Sure, but I only use the hosted APIs, so for me it
| doesn't make much sense to pay the extra premium. Maybe
| it doesn't for others either.
| hn_user2 wrote:
| Chatblade cli is also worth checking out. No loading fees and
| you can pipe code results to files.
| SirYandi wrote:
| Just plug your API keys into a front end like
| https://github.com/enricoros/big-AGI and pay as you go for
| all commercially available models
| freedomben wrote:
| Have you tried open-webui?[1] I've been using that and
| really loving it, but wondering if I should try out big-AGI
|
| [1]: https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui
| sergiotapia wrote:
| There's also BigAgi (really a weird ass name - probably
| hurting them) that is good for the same use case. Just paste
| in your API key and you get a really nice UI to chat through
| at-cost.
|
| https://get.big-agi.com/
| bangaladore wrote:
| A nice thing about this as I'm reading it is you can hook
| up OpenRouter to it. OpenRouter's interface leaves a lot to
| be desired.
| Havoc wrote:
| OpenRouter absolutely does have rate limits:
|
| https://openrouter.ai/docs/limits
|
| ...haven't had issues with them, but they are there
| eli wrote:
| It was a little janky when I tested it in beta and you don't
| get all the features of paying for ChatGPT directly (no
| multimodal, no DALL-E, etc) but otherwise yeah it's a good
| deal.
|
| If you just want text chat with different models it's great.
| lolinder wrote:
| Also, if you're already a Kagi Pro subscriber it's really only
| $15/mo more for access to both models. This is the first time
| I've actually been tempted by one of these subscription LLMs.
| blackeyeblitzar wrote:
| What is the best paid service for private, anonymous,
| censorship free access to an LLM chatbot? Are there any that
| let you choose between multiple LLM backends to be able to
| compare answers or avoid being subject to secret system
| prompts, while still retaining privacy?
| scblock wrote:
| Cool, not a feature I personally want and behind a higher priced
| tier than I pay for now. That seems entirely reasonable for both
| Kagi and for me.
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| Hmmm
|
| One feature here that I think competitors lack is that the LLM's
| view of search results can be constrained by Kagi's search "lens"
| [0] that let you exclude various categories of results.
|
| I use Kagi but haven't dug into lenses, anyone have experience ?
|
| I'm currently trying to write python script interfacing with
| outlook's mailterm interface (win32com.client) and it's annoying.
| I wonder if I can restrict search results to a particular domain
| so it only pulls from microsoft docs...
|
| [0] https://help.kagi.com/kagi/features/lenses.html
| abound wrote:
| I use the Programming, Forums, PDFs, Recipes, and Small Webs
| lenses pretty regularly, though I haven't tried making my own
| lens yet. The 'Programming' lens is probably what you'd want
| for your Python script.
|
| Note: I work part-time at Kagi (was a Kagi user before that),
| not doing search stuff.
| PhilippGille wrote:
| If you want to restrict results to a single page you can all to
| use `site:example.com` in your search.
| crowcroft wrote:
| This is actually really exciting for Kagi. In a lot of situations
| the underlying model (Claude, GPT4 etc.) isn't that exciting,
| it's the connection to search to retrieve and summarize recent
| information that's exciting.
|
| By already having a traditional search engine this puts Kagi at a
| big advantage compared to someone like Perplexity, or even Claude
| and OpenAI who I think are all cobbling together solutions on top
| of Bing's API.
| throwup238 wrote:
| The ability to use lenses with custom assistants is the killer
| feature IMO.
|
| Want to search for open source projects that implement some
| algorithm? Create a Github/Gitlab lens. Want to ask it
| questions only about some framework? Add it's domain to a lens.
| crowcroft wrote:
| Yea, it solves a lot of limitations with LLMs generally
| struggling with 'niche' topics.
|
| Being able to innovate on the search side while everyone else
| loses a lot of many training LLMs feels like a good space to
| be in at the moment.
| stagalooo wrote:
| I've been curious about Kagi as a search engine for a while now
| and this seems like a good time to try, given that I already pay
| $20/month for ChatGPT.
|
| The thing stopping me currently from trying this or Claude is I
| rely on the Opt+Space shortcut with the ChatGPT mac app.
|
| Are there any other options for a native mac app with integration
| as good as the ChatGPT app?
| viraptor wrote:
| I don't know if they have shortcuts, but if not you could
| likely add some automation to do it: there's Msty and ChatBox
| that can use any model.
| cube2222 wrote:
| To repeat myself from a recent HN thread:
|
| I've been using Kagi for a while (almost two years now!) and it's
| been nothing but excellent!
|
| Lenses are very useful (Reddit lens is on every second search),
| and I personally really like the AI features they are working on.
|
| The new more advanced assistant which is able to do searches,
| which can also be constrained to lenses, and lets you pick an
| arbitrary model, is excellent, and basically means I don't need a
| chatgpt/claude subscription, as Kagi covers it very well.
|
| All in all, great product which I'm happy to pay for.
| eli wrote:
| Unfortunately I think Kagi only has old Reddit content now that
| Reddit only lets Google crawl them:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41057033
| msmithstubbs wrote:
| Kagi uses Google as one of its sources for search results so
| should be able to return the same reddit results as Google.
| eli wrote:
| Doesn't seem like it. Can you get it to return a reddit
| result from the last 6 weeks?
| ezekg wrote:
| I'm able to search a post I made a couple weeks ago: http
| s://kagi.com/search?q=%22union_of%22+site%3Areddit.com
| msmithstubbs wrote:
| Try this:
|
| https://kagi.com/search?q=remarkable+pro+site%3Areddit.co
| m
|
| It includes Reddit results from less than 24 hours ago.
| eli wrote:
| Ah hmm. Maybe they are doing something special with
| "site:reddit.com" queries.
|
| If I search for that exact Reddit post using the lens it
| isn't there.
| https://kagi.com/search?q=ReMarkable+Paper+Pro+hands-
| on+revi...
| darby_nine wrote:
| Curiously this link seems to show the "Academic" lens.
| Switching to the "Forums" lens pulls it right up for me.
| atombender wrote:
| The lens ID in the URL doesn't look to be globally
| unique. It's just l=<number>, and the number seems to be
| order in the lens list under your account.
| littlecranky67 wrote:
| Well, there never was any law that required robots.txt to
| be honored. Big players like Google do, but I am not
| aware of any consequences if they wouldnt (of course
| UNTIL it is then regulated).
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Old Reddit (and other website) content might actually be more
| valuable given the higher likelihood of newer posts being
| spam/AI bot posts.
| DoughnutHole wrote:
| That disregards the fact that facts change over time.
|
| If you google "best DSLR camera reddit" it's much less
| valuable if the results are 5 years old, even if they're
| LLM free - the cameras on the market may very well have
| changed in that timeframe.
| aeturnum wrote:
| I do think LLMs have their place in search and I think the Kagi
| approach feels a lot better than Googles'. Kagi doesn't inject
| LLM results anywhere, but they've been making LLMs accessible in
| their search interface for a long while - this being the most
| evolved version of that effort. I am not totally sold on
| everything they are doing but I hate their integration of LLMs
| the least.
| lawn wrote:
| Kagi's auto summary feature when you add a question mark after
| your query is absolutely excellent.
|
| It essentially summarizes the top search results for you,
| leaning in on a strength of LLMs (summarizing) while reducing
| its greatest weakness (hallucinations).
| aeturnum wrote:
| For me, search integration of LLMs also helps bring together
| the value prop of paid search. It's not just privacy, it's
| the skillful integration of a premium information processing
| service (with built in privacy).
| tinyhouse wrote:
| It's not clear from the post how to access this new assistant.
| The search page has no such option (not a paying user). When I
| run a search, I only see an LLM based summary of the results
| similar to Google's.
|
| Update: I see now that they say it's not available for free
| users. Need to pay $25/month. Not sure why, they can offer it for
| free users with the cheaper models like they do now to generate a
| "quick answer". I'm not going to pay to try it out.
| jjmarr wrote:
| Kagi search isn't free either.
| rlad wrote:
| For users of both, how does this compare to searchGPT, in terms
| of results quality and quantity?
| bun_terminator wrote:
| c-f "ai"; c-w. and onto the pile they go!
|
| Is it still legal do do something with a computer without
| involving "ai"?
| chankstein38 wrote:
| agreed. I'm getting pretty sick of AI summaries that will fully
| lie to me about things. Google's search summary AI is awful I'd
| expect Kagi's to be similar.
| exe34 wrote:
| does Google ai summary lie? do you have examples?
| Diti wrote:
| https://old.reddit.com/r/Pizza/comments/1a19s0/my_cheese_sl
| i...
| KoolKat23 wrote:
| I think you should try Kagi before passing judgement, really
| clever design.
|
| You only get the quick summary if you ask for it (i.e. you're
| happy to take the risk). Another handy use, is web summarize,
| which looks at the specific webpage, lowering the risk even
| further.
|
| If you don't call these features it's straight up clean
| search with no ads and it's fast with good results.
| exe34 wrote:
| see roko's basilisk.
| TNorthover wrote:
| uncertAIn.
| CatWChainsaw wrote:
| No, Microsoft and Google and Apple need to know everything
| you're doing, for the sake of the children.
| daft_pink wrote:
| I love Kagi and I'm a paid user, but I'm not willing to pay $25
| per month for the assistants for the following reasons: * I
| already pay these companies directly and wouldn't be able to
| cancel these as I use the voice assistant on my phone from
| ChatGPT and love using the artifacts from Claude on my computer *
| I'm also paying raycast to access these at the touch of my
| keyboard and prefer to quick access use it there
|
| I love Kagi and can't recommend it enough. I wish I could just
| give them my api key for this instead of paying several different
| service providers for the same ai access to the same models. This
| is getting expensive.
| bossyTeacher wrote:
| Can you explain to me why Kagi is so good? I don't use Google
| Search so don't try the privacy card on me
| teractiveodular wrote:
| Search results are ranked by what's best, not which
| advertiser pays the most. And unlike DDG, the quality of the
| results is actually great.
| ziddoap wrote:
| > _And unlike DDG, the quality of the results is actually
| great._
|
| Any chance you can expand on this?
|
| I've used DDG for years and find the results great, but
| maybe we just query for different things. Is there any
| specific topics that you find DDG is bad at but Kagi is
| good at?
| MostlyStable wrote:
| I'm a paying Kagi user. I don't think that I can give a
| clear example or explanation of why they are better,
| partly because it's been a long time since I used DDG,
| and I gave up pretty quickly. The one thing I can say is
| that, for the short time I was using DDG, I found myself
| doing a search, and then in most cases, immediately
| redoing the search using the !g, because the DDG results
| were bad, and even though I am also dissatisfied with
| google results these days, they were better. Kagi has the
| same functionality, but I find myself almost never using
| it.
|
| That being said, if you personally are happy with your
| DDG results, then I'd say you should probably stick with
| it. Kagi _might_ be better for you than DDG, but if you
| aren't actively dissatisfied (the way I was with Google
| and everything else), then the room for improvement is
| smaller. Might be worth using their free tier (which is
| 100 queries per month I think) just to test out some side
| by side searches though.
| lovemenot wrote:
| >> Might be worth using their free tier (which is 100
| queries per month I think)
|
| 100 in total, it seems
| dabbz wrote:
| I personally switched away from DDG when they started
| removing results that were errantly removed by Bing.
| Since Bing is their upstream results provider, I didn't
| feel like I was getting away from the overreach of big
| tech, so I went to Kagi where they don't solely rely on
| upstream providers as they have their own crawler and
| such. The fact that they offer other great features like
| filtering results, and integrated AI makes it worth
| switching and paying for. Plus, I hate ads. Targeted or
| not. So I'm willing to pay to make that go away for a
| quality service.
| freedomben wrote:
| I love being able to uprank, downrank, pin or blacklist
| specific domains/sites for my personal results. That alone
| makes it worth it. I also find the search results to be as
| good or better than Google. Once my personal ranking kicks in
| it's not even close.
| everforward wrote:
| It uses Google's index, among others.
|
| Being able to personalize your own search is truly the
| killer feature, though, in a couple of ways.
|
| The first is as you point out: being able to "edit your own
| algorithm" is really nice. I don't have to try to "train"
| Google's algorithm to show the results I want, and it's
| very easy to say "I never want to see this site in my
| results again". I'm still shocked Google doesn't have that
| feature even as some kind of client-side Javascript.
|
| The second is Lenses. It's so obvious in hindsight that a
| singular algorithm is insufficient for search. Nobody wants
| or needs their searches for porn to impact their searches
| for technical documentation, or vice versa. There are more
| nuanced examples, but that's the most obvious (also, I
| don't think Kagi indexes NSFW content or at least I haven't
| seen any).
| drdaeman wrote:
| It does its job: provides web results relevant to the query.
| At the moment it has acceptable signal-to-noise ratio
| (quality varies per-query, but it has higher chances of
| useful links than web spam), which is why people tend to say
| it's good.
| freedomben wrote:
| IMHO if you pay for them directly already, then probably not
| worth it. I cancelled Ultimate because it just wasn't feature
| competitive to me over OpenWebUI, but if you want to be able to
| try out several different models from different companies
| without giving each of them a card and using a different
| interface, Kagi Assistant could be a good solution.
| jmaker wrote:
| There's still a bit nuance to that - in most cases I've
| experienced integrated via API in a third-party app, the
| results have been mostly underwhelming, as opposed to being
| used directly, preferably with the configurable contexts.
| Including GitHub and Microsoft Copilot, various choose-your-
| AI apps, even corporate chatbots, sentiment analyzers and
| summarizers I've worked with. Asking via ChatGPT or Claude
| directly has produced more acceptable results to me than via
| an intermediary.
| dcchambers wrote:
| Maybe they'll offer a "bring your own API key" option some day.
|
| I imagine the intersect between paid Kagi users and paid LLM
| users is pretty high, and many people probably don't want to
| double-dip on LLM spending.
| chiefrubberduck wrote:
| can you use the assistant to generate images as well?
| NotYourLawyer wrote:
| Oof, I wanted a better google, not a worse one.
| recursive wrote:
| So did I. But for me, it is.
| traceroute66 wrote:
| I recently tried Kagi and I struggled to see the value.
|
| For many queries side-by-side with Startpage it delivered the
| same results word-for-word (sure you get a few sponsored links
| top-3 of Startpage but its no big deal to scroll past those).
|
| For other things, it was just plain annoying, e.g. "newest $type
| restaurants in $large_city" half the results on the first page
| were from 10 years ago (e.g. dated 2014). I mean FFS I put the
| word "newest" in there !
|
| They seem to have a habit of interespersing very weird Facebook
| links randomly in the middle of a list of results. For example I
| was searching for something related to a specific Prometheus
| function (which I explicitly named in the query, alongside the
| word prometheus) and Kagi insisted on interspersing the technical
| results with random links to Facebook pages of companies selling
| "girlie dresses for proms".
|
| I approached Kagi with an open mind, but having used up the 100
| free searches nothing made me say "just shut up and take my
| money".
| recursive wrote:
| > but its no big deal to scroll past those
|
| For some of us it is. If your search engine's revenue model is
| based on advertising to its users, their relationship is
| fundamentally adversarial. This affects all of their decisions,
| in ways that are sometimes hard to identify. Witness the slow
| decline of google search result ads.
|
| If users are the direct source of revenue, then everyone's
| interests are aligned.
|
| Also, I, and many like me, value a lack of ads much more highly
| than you do. Which is fine.
| rvnx wrote:
| 40 to 60% of users get the free search results, and the
| comfort of not having ads with a simple "Hide element"
| extension.
|
| It's hard to beat.
| MostlyStable wrote:
| Avoiding the ads doesn't fix the alignment issues. Even
| without ads, modern google search is dramatically worse
| than a decade ago, and I'm personally pretty confident it's
| because their interests and user interests are not well
| aligned. I don't have to worry about that with Kagi.
| RoyalHenOil wrote:
| Customizing your search results is a big part of it. When I
| tried Kagi, I did not find it to be a huge improvement on
| Google until I started adjusting the rankings of my search
| results. Now I find it painful to go back to Google when I use
| someone else's computer or device.
|
| The other big part of it (for me at least) is seeing more
| obscure websites in my results. I have had Kagi for a year now,
| and it has saved me more money than I've spent on it by making
| it easier to find specific products at lesser-known shops.
| These lesser-known shops often have really great sales because
| they are trying to compete against the big names, and Google
| pretty much _only_ shows me the big names.
| dubme1 wrote:
| Paid Kagi user here. I REALLY wish Kagi would focus on it's core
| selling point: search. Building a search engine is hard enough. I
| use Kagi Search everyday and I am mostly happy with it but the
| product has a lot of room for improvment.
|
| Stop launching new products (browser, summarizer, gpt, assistant)
| while your core product is still behind the competition in many
| areas.
| unshavedyak wrote:
| Paid Kagi user here. I love the AI additions, because to me
| it's an alternate interface to the core selling point: search.
|
| Whether or not Kagi can achieve more than the "search alone is
| hard enough" point however is fair - though i've been happy so
| far.
| freedomben wrote:
| Same. I love the AI additions and I think they've introduced
| them very thoughtfully.
|
| To me, the best part of the AI additions is that it can
| (almost instantaneously) summarize information from the
| several top hits of a search. This is subtly but importantly
| different from having the LLM spit out an answer based on
| it's knowledge base, and also is able to quickly and easily
| cite it's sources! Extremely useful to me.
| unshavedyak wrote:
| Agreed! To me LLMs as they stand now are a natural
| extension of the classic "Google". Which is to say a
| Natural Language -> Search Results list. People (and
| products lol) got hung up on LLMs returning the answers
| directly.. and while they've been a definite disappointment
| in that realm, they can be great for summarizing and
| aggregating imo.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| I agree that they should focus on their core product, but
| ironically while I use Kagi from time to time, I'm still mostly
| on DDG- via Orion, a browser I'm willing to pay for.
| Spivak wrote:
| If you hear Vlad talk it's very clear that he considers these
| things to be part of that core product. The summarizer powers
| the ability to summarize articles / search results (even
| video), the assistant and fastgpt power their answer to
| Google's snippets and quick answers, small-web is the minimum-
| useful thing to start their own index and not have to pay rent
| to Bing/Google, and they view Orion to be a long-term bet on
| the belief that this is the only way they'll get Kagi as a
| default search engine.
| jmaker wrote:
| Great points. Though I think in order for any search to
| become a default in some browser app would take a billion or
| so in competing annual payment, or Google it will remain.
|
| Also, AI aside, Searx has been around for many years as a
| very promising metasearch, even self-hosted engine, alas
| still little traction. Great to have all results, including
| re-ranked Google and Reddit in one place.
| barbazoo wrote:
| To me it seems like that's what they're doing here. I don't see
| right away how this is not their core business.
|
| > Kagi Assistant has the ability to use Kagi Search to source
| the highest quality information meaning that its responses are
| grounded in the most up-to-date factual information while
| disregarding most "spam" and "made for advertising" sites with
| our unique ranking algorithm and user search personalizations
| on top.
| daveoc64 wrote:
| You have to pay extra for it, so it can't be part of the core
| business.
| viraptor wrote:
| I think this is very much about search. They just took on what
| Perplexity is doing with search. And I'm glad because I've been
| using it occasionally and now I can just keep everything in
| Kagi.
|
| They're literally taking on competition here.
| Terretta wrote:
| > _core selling point: search_
|
| The people I know who like to dictate into their phones and who
| have OpenAI's iOS app tend to open ChatGPT to "search" before
| they open Google or Ask Siri now.
|
| They're going to go to one thing first, and this puts Kagi as
| an option.
|
| Apple's alleged integration with OpenAI is presumably rolling
| in to Sherlock this though.
| freedomben wrote:
| The AI additions IMHO _are_ search. Historically search gave us
| an ordered list of results, but there 's no reason it needs to.
| The Kagi quick answer for example is phenomenal IMHO. Most of
| the time I am searching is because I need information for
| something. The "quick answer" and it's source citing can much
| more quickly tell me whether the results are worth a click. At
| this point I would hate to return to the old list of links
| output.
| dawnerd wrote:
| I think the problem is we're blending two different
| methodologies for finding information. When I search for
| something I want to get to the source. Others just want the
| answer. Ideally it should still be smart enough to figure
| that out, kinda what it does already if you search with a
| question.
| jmaker wrote:
| I think AI capabilities have been becoming an integral part of
| modern search. On the flip side you have the SEO optimizations.
|
| Brave Search has offered an AI summarizer and assistant for a
| long time now. Bing with their OpenAI-powered Copilot. Google
| with the improved Bard/Gemini more recently. Amazon with the
| perhaps Anthropic-based Q for Business.
|
| I think the end user is growing to expect the AI-augmented
| experience from all knowledge lookups. Feedback loop queries
| have become so natural to me, I've been finding it awkward to
| ask only one search query without a narrowing follow-up query,
| having the former discarded - kinda no longer adequate,
| particularly given the SEO-optimized flip side full of junk.
| darby_nine wrote:
| > while your core product is still behind the competition in
| many areas
|
| IDK, I've been very happy with it. Just the ability to
| consistently pin/block domains is a massive upgrade over
| Google.
| bastawhiz wrote:
| I couldn't disagree any harder. When I can't find an answer, I
| turn to LLMs. I don't want to read half the docs on an AWS
| product, I want the snippet of code that I care about. Kagi, as
| best as I can tell, is the only search service which can answer
| these questions and also respects me as a customer.
|
| I think of it this way: there's often not a single page (or
| even small handful of pages) that answer a query. The LLM
| features answer the question with text that links to the pages,
| rather than answering my question with pages that might contain
| pieces of answers.
| mattl wrote:
| The move to AI stuff is why I don't have a Kagi subscription. I
| really liked the idea of paying for search. I don't want to
| give any money to an AI product.
| mirkodrummer wrote:
| What's the incentive for websites to let Kagi and others indexing
| content if llms in search show relevant informations right away?
| Wouldn't something like perplexity ai making more sense then? Or
| perhaps better application of llms to search
| lilyball wrote:
| I haven't used Kagi's Quick Answer very often yet, but when I
| do, it always cites its sources and I often end up clicking
| into at least one of the sources to look for more detail or
| context.
| freedomben wrote:
| Bingo. I nearly always use the quick answer, and then will
| use the cited sources to click onto the page to either read
| more or verify that the summary was accurate (and it always
| has been in the 300+ times I've used it).
| matsemann wrote:
| Isn't the point of a corporate blog to drive users to your
| product? Then why do the blogs never have an easy way of getting
| there? Clicking the logo and things in the header all just take
| me to the front page of the blog. Pet peeve of mine.
| freedomben wrote:
| Something I love about Kagi that isn't often known, is they will
| pro-rate based on days. If you are on an existing plan, you can
| upgrade to Ultimate, try it out for a few days, and then
| downgrade and only pay for the days you used it. I despise the
| subscription model generally, but if we're going to have it then
| I wish more companies would do pro-rating! Anyway, you can try it
| out for very low risk.
| KoolKat23 wrote:
| Now that's even better. I'm definitely going to try this by
| upgrading temporarily who knows maybe it'll stick. Good
| business practice by Kagi.
| ewy1 wrote:
| I appreciate that it's on a separate plan so that I don't have to
| interface with it.
| doublerabbit wrote:
| I upgraded. Using the prompt: "something cool in html css"
|
| Mistral and GPT - Create the same example of a flip card
|
| Gemini - Creates glowing neon text
|
| and Claude - Produces a pulsing dot, that enlarges and shrinks
| and radiates a fading white shadow. That's cool.
| throwing_away wrote:
| I love Kagi and happily pay their $25/mo but I think it's a
| mistake to think of their offerings as cutting-edge AI. It's
| obviously limited compared to open source software (as mentioned
| elsewhere in this thread already) and likely more expensive than
| raw API calls. This isn't the "best" AI experience.
|
| What it is though, is fast, available on all my devices,
| constantly upgraded, and integrated with their already excellent
| search engine.
|
| When I see these sorts of announcements and read some of the
| comments here, it makes me worry that bad customers cause
| enshittification and I hope kagi stays true to their human-
| friendly web search product.
| mtrovo wrote:
| > You can edit the question and add that you're working on a
| binary classification problem to get a more specific answer.
|
| This mid-thread editing feature sounds really useful, I'm curious
| how does it work when you switch between models in the middle of
| a conversation?
|
| Like, say I start with a general search question, then halfway
| through I want to switch to a coding model to ask something like,
| "Can you create a Python dictionary of the top 10 longest city
| names in the UK and their populations?"
|
| Does the context carry over smoothly, or would I need to rephrase
| things when switching models? Wondering how it handles tasks that
| require different kinds of expertise without losing track of the
| flow.
| hyperbolablabla wrote:
| I don't find Kagi as compelling as some other users seem to,
| worked about as well (read, poorly) as most other modern search
| engines
| jacooper wrote:
| Why would i use this over perplexity pro?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-04 23:00 UTC)