[HN Gopher] Kagi News
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Kagi News
        
       Author : grappler
       Score  : 707 points
       Date   : 2025-09-30 15:09 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.kagi.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.kagi.com)
        
       | medstrom wrote:
       | > One daily update: We publish once per day around noon UTC,
       | creating a natural endpoint to news consumption. This is a
       | deliberate design choice that turns news from an endless habit
       | into a contained ritual.
       | 
       | Could you guys maybe print it on paper and send it to my physical
       | mailbox, so I can do this ritual with breakfast? :-)
        
         | 0xdeadbeefbabe wrote:
         | I'd like mine shaped like a cylinder waiting on the door step.
        
           | lxgr wrote:
           | Make sure to make each page way too large to read it on
           | public transit or a table in a cafe without having your seat
           | neighbors join in on the fun :)
        
         | toomuchtodo wrote:
         | Potentially relevant:
         | 
         |  _Guten: A Tiny Newspaper Printer_ -
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42599599 - January 2025
         | (106 comments)
         | 
         |  _Getting my daily news from a dot matrix printer_ -
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41742210 - October 2024
         | (253 comments)
        
       | buster wrote:
       | Kagi seems to be one of the few companies that put out services,
       | genuinely trying to fix things with good intent. I hope it stays
       | that way.
       | 
       | (I was very skeptical about Kagi Assistant but now i am a happy
       | Kagi Ultimate subscriber).
        
         | jjice wrote:
         | I like assistant, but I use Claude directly mostly. It's handy
         | for really quick stuff though.
         | 
         | I like that Kagi charges for their service, so their motive is
         | to provide services for that cost, and not with ads on top of
         | it.
        
           | captainkrtek wrote:
           | It feels much less slimy to pay a nominal fee for a service
           | than it does to use a "free" service and wonder about how /
           | to what extent your data is being exploited.
        
             | jjice wrote:
             | 100% agree. Free services have their place, but I'd love to
             | have more paid service alternatives for derives that only
             | exist as "free".
             | 
             | That said, all my friends think I'm insane and poke fun at
             | me for paying for search, so I imagine we're a small
             | minority.
             | 
             | People just hate paying for software in general in my
             | experience, especially a subscription.
             | 
             | I have multiple good friends who refuse to pay 99 cents a
             | month to get 50gb of iCloud storage so they can backup
             | their phones, and instead of all their precious memories on
             | a single device that is out and about.
        
               | captainkrtek wrote:
               | I think the whole "if it's free, you're the product"
               | nugget of information has not been broadly understood by
               | folks, or if it has, maybe folks don't care as much about
               | their data.
               | 
               | I do live these days with the understanding that pretty
               | much all of my personal info is out there one way or
               | another, a social security number is about as private as
               | a phone number these days.
        
               | thfuran wrote:
               | It's pretty well established that people are just
               | generally irrational about free things. Because of this,
               | I think any business model involving giving something
               | away for free, whether it's a loss leader or or ad
               | supported or something else, is fundamentally anti-
               | competetive. Cognitive biases place any competitor
               | charging for the good/service at a disadvantage. If
               | you're a non profit, go ahead and give things away. If
               | you're a business, you should have to charge.
        
         | SOLAR_FIELDS wrote:
         | I used Kagi search for awhile but eventually switched back to
         | google because Kagi location aware search sucks. It might be
         | better nowadays. I've been living on their browser Orion for a
         | few weeks now though and it's great. It works about 90% of the
         | time which is impressive for a browser that isn't tested
         | alongside the big 4
        
           | viraptor wrote:
           | What do you mean 90%? Orion is WebKit under the hood, so any
           | failures would be surprising.
        
             | SOLAR_FIELDS wrote:
             | Clearly there is divergence. Examples that I run into on a
             | daily basis:
             | 
             | My credit union login does an infinite redirect on login.
             | Works fine on Chrome (and all other major browsers)
             | 
             | Perplexity on the mobile version web search entirely
             | broken. Works fine on safari.
             | 
             | Many other random stuff breaks at least a few times per day
             | usually from login redirects and authentication. Extensions
             | like 1Password have autofill only working some of the time.
             | The list goes on
        
         | bobbylarrybobby wrote:
         | I'm curious, aside from pricing, what utility do you get from
         | Assistant that you wouldn't from just subscribing directly to a
         | single LLM?
        
           | buster wrote:
           | Actually, i get the news search with a quick answer and a
           | link to the assistent and not a single LLM but practically
           | all LLMs in one interface and can link and share the chats.
           | The Interface is nice, simple and Kagi is very up to date
           | regarding new LLMs (it already contains Sonnet 4.5, for
           | example).
           | 
           | It's just a nice interface for all LLMs which i often use on
           | mobile or laptop for various work and also private tasks.
           | 
           | The last months have shown that there is no single LLM worth
           | investing in (todays "top" LLM is tomorrows second-in-class).
        
           | Spivak wrote:
           | The Kagi implementation can use Kagi search and can use
           | advanced features of search like lenses. This isn't a unique
           | feature but if you believe Kagi search is better than whoever
           | Anthropic/OpenAI are using it's a nice plus.
           | 
           | Kagi's contracts with LLM providers are the ones businesses
           | get with actual privacy protections which is also nice.
        
           | flyer23 wrote:
           | KI multi-step asisstant. Being able to try out all the llms
           | in one subscription. Search integration with Kagi which means
           | AI can really search only pages I want. And my settings for
           | search as well.
        
           | wiether wrote:
           | > subscribing directly to a single LLM
           | 
           | You get multiple LLM in a single interface, with a single
           | login and a single subscription to maintain, all your threads
           | stored at the same place, the ability to switch between
           | models in a thread, custom models...
        
       | charcircuit wrote:
       | RSS is a strange choice in 2025. As a search engine they are in
       | the position to extract things from web pages themselves. They
       | already need this capability in order to properly rank the page.
        
         | ktosobcy wrote:
         | Why? I do use it and can't imagine following anything without
         | it... And I keep hoping that it will come back and replace
         | absolutely terrible schizophrenic feeds from meta/x/etc
        
           | charcircuit wrote:
           | >Why?
           | 
           | Because not every site has a RSS feed. For example when
           | Claude Sonnet 4.5 released it would make sense to have that,
           | but there is no RSS feed for Anthropic. Being compatible with
           | the entire web instead of just a subset of it is useful.
        
             | swiftcoder wrote:
             | I don't know of any major publisher that doesn't maintain
             | RSS feeds, and this is mostly syndicating major publishers,
             | so I'm not sure it makes any difference
        
             | ktosobcy wrote:
             | Well... thanks to walled-garden policy from google whole
             | web decided to erect walls instead of providing neat RSS.
             | Though all websites I care about have RSS and if some
             | doesn't I contact the admin and they add it...
        
         | treetalker wrote:
         | For one, I welcome RSS (back) and say the more, the better. I
         | much prefer to pull specific types of information at my own set
         | intervals when I need them, instead of either having
         | undifferentiated information pushed on me continuously like a
         | blast from a fire hose, or having to reach out to manually
         | check and filter many individual sources. The idea is to
         | schedule my receipt and processing of the information, and then
         | refine the stream itself as well as the intervals I use to view
         | it and the total amount of time I spend on it.
         | 
         | I'm currently on the hunt for an RSS reader that has good
         | filtering and sorting functionality, so I can (for instance)
         | pull several feeds from only certain sources, but not see any
         | posts/articles about terms A or B, yet see and sort any posts
         | with term C by time, followed by either posts from source 1
         | with terms C and D, or posts from source 2 with terms E or F
         | but not G, which would be sorted by relevance.
         | 
         | I know that's a complicated and probably poorly written
         | explanation; but I'm imagining something like Apple Mail Rules
         | for RSS.
        
           | charcircuit wrote:
           | I think Kagi's target audience is people who want to see
           | news, and not people who want a RSS reader for news. The
           | average person does not care how news gets to them. The fact
           | that it uses RSS is a technical detail they should not have
           | to worry about. Kagi should not be artificially restricting
           | themselves to RSS feed when there is news that exists outside
           | the RSS ecosystem which they should consider including.
        
             | Apocryphon wrote:
             | Kagi's eventual target audience might be the average
             | person, but right now its customers are almost certainly
             | the type of people who mourned the shuttering of Google
             | Reader.
        
         | anonymousd3vil wrote:
         | I use RSS to get my information and I've built my own reader
         | https://rahuldshetty.github.io/reader-project/ for it. It helps
         | me stay upto date with my various news feed and sites at one
         | place. I don't have to search for things in search engine all
         | the time for a piece of news.
        
       | charv wrote:
       | I love everything that Kagi has put out. The Orion browser rocks
       | (recently replaced Brave, good riddance) and my go-to chatbot
       | today is the Kagi Assistant with Kimi K2 connected to the
       | internet.
       | 
       | I tended towards Axios but lately it's gotten a bit paywalled and
       | less informative. Can't wait to incorporate Kagi News into my
       | daily workflow.
        
       | ivanjermakov wrote:
       | > One daily update: We publish once per day around noon UTC,
       | creating a natural endpoint to news consumption. This is a
       | deliberate design choice that turns news from an endless habit
       | into a contained ritual.
       | 
       | I might not agree with all decisions Kagi makes, but this is
       | gold. Endless scrolling is a big indicator that you're a consumer
       | not a customer.
        
         | ethbr1 wrote:
         | > _Endless scrolling is a big indicator that you 're a consumer
         | not a customer._
         | 
         | Someone recently highlighted the shift from social networks to
         | social media in a way I'd never thought about:
         | 
         | >> _The shift from social networks to social media was subtle,
         | and insidious. Social networks, systems where you talk to your
         | friends, are okay (probably). Social media, where you consume
         | content selected by an algorithm, is not._ (immibis
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45403867)
         | 
         | Specifically, in the same way that insufficient supply of
         | mortgage securities (there's a finite number of mortgages) led
         | to synthetic CDOs [0] in order to artificially boost supply of
         | something there was a market for.
         | 
         | Social media and 24/7 news (read: shoving content from
         | strangers into your eyeballs) are the synthetic CDOs of
         | content, with about the same underlying utility.
         | 
         | There is in fact a finite amount of individually useful content
         | per unit of time.
         | 
         | [0] If you want the Michael Lewis-esque primer on CDOs
         | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A25EUhZGBws
        
           | captainkrtek wrote:
           | > Social media and 24/7 news (read: shoving content from
           | strangers into your eyeballs) is the synthetic CDO of
           | content, with about the same underlying utility.
           | 
           | This is a great way to put it. Much of the social media
           | content is a derivative/synthetic representation of actual
           | engagement. Content creators and influencers can make us
           | "feel" like we have a connection to them (eg: "get ready with
           | me!" type videos), but it's not the same as genuine
           | connection or communication with people.
        
         | oezi wrote:
         | I agree but I also would like to see yesterday's news. 12
         | articles is a little to few for me. I would like to come back
         | every couple of days and review what happened.
        
         | ascagnel_ wrote:
         | This is one of the big reasons I've gravitated towards a
         | reverse-chronological feed that takes you from the past to the
         | present -- at some point you hit a natural end, which is a
         | natural prompt to go do something else. I've picked up
         | Reeder[0] as a feed reader, since it can aggregate a bunch of
         | sources (chiefly RSS, but also Mastodon, BlueSky, reddit, etc)
         | and presents it in such a timeline without pressure to read
         | everything.
         | 
         | [0] https://reederapp.com
        
       | atonse wrote:
       | I LOVE this. The app feels very clean, the data's presented
       | beautifully, and it hasn't been enshittified yet. And hopefully
       | never will, because I pay Kagi in hopes that they don't.
       | 
       | I feel this is what Apple News should've been. Instead it's just
       | god-awful ad-filled mess of news articles. And the only reason I
       | have it is because of Apple One. But it is a clearly neglected
       | product.
       | 
       | I also pay for ground news but it hasn't met my expectations,
       | mostly because there's a lot of redundancy with wire stories.
       | Like it'll show 50 sources but they're all just regurgitating the
       | same AP or Reuters article. So it skews the "bias"
        
       | laweijfmvo wrote:
       | sites like these make me realize that i'm not all that interested
       | in "news", which might be a personal fault, but also makes you
       | wonder what all the other ""news"" sites have been doing to
       | capture my attention...
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Is this an annoucement or just a promotion?
       | 
       | Bunch of discussion here 3 months ago?
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44518473
        
         | graynk wrote:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44519356
         | 
         | It was in beta then.
        
         | smoothbenny wrote:
         | Judging by the newly available categories it looks like they
         | may have paid attention to some early feedback :)
        
       | chrisweekly wrote:
       | Happy paying Kagi subscriber here. Rock on, Kagi.
        
       | daveoc64 wrote:
       | The World section seems to have a heavy bias towards news from
       | the USA.
       | 
       | The UK section seems to have a heavy bias towards news from
       | Scotland.
       | 
       | It looks too simplistic for me to actually use.
        
         | baggachipz wrote:
         | Several sections have Trump in the headline. I wish there was a
         | way to block that word like I do in Lemmy. That guy monopolizes
         | the headlines which only makes him more powerful, and annoys
         | me. I'll see whether I can take this when I use this new app,
         | which I otherwise think is great.
        
           | lblume wrote:
           | Surely it isn't that simple. Even a person who thoroughly
           | condemns Trump's hijacking of media systems and attentions
           | must acknowledge that if international politics are at all
           | relevant for you, some actions of the US president should be
           | seen by you, if only in exceptional circumstances.
        
             | Xiol32 wrote:
             | The problem is the continual stream of bullshit emitted
             | from Trump's mouth gets clicks, and as such even little
             | things that don't have any bearing on an international
             | audience are reported heavily.
             | 
             | When Biden was president I barely heard anything about US
             | politics, but with Trump in power it's hard to avoid.
        
             | dstroot wrote:
             | This is the issue. I feel bombarded by trump's firehouse of
             | bullshit, but some of it has to be important, right? So how
             | can Kagi create a "smart" trump filter that focuses on the
             | most important stuff and reduces the firehose. I tried Kagi
             | news and created a "trump" filter and *every story in the
             | US section was gone*.
        
           | MostlyStable wrote:
           | This comment[0] suggests that they have some kind of a filter
           | 
           | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45427513
        
             | baggachipz wrote:
             | Strange, I couldn't find anything in the settings (iOS
             | version). So maybe there's a divergent feature set and
             | updates are forthcoming.
        
               | MostlyStable wrote:
               | I can't speak to any of the apps, but after making my
               | original comment, I checked out the website version, and
               | the settings there do indeed have filters for category as
               | well as specific terms.
        
             | lblume wrote:
             | Can verify. Settings > Content Filter > Custom Keywords.
             | You can choose whether to hide the stories completely or
             | blur them instead.
        
             | khaleel-kagi wrote:
             | We have Content Filter on the web version. And it's coming
             | to the mobile app very soon. We're working towards having
             | complete feature parity with the web app.
        
           | freediver wrote:
           | It is possible to block news by keywords, see settings (I
           | believe in the web app currently only)
        
             | baggachipz wrote:
             | Awesome, looking forward to it being in the mobile apps if
             | possible. I like to think of it as blocking spammy domains
             | ;)
        
             | carlhjerpe wrote:
             | Haha if you block Politics, Sports, Celebrity News and
             | Crypto there are no news in the USA section for me
        
         | Guillaume86 wrote:
         | The Belgian section has no french language articles, they still
         | need to work some things out but I welcome the idea.
        
       | user_7832 wrote:
       | Mini feedback - it appears to report google news results as if
       | from google and not the website in question (Wired in my case,
       | the snapdragon x2 elite article).
       | 
       | Apart from that, it's really nice! Good job, kagi team!
        
       | msravi wrote:
       | Very skeptical that this would work for me. None of the topics
       | that Kagi chooses to "cover" in their seven or so stories for the
       | day resonates with what I'd want to read. That's exactly why we
       | have feeds that you can tune to your tastes and so on. Getting
       | rid of endless scrolling and such might be a good thing though.
        
       | __jonas wrote:
       | Just to be clear I'm understanding correctly:
       | 
       | This is pulling the content of the RSS feeds of several news
       | sites into the context window of an LLM and then asking it to
       | summarize news items into articles and fill in the blanks?
       | 
       | I'm asking because that is what it looks like, but AI / LLMs are
       | not specifically mentioned in this blog post, they just say news
       | are 'generated' under the 'News in your language' heading, which
       | seems to imply that is what they are doing.
       | 
       | I'm a little skeptical towards the approach, when you ask an LLM
       | to point to 'sources' for the information it outputs, as far as I
       | know there is no guarantee that those are correct - and it does
       | seem like sometimes they just use pure LLM output, as no sources
       | are cited, or it's quoted as 'common knowledge'.
        
         | devmor wrote:
         | The line "news stories will be generated" throws up red flags
         | across the horizon for me.
         | 
         | That's not news. That's news-adjacent random slop.
        
           | input_sh wrote:
           | It's also a workaround around copyright, news sites would be
           | (rightfully) pissed if you publicly post their articles in
           | full and would argue that you're stealing their viewership.
           | But, if you're essentially doing an automatic mash-up of five
           | stories on the same topic from different sources, all of a
           | sudden you're not doing anything wrong!
           | 
           | As an example from one of their sources, you can only re-
           | publish a certain amount of words from an article in The
           | Guardian (100 commercially, 500 non-comercially) without
           | paying them.
        
             | nemomarx wrote:
             | tbh I would take the headline and first hundred words in a
             | news aggregator. that seems fine?
        
               | input_sh wrote:
               | Yes, that is fine! That's how RSS feeds usually work when
               | you follow more "mainstream" news sources. At the very
               | least, you see the name of the author and you actually
               | make a connection to their server that can be measured in
               | the analytics.
               | 
               | But instead, Kagi "helpfully" regurgitates the whole
               | story, visits the article once, delivers it to presumably
               | thousands, and it can't even be bothered to display all
               | of the sources it regurgitates unless you click to expand
               | the dropdown. And even then the headline itself is one
               | additional click away, and they straight up don't even
               | display the name of the journalist in the pop-up, just
               | the headline.
               | 
               | Incredibly shitty behaviour from them. And then they have
               | the balls to start their about page with this:
               | 
               | > Why Kagi News? Because news is broken.
        
           | amarant wrote:
           | And yet, after trying it, I have to admit it's more
           | informative and less provocative than any other news source
           | I've seen since at least 2005.
           | 
           | I don't know how they do it, and I'm not sure I care, the
           | result is they've eliminated both clickbait and ragebait, and
           | the news are indeed better off for it!
        
             | input_sh wrote:
             | Soulless, uncreative, not fact-checked (or read by anyone
             | before clicking publish), not contributing anything back to
             | the original journalists, all of the editorial decisions
             | are done by an undeterministic AI filter.
             | 
             | Not gonna call it the worst insult to journalism I've ever
             | seen because I've seen factually(.)so which does
             | essentially the same thing but calls it an "AI fact check",
             | but it's not much better.
             | 
             | It's like instead of borrowing a book from the library,
             | there's like a spokesperson at the entrance who you ask a
             | question and then blindly believe whatever they say.
        
               | amarant wrote:
               | >soulless,uncreative
               | 
               | This is exactly how I want my news to be. Nothing worse
               | than a headline about a new vaccine breakthrough,
               | followed by a first paragraph that starts with "it was a
               | cold November morning as I arrived in..."
               | 
               | I guess it's a matter of taste, but I prefer it short and
               | to the point
        
         | mvieira38 wrote:
         | Yes, that's what it is. Kagi as a brand is LLM-optimist, so you
         | may be fundamentally at odds with them here... If it lessens
         | the issue for you, the sources of each item are cited properly
         | in every example I tried, so maybe you could treat it as a
         | fancy link aggregator
        
           | meowface wrote:
           | I consider myself a major LLM optimist in many ways, but if
           | I'm receiving a once per day curated news aggregation feed I
           | feel I'd want a human eye. I guess an LLM in theory might
           | have less of the biases found in humans, but you're trading
           | one kind of bias for another.
        
             | mvieira38 wrote:
             | Yeah, I agree. The entire value/fact dichotomy that the
             | announcement bases itself on is a pretty hot philosophical
             | topic I lean against Kagi on. It's just impossible to
             | summarize any text without imparting some sort of value
             | judgement on it, therefore "biasing" the text
        
               | xpe wrote:
               | > It's just impossible to summarize any text without
               | imparting some sort of value judgement on it, therefore
               | "biasing" the text
               | 
               | Unfortunately, the above is nearly a cliche at this
               | point. The phrase "value judgment" is insufficient
               | because it occludes some important differences. To name
               | just two that matter; there is a key difference between
               | (1) a moral value judgment; (2) selection & summarization
               | (often intended to improve information density for the
               | intended audience).
               | 
               | For instance, imagine two non-partisan medical
               | newsletters. Even if they have the same moral values
               | (e.g. rooted in the Hippocratic Oath), they might have
               | different assessments of what is more relevant for their
               | audience. One could say both are "biased", but does doing
               | so impart any _functional_ information? I would rather
               | say something like  "Newsletter A is compromised of
               | Editorial Board X with such-and-such a track record and
               | is known for careful, long-form articles" or "Newsletter
               | B is a one-person operation known for a prolific stream
               | of hourly coverage." In this example, saying the
               | newsletters differ in framing and intended audience is
               | useful, but calling each "biased in different ways" is a
               | throwaway comment (having low informational content in
               | the Shannonian sense).
               | 
               | Personally, instead of saying "biased" I tend to ask
               | questions like: (a) Who is their intended audience; (b)
               | What attributes and qualities consistently shine
               | through?; (c) How do they make money? (d) Is the
               | publication/source transparent about their approach? (e)
               | What is their track record about accuracy, separating
               | commentary from factual claims, professional integrity,
               | disclosure of conflicts of interest, level of
               | intellectual honesty, epistemic standards, and
               | corrections?
        
               | xpe wrote:
               | > The entire value/fact dichotomy that the announcement
               | bases itself on
               | 
               | Hmmm. Here I will quote some representative sections from
               | the announcement [1]:
               | 
               | >> News is broken. We all know it, but we've somehow
               | accepted it as inevitable. The endless notifications. The
               | clickbait headlines designed to trigger rather than
               | inform, driven by relentless ad monetization. The
               | exhausting cycle of checking multiple apps throughout the
               | day, only to feel more anxious and less informed than
               | when we started. This isn't what news was supposed to be.
               | We can do better, and create what news should have been
               | all along: pure, essential information that respects your
               | intelligence and time.
               | 
               | >> .. Kagi News operates on a simple principle:
               | understanding the world requires hearing from the world.
               | Every day, our system reads thousands of community
               | curated RSS feeds from publications across different
               | viewpoints and perspectives. We then distill this massive
               | information into one comprehensive daily briefing, while
               | clearly citing sources.
               | 
               | >> .. We strive for diversity and transparency of
               | resources and welcome your contributions to widen
               | perspectives. This multi-source approach helps reveal the
               | full picture beyond any single viewpoint.
               | 
               | >> .. If you're tired of news that makes you feel worse
               | about the world while teaching you less about it, we
               | invite you to try a different approach with Kagi News, so
               | download it today ...
               | 
               | I don't see any evidence from these selections (nor the
               | announcement as a whole) that their approach states,
               | assumes, or requires a value/fact dichotomy.
               | Additionally, I read various example articles to look for
               | evidence that their information architecture group
               | information along such a dichotomy.
               | 
               | Lastly, to be transparent, I'll state a claim that I find
               | to be true: for _many /most_ statements, it isn't that
               | difficult nor contentious to separate out factual claims
               | from value claims. We don't need to debate the exact
               | percentages or get into the weeds on this unless you
               | think it will be useful.
               | 
               | I will grant this -- which is a different point that what
               | the commenter above made -- when reading various articles
               | from a particular source, it can take effort and analysis
               | to suss out the source's level of intellectual honesty,
               | ulterior motives, and other questions I mention in my
               | sibling comment.
               | 
               | [1]: https://blog.kagi.com/kagi-news
        
             | bbarnett wrote:
             | Don't worry, all those news articles are of course human
             | curated.
             | 
             | (I say this sarcastically and unhappily)
        
             | rwl wrote:
             | Indeed! A once per day human-curated news aggregation feed
             | used to be called a "newspaper". You can still get them in
             | some places, I believe.
        
           | leephillips wrote:
           | Hard pass then. I'm a happy Kagi search subscriber, but I
           | certainly don't want more AI slop in my life.
           | 
           | I use RSS with newsboat and I get mainstream news by visiting
           | individual sites (nytimes.com, etc.) and using the Newshound
           | aggregator. Also, of course, HN with https://hn-ai.org/
        
             | CaptainOfCoit wrote:
             | > Also, of course, HN with https://hn-ai.org/
             | 
             | Ironically, this submission is at the top of that website
             | :)
        
             | cyberax wrote:
             | You can also convert regular newspapers into RSS feeds!
             | NYTimes and Seattle Times have official RSS feeds, and with
             | some scripting you can also get their article contents.
        
           | NobodyNada wrote:
           | I'm about as AI-pessimist as it gets, but Kagi's use of LLMs
           | is the most tasteful and practical I've seen. It's always
           | completely opt-in (e.g. "append a ? to your search query if
           | you want an AI summary", as opposed to Google's "append a
           | swear word to your search query if you don't want one"), it's
           | not pushy, and it's focused on summarizing and aggregating
           | content rather than trying to make it up.
        
             | arrosenberg wrote:
             | FYI, you can append &udm=14 to Google searches to remove AI
             | results and a bunch of the other clutter they've added.
        
               | paws wrote:
               | Neat trick, any other params folks might want to know
               | about?
        
               | willguest wrote:
               | I found this page that describes a variety of search
               | parameter: https://susodigital.com/thoughts/the-mystery-
               | of-the-google-u...
               | 
               | then i got the machine to write a front-end that
               | visualises them and builds a search query for you:
               | https://pastebin.com/HNwytYr9
               | 
               | enjoy
        
               | bbarnett wrote:
               | I did that, and started getting flagged as a bot. Had to
               | search elsewhere(Kagi) full time, or else suffer endless
               | "find a bike" nonsense.
               | 
               | I think Google hates the loss of no/few ads or lame
               | suggestions.
        
               | pirates wrote:
               | Google thinks the same of me and I don't even edit the
               | URL. I can have a session working just fine one night and
               | come back the next day, open a new tab to search for
               | something, and get captcha'd to hell. I'm fairly sure
               | they just mess with Firefox on purpose. I won't install
               | Brave, Chrome, or Edge out of principle either. Safari
               | works fine, but I don't like it.
        
               | Jepacor wrote:
               | Google will captcha me on the second or third search if I
               | try to use the "site":" advanced keyword to narrow down
               | search
               | 
               | I'm sorry I know how to use your tool?? ? Didn't you put
               | these keywords in to be used?
        
           | freediver wrote:
           | > Kagi as a brand is LLM-optimist
           | 
           | Kagi founder here. I am personally not an LLM-optimist. The
           | thing is that I do not think LLMs will bring us to "Star
           | Trek" level of useful computers (which I see humans
           | eventually getting to) due to LLM's fundamentally broken
           | auto-regressive nature. A different approach will be needed.
           | Slight nuance but an important one.
           | 
           | Kagi as a brand is building tools in service of its users, no
           | particular affinity towards any technologies.
        
             | agiacalone wrote:
             | Happy Kagi Ultimate user here, so thank you!
        
             | sally_glance wrote:
             | Another LLM-pragmatist here. I don't see why we should
             | treat LLMs differently than any other tool in the box.
             | Except maybe that it's currently the newest and most shiny,
             | albeit still a bit clunky and overpriced.
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | It's not binary - it's a continuum.
         | 
         | When you go to Google News, the way they group together stories
         | is AI (pre-LLM technology). Kagi is merely taking it one step
         | further.
         | 
         | I agree with your concern. I see this as a convenient grouping,
         | and if any interests me I can skip reading the LLM summary and
         | just click on the sources they provide (making it similar to
         | Google News).
        
           | philipwhiuk wrote:
           | > Kagi is merely taking it one step further.
           | 
           | I would argue creating your own summary is several steps
           | beyond an ordering algorithm.
        
           | krainboltgreene wrote:
           | It cannot be "one step further", because there's a clear
           | break in reality between what Google News provides and Kagi
           | provides. Google News links to an article that exists in our
           | world, 100%, no chance involved. Kagi uses an LLM generate
           | text and thus is entirely up to chance.
        
             | bbarnett wrote:
             | Devil's advocate here.
             | 
             | Do you know that's what they're doing? They are a search
             | engine after all. They do run their own indexer, as well as
             | cache results from other sources.
             | 
             | If they're feeding urls to an AI, why can't they validate
             | AI output urls are real? Maybe they do.
        
               | krainboltgreene wrote:
               | I don't care.
        
           | timeon wrote:
           | > When you go to Google News
           | 
           | You don't and you should not use this one either.
        
         | bigstrat2003 wrote:
         | Thanks for pointing out that this is yet more AI slop. Very
         | disappointing for Kagi to do this. I get my money's worth from
         | searches, but if I was looking for more features I would want
         | them to be not AI-based.
        
         | atonse wrote:
         | I'm genuinely asking, but have you tried it?
         | https://kite.kagi.com
         | 
         | It actually seems more like an aggregator (like ground.news) to
         | me. And pretty much every single sentence cites the original
         | article(s).
         | 
         | There are nice summaries within an article. I think what they
         | mean is that they generate a meta-article after combining the
         | rest of them. There's nothing novel here.
         | 
         | But the presentation of the meta-article and publishing once a
         | day feel like great features.
        
           | __jonas wrote:
           | I have yeah, to me it looks like what I described in my
           | comment above, it's LLM generated text, is it not?
           | 
           | > And pretty much every single sentence cites the original
           | article(s).
           | 
           | Yeah but again, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think
           | asking an LLM to provide a source / citation yields any
           | guarantee that the text it generates alongside it is
           | accurate.
           | 
           | I also see a lot of text without any citations at all, here
           | are three sections (Historical background, Technical details
           | and Scientific significance) that don't cite any sources:
           | https://kite.kagi.com/s/5e6qq2
        
             | cogman10 wrote:
             | Oof, that one is particularly bad because it cites 3
             | sources which are all the same article.
             | 
             | Google points to phys and phys is a republish of the MIT
             | article.
        
               | rdlw wrote:
               | There's even a 'perspectives' section that tries to
               | contrast two of the sources, but they're the same
               | article.
        
               | cogman10 wrote:
               | I can envision the day where an LLM article generator
               | starts consuming LLM generated articles which were
               | sourced from single articles (co-written by an LLM).
        
             | atonse wrote:
             | They are LLM generated summaries, sure.
             | 
             | I guess I'm trying to understand your comment. Is there a
             | distinction you're making between LLM summaries or LLM
             | generated text, or are you stating that they aren't being
             | transparent about the summaries being generated by LLMs (as
             | opposed to what? human editors?).
             | 
             | Because at some point when I launched the app, it did say
             | summaries might be inaccurate.
             | 
             | Looks like you found an example where it isn't properly
             | citing the summaries. My guess is that they will tighten
             | this up, because I looked mostly at the first and second
             | page and most of those articles seemed to have citations in
             | the summaries.
             | 
             | Like most people, I would want those everywhere to guard
             | against potential hallucinations. No, the citations don't
             | guarantee that there weren't any hallucinations, but if you
             | read something that makes you go "huh" - the citations give
             | you a low-friction opportunity to read more.
             | 
             | But another sibling commenter talked about the phys.org and
             | google both pointing to the same thing. I agree, and this
             | is exactly an issue I have with other aggregators like
             | Ground.news.
             | 
             | They need to build some sort of graph that distills down
             | duplicates. Like I don't need the article to say "30
             | sources" when 26 of them are just reprints of an AP/Reuters
             | wire story. That shouldn't count as 30 sources.
        
               | __jonas wrote:
               | > I guess I'm trying to understand your comment. Is there
               | a distinction you're making between LLM summaries or LLM
               | generated text, or are you stating that they aren't being
               | transparent about the summaries being generated by LLMs
               | (as opposed to what? human editors?).
               | 
               | The main point of my original comment was that I wanted
               | to understand what this is, how it works and whether I
               | can trust the information on there, because it wasn't
               | completely clear to me.
               | 
               | I'm not super up to date with AI stuff, but my working
               | knowledge is that I should never trust the output of an
               | LLM and always verify it myself, so therefore I was
               | wondering if this is just LLM output or if there is some
               | human review process, or a mechanism related to the
               | citation functions that makes it output of a different,
               | more trusted category.
               | 
               | I did catch the message on the loading screen as well
               | now, I do still think it could be a little more clear on
               | the individual articles about it being LLM generated
               | text, apart from that I think I understand somewhat
               | better what it is now.
        
               | jtbayly wrote:
               | > No, the citations don't guarantee that there weren't
               | any hallucinations, but if you read something that makes
               | you go "huh" - the citations give you a low-friction
               | opportunity to read more.
               | 
               | Either you mean every time you read something interesting
               | ("huh") you should check it. But in that case, why bother
               | with reading the AI summary in the first place...
               | 
               | Or you mean that any time you read something that sounds
               | wrong, you should check it. But in that case, everything
               | false in the summaries that happens to _sound_ true to
               | you will be confirmed in your mind without you ever
               | checking it.
        
               | rdlw wrote:
               | > as opposed to what? human editors?
               | 
               | ...yes? If I go to a website called "_ News" (present
               | company included), I expect to see either news stories
               | aggregated by humans or news stories written and fact
               | checked by humans. That's why newspapers have fact
               | checking departments, but they're being replaced by
               | something with almost none of the utility and its
               | proponents are framing the benefits of the old system as
               | impossible or impractical.
        
               | atonse wrote:
               | I think you misunderstood my comment. I wasn't
               | challenging the concept of human editors and fact
               | checkers. I was asking a parent for a clarification of
               | what the parent post meant by outlining that they were
               | LLM generated summaries.
               | 
               | Like, I was asking whether they were expecting the
               | curation/summarization to be done by humans at Kagi News.
        
           | hadlock wrote:
           | Publishing once a day to remove the "slot machine dopamine
           | hit" is worth it for that alone. I have forever been looking
           | for a peer/replacement to Google News, I was about to pony up
           | for a Ground News subscription but I'll probably hold off for
           | a couple more months. Alternatives to google news have been
           | sorely lacking for over a decade, especially since google
           | news got their mobile-first redesign which significantly and
           | permanently weakened the product to meet some product
           | manager's bonus-linked KPI. One more product to wean off the
           | google mothership. Gmail is gonna be real hard though.
        
             | jacobgkau wrote:
             | > Gmail is gonna be real hard though.
             | 
             | Gmail seems like the easiest piece of the Google puzzle to
             | replace. Different calendar systems have different quirks
             | around repeating events, you sometimes need to try a
             | variety of search engines to find what you're looking for,
             | Docs aren't bug-for-bug equivalent to the Office or iCloud
             | competitors, YouTube has audience, monetization, and
             | hosting scale... Gmail is just "make an email account with
             | a different provider and switch all of your accounts to use
             | the new address." They don't even give you that much
             | storage for free Gmail; it's 15GB, which lots of other
             | email providers can match (especially paid ones). You can
             | import your old emails to your new provider or just store
             | them offline with a variety of email clients.
             | 
             | Is updating all of your accounts (and telling your contacts
             | about the new address) what you consider to be the hard
             | part, or do you actually use any Gmail-specific features?
             | Genuinely curious, as I tend to disregard almost all mail-
             | provider-specific features that any of my mail providers
             | try to get me excited about (Gmail occasionally adds some
             | new trick, but Zoho Mail is especially bad about making me
             | roll my eyes with their new feature notifications).
        
               | wintermutestwin wrote:
               | I am sticking with this reprehensible company for email
               | because their spam detection is awesome and I have found
               | no clear measurements of detection to reasonably compare.
               | I'd love to be proven wrong!
        
               | gnud wrote:
               | Switched from Gmail to Fastmail about 10 years ago.
               | 
               | 2-3 spam emails slip through every week, and sometimes a
               | false positive happens when I sign up for something new.
               | I don't see this as a huge problem, and I doubt Gmail is
               | significantly better.
        
         | imiric wrote:
         | I'm firmly on the side of "AI" skepticism, but even I have to
         | admit that this is a very good use of the tech. LLMs generally
         | do a great job at summarizing text, which is essentially what
         | this is. The sources could be statically defined in advance,
         | given that they know where they pull the information from, so I
         | don't think the LLM generates that content.
         | 
         | So if this automates the process of fetching the top news from
         | a static list of news sites and summarizing the content in a
         | specific structure, there's not much that can go wrong there.
         | There's a very small chance that the LLM would hallucinate when
         | asked to summarize a relatively short amount of text.
        
           | threetonesun wrote:
           | We used to do this with a human created meta tag but I guess
           | this is better?
        
           | input_sh wrote:
           | It's useful for the users, but tragically bad for anyone
           | involved with journalism. Not that they're not used to
           | getting fucked by search engines at this point, be it via
           | AMP, instant answers, or AI overviews.
           | 
           | Not that the userbase of 50k is big enough to matter right
           | now, but still...
        
             | atonse wrote:
             | All this is doing is aggregating RSS feeds and linking to
             | the original articles.
             | 
             | So this might result in lower traffic for "anyone involved
             | in journalism" - but the constant doomscrolling is worse
             | for society. So I think we can all agree that the industry
             | needs to veer towards less quantity and more quality.
        
               | input_sh wrote:
               | RSS feeds are meant to be used by actual users, not
               | regurgitated publicly. RSS readers at the very least have
               | have author info visible and its users tend to be
               | reported to website's analytics with a special user
               | agent.
        
             | imiric wrote:
             | What journalism? Most of these sites copy their content
             | from each other or social media, and give it their own
             | spin. Nowadays most of them use AI anyway.
             | 
             | Actual journalism doesn't rely on advertising, and is
             | subscription based. Anyone interested in that is already
             | subscribed to those sources, but that is not the audience
             | this service is aiming for. Some people only want to spend
             | a few minutes a day catching up with major events, and this
             | service can do that for them. They're not the same people
             | who would spend hours on news sites, so these sites are not
             | missing any traffic.
        
               | malnourish wrote:
               | Broadly agreed, I don't consider the CBS (national) news
               | website to be a source of hard hitting journalism;
               | Reuters, however, is. Reuters and the AP are often the
               | source of these news stations.
               | 
               | I continue to subscribe to Reuters because of the quality
               | of journalism and reporting. I have also started using
               | Kagi News. They are not incompatible.
        
           | __jonas wrote:
           | I see! One thing I'm wondering: They say they are fetching
           | the content from the RSS feeds of news outlets rather than
           | scraping them, I haven't used RSS in a bit, but I recall most
           | news outlets would usually not include the full article in
           | their feed but just the headline or a small summary. I'd be
           | worried that articles with misleading headlines (which are
           | not uncommon) might cause this tool to generate incorrect
           | news items, is that not a concern?
        
             | imiric wrote:
             | That's a fair concern, and I would prefer it if they
             | scraped the sites instead. They could balance this out by
             | favoring content from sites that do provide the entire
             | article in their feeds, but that could lead to bias
             | problems. Maybe this is why their own summaries are short.
             | We can't know for sure unless they explain how it works.
        
           | saghm wrote:
           | If the parent commenter is correct, the concern I'd have
           | would be about transparency. Even if it's good at what it
           | does, I don't think we're anywhere close to a place as a
           | society where it shouldn't be explicit when it's being used
           | for something like this.
        
         | zwnow wrote:
         | This also is a really ignorant approach to data poisoning
         | issues in the LLM space. LLMs can easily be misused as
         | propaganda machines...
        
         | doublerebel wrote:
         | Disappointing. Non-LLM NLP summarization is actually rather
         | good these days. It works by finding the key sentences in the
         | text and extracting the relevant sections, no possibility for
         | hallucination. No need to go full AI for this feature.
        
           | tene80i wrote:
           | That's interesting. Could you share an example or a resource
           | about this?
        
         | raincole wrote:
         | Kagi is probably the only pro-LLM company praised on HN.
         | Perhaps people's hatred towards Google outweighs that of LLM.
         | 
         | Imagine if Google news use LLM to show summaries to the users
         | without explicitly saying it's AI on the UI.
         | 
         | Ironically, one of the first LLM-induced mistakes experienced
         | by average people was a news summary:
         | https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cge93de21n0o.amp
        
           | JohnFen wrote:
           | > Kagi is probably the only pro-LLM company praised on HN.
           | 
           | Kagi made search useful again, and their genAI stuff can be
           | easily ignored. Best of both worlds -- it remains useful for
           | people like myself who don't want genAI involved, but there's
           | genAI stuff for people who like that sort of thing.
           | 
           | That said, if their genAI stuff gets to be too hard to
           | ignore, then I'd stop using or praising Kagi.
           | 
           | That this is about news also makes it less problematic for
           | me. I just won't see it at all, since I don't go to Kagi for
           | news in the first place.
        
             | raincole wrote:
             | I'm not against AI summaries if they are marked as so.
             | Sneakily sliding LLM under the table is a dark pattern no
             | matter how I interpret their intentions.
             | 
             | Even Google calls the overview box AI Overview (not saying
             | it doesn't hurt content hosting sites.)
        
         | kiicia wrote:
         | It also publishes normal unabridged rss feed that you can read
         | with rss reader of your choice, it looks like great news source
        
         | jama211 wrote:
         | I am fine with it using AI but it makes me feel pretty icky
         | that they didn't mention that this was ai/llm generated at any
         | point in this article. That's a no-no IMO, and has turned me
         | off this pretty strongly.
        
           | stavros wrote:
           | Why do you care what technology was used to generate the
           | summaries? What if they had used their old NLP summarizer?
        
             | lukeschlather wrote:
             | They don't explicitly say they generate summaries at any
             | point in the article. In fact I read it and though this was
             | just some fancy RSS aggregator. The way they describe the
             | "daily briefing" is extremely ambiguous.
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | OK, but I'd like to repeat my question here: Why do you
               | care how the summary was generated?
        
               | edaemon wrote:
               | I'm not the person you asked, but it's useful to know if
               | the summary was generated using a method prone to
               | inaccuracy.
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | That's all methods, though. Have you seen humans?
        
               | motoxpro wrote:
               | In this situation, humans are more accurate, for now, so
               | it's good information to have.
               | 
               | Same as I would like to know if humans self assessed in a
               | study about how well they drive vs the empirical
               | evidence. Humans just aren't that good at that task so it
               | would be good to know coming in.
               | 
               | Just call it Kagi Vibes instead of Kagi News as news has
               | a higher bar (at least for me)
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | I'm not sure I agree that humans are more accurate at
               | summarizing, but I don't have data, so I'll take your
               | word for it.
        
               | motoxpro wrote:
               | I'd point to Wikipedia. You can say the content is
               | "wrong". But the links go to the right place.
        
               | willguest wrote:
               | different kinds of inaccuracy
        
               | jama211 wrote:
               | I find it more distasteful that they weren't transparent
               | about their method than the method being AI.
        
               | edaemon wrote:
               | Sure, but it's useful to know what kind of inaccuracies
               | to look for.
        
             | jama211 wrote:
             | Many reasons, if this news were summarised by humans I
             | would prefer it, one example reason is with AI summaries I
             | know to look out for hallucinations.
             | 
             | To be honest though that's not the point. I'm more annoyed
             | they weren't transparent about their methods than I am
             | about them using AI.
        
               | bhrlady wrote:
               | Kagi team member here who helped author that blog post
               | announcement. That's a fair point, and we've updated the
               | post to now clearly mention that we use AI for the daily
               | briefing. Thank you for your feedback!
        
         | whatamidoingyo wrote:
         | > when you ask an LLM to point to 'sources' for the information
         | it outputs, as far as I know there is no guarantee that those
         | are correct
         | 
         | A lot of times when I ask for a source, I get broken links. I'm
         | not sure if the links existed at one point, or if the LLM is
         | just hallucinating where it thinks a link should exist. CDN
         | libraries, for example. Or sources to specific laws.
        
           | CaptainOfCoit wrote:
           | > A lot of times when I ask for a source,
           | 
           | They'll do pretty much everything you ask of them, so unless
           | the text actually come from some source (via tool calls,
           | injecting content into the context or other way), they'll
           | make up a source rather than doing nothing, unless prompted
           | otherwise.
        
             | vbezhenar wrote:
             | They could make up source, but ChatGPT is an actual app
             | with complicated backend, not dumb pipe between textedit
             | and GPU. Surely they could verify on server side every link
             | they output to user before including it in the answer. I'm
             | sure Codex will implement it in no time!
        
               | therein wrote:
               | They surely can detect it, but what are they going to do
               | after detecting it? Loop the last job with a different
               | seed and hope that the model doesn't lie through its
               | teeth? They won't be doing it because the model will
               | gladly generate you a fake source on the next retry too.
        
               | doikor wrote:
               | This is actually harder then most think. The chances of
               | your app doing this check being bot detected/blocked is
               | very high.
               | 
               | (unless you are Google etc which are specifically let in
               | to get the article indexed into search)
        
             | jacobgkau wrote:
             | Maybe they should be trained on the understanding that
             | making up a source is not "doing what you ask of them" when
             | you ask for a source. It's actually the exact opposite of
             | the "doing what you asked, not what you wanted" trope--
             | it's providing something it thinks you want instead of
             | providing what you asked for (or being honest/erroring out
             | that it can't).
        
               | ssivark wrote:
               | Think for a second about what that means... this is a
               | very easy thing to do IFF we already had a general
               | purpose intelligence.
               | 
               | How do you make an LLM _understand_ that it must only
               | give factual sources? Just some naive RL with positive
               | reward on the correct sources and negative reward on
               | incorrect sources is not enough -- there are obscenely
               | many more hallucinated sources possible, and the set of
               | correct sources is a set of insanely tiny measure.
        
               | fluoridation wrote:
               | "Easy". You make the model distinguish between
               | information and references to information. Information
               | may be fabricated (for example, a fictional book is
               | mostly composed of lies) but references are assumed to be
               | factual (a link does point to something and is related to
               | something). Factual information is true only to the
               | degree that it is conveyed exactly, so the model needs to
               | be able to store and reproduce references verbatim.
               | 
               | Of course, "easy" is in quotes because none of this is
               | easy. It's just easier than AGI.
        
             | Paradigma11 wrote:
             | Wrong, just ask it about some non existent famous
             | historical person and it will most likely tell you it didnt
             | exist.
        
             | instagib wrote:
             | On my llm, I have a prompt that condenses down to:
             | 
             | For every line of text output, give me a full MLA annotated
             | source. If you cannot then say your source does not exist
             | or you are generating information based on multiple sources
             | then give me those sources. If you cannot do that, print
             | that you need more information to respond properly.
             | 
             | Every new model I mess with needs a slightly different
             | prompt due to safeguards or source protections. It is
             | interesting when it lists a source that I physically own
             | and their training data is deteriorated.
        
           | nicbou wrote:
           | I monitor 404 errors on my website. ChatGPT frequently sends
           | traffic to pages that never existed. Sometimes the
           | information they refer to has never existed on my website.
           | 
           | For example: "/glossary/love-parade" - There is no mention of
           | this on my website. "/guides/blue-card-germany" has always
           | been at "/guides/blue-card". I don't know what "/guides/cost-
           | of-beer-distribution" even refers to.
        
             | cgsmith wrote:
             | Definitely need an LLM to just generate it automatically on
             | the fly! Welcome to the future! (Just kidding please don't
             | (generate automatically))
        
               | tomsmeding wrote:
               | Not quite this, but still relevant: https://www.ty-
               | penguin.org.uk/~auj/spigot/
        
         | skysthelimitt wrote:
         | i believe an llm output is fine for giving an overview if
         | provided the articles, if you want a detailed overview you
         | should be reading the articles anyways.
        
         | j2kun wrote:
         | This seems like the opposite of "privacy by design"
         | 
         | > Privacy by design: Your reading habits belong to you. We
         | don't track, profile, or monetize your attention. You remain
         | the customer and not the product.
         | 
         | But the person running the LLM surely does.
        
           | m4r71n wrote:
           | How would the LLM provider get any information about your
           | reading habits from the app? The LLM is used _before_ the
           | news content is served to you, the reader.
        
         | ivape wrote:
         | ML did not figure out every solution on planet earth. It
         | figured out the LLM, and that is the giant's shoulder most apps
         | will stand on.
        
         | Harmon758 wrote:
         | Just for concrete confirmation that LLM(s) are being used,
         | there's an open issue on the GitHub repository, on
         | hallucinations with made up information, where a Kagi employee
         | specifically mentions "an LLM hallucination problem":
         | 
         | https://github.com/kagisearch/kite-public/issues/97
         | 
         | There's also a line at the bottom of the about page at
         | https://kite.kagi.com/about that says "Summaries may contain
         | errors. Please verify important information."
        
           | jazzyjackson wrote:
           | Love how it only took 8 years to go from "Fake News!" to
           | "News May Be Fake"
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | There's too much demand for fake news, plenty of subsidy
             | for it, and it's far easier to make.
             | 
             | Non fake news is going to be restricted to pay services
             | like Bloomberg terminals.
        
               | byearthithatius wrote:
               | It is getting easier and easier to fake stuff and there
               | are becoming less and less fully trusted institutions. So
               | sadly I think you are right. Its scary but we are likely
               | heading towards a future where you need to pay to get
               | verified information and that itself will likely be
               | segmented to different subscriptions for what information
               | you want.
        
               | andrewinardeer wrote:
               | > It is getting easier and easier to fake stuff
               | 
               | This is why the moon landing hoax was revolutionary in
               | the 60's. The size of this project was enormous.
        
               | fgalhwrg wrote:
               | As an American, confirmation that the landing was a hoax
               | would make me even prouder than my current belief that it
               | was real.
        
           | bbor wrote:
           | To take a moment to be a hopeless Stan for one of my all-time
           | favorite companies: I don't think the summary above yours is
           | fair, and I see why they don't center the summary part of it.
           | 
           | Unlike the disastrous Apple feature from earlier this year
           | (which is still available, somehow!), this isn't trying to
           | transform individual articles. Rather, it's focused on
           | capturing broader trends and giving just enough info to
           | decide whether to click into any of the source articles. That
           | seems like a much smaller, more achievable scope than Apple's
           | feature, and as always, open-source helps work like this a
           | _ton_.
           | 
           | I, for one, like it! I'll try it out. Seems better than my
           | current sources for a quick list of daily links, that's for
           | sure (namely Reddit News, Apple News, Bluesky in general, and
           | a few industry newsletters).
        
           | MarcelOlsz wrote:
           | Man am I tired of this stuff.
        
             | malfist wrote:
             | My LLM Investor Agent says we must keep investing in AI,
             | tulips will always be worth more at a later date
        
         | viraptor wrote:
         | > when you ask an LLM to point to 'sources' for the information
         | it outputs,
         | 
         | Services listing sources, like Kagi news, perplexity and others
         | don't do that. They start with known links and run LLMs on that
         | content. They don't ask LLMs to come up with links based on the
         | question.
        
           | __jonas wrote:
           | That is what I mean yeah, I'm not saying it's fabricating
           | sources from training data, that would obviously be
           | impossible for news articles, I'm saying if you give it a
           | list of articles A, B and C including their content in the
           | context and ask 'what is the foo of bar?' and it responds
           | 'the foo of bar is baz, source: article B paragraph 2', that
           | does not tell you whether the output is actually correct, or
           | contained in the cited source at all, unless you manually
           | verify it.
        
         | Onavo wrote:
         | Yes, they are not the only player here. Quite a few companies
         | are doing this, if you use Perplexity, they also have a news
         | tab with the exact feature set.
        
           | xpe wrote:
           | > if you use Perplexity, they also have a news tab with the
           | exact feature set
           | 
           | "Exact" is far from accurate. I just did a side-by-side
           | comparison. To name only two obvious differences:
           | 
           | A. At the top level, Perplexity has a "Discover" tab [1] --
           | not titled "News". That leads to a AAF page with the endless-
           | scroll anti-pattern (see [2] [3] for other examples). Kagi
           | News [4] presents a short list of ~7ish items without images.
           | 
           | B. At the detail-page level, Kagi organizes their content
           | differently (with more detail, including "sources",
           | "highlights", "perspectives", "historical background", and
           | "quick questions"). Perplexity only has content with sources
           | and "discover more". You can verify for yourself.
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.perplexity.ai/discover
           | 
           | [2]: https://www.reddit.com/r/rant/comments/e0a99k/cnn_app_is
           | _ann...
           | 
           | [3]: https://www.tumblr.com/make-me-
           | imagine/614701109842444288/an...
           | 
           | [4]: https://kite.kagi.com
        
         | coffeefirst wrote:
         | Yeah. I really like Kagi. This is a terrible idea.
         | 
         | 1. It seems to omit key facts from most stories.
         | 
         | 2. No economic value is returned to the sources doing the
         | original reporting. This is not okay.
         | 
         | 3. If your summary device makes a mistake, and it will, you are
         | absolutely on the hook for libel.
         | 
         | There seem to be some misunderstandings about what news is and
         | what's makes it well-executed. It's not the average, it's the
         | deepest and most accurate reporting. If anyone from the Kagi
         | team wants to discuss, I'm a paying member and I know this
         | field really, really well.
        
       | hendersoon wrote:
       | I would love to replace google/apple news, but publishing once
       | daily doesn't work for me.
        
         | lblume wrote:
         | Why not? Is it really that important for you to know of events
         | a few hours earlier?
        
         | hagbard_c wrote:
         | Nextcloud News works just fine, is free, is as biased as the
         | feeds you configure and no more, does not (yet...)
         | introduce/intrude LLM slop, is free software (beer/freedom) and
         | has been around for a long long time. You can configure it any
         | way you want, the default update interval is 5 minutes which
         | should be enough for even the most FOMO-affected 'news' junkie.
         | Of course the actual updates depend on the RSS sources but if
         | you configure a number of active feeds you'll get updates every
         | few minutes.
         | 
         | https://github.com/nextcloud/news
        
       | hootguy wrote:
       | Ground offers a paid service that summarizes a broad range of
       | sources and intentionally helps you escape your filter bubble,
       | https://ground.news/.
        
         | xetera wrote:
         | I'm just waiting for whatever shady practice or controversy
         | behind this infinite YouTube sponsorship is to finally come out
         | like all the others have.
        
       | smlacy wrote:
       | This looks awesome, but there's absolutely no way I'm installing
       | an app for this, sorry.
        
         | treetalker wrote:
         | So don't! kite.kagi.com.
        
       | mac-attack wrote:
       | Big news junkie but I don't feel the need to buy into Kagi's
       | ecosphere personally as a SearXNG user. The article touches on
       | signal over noise and I have found two solutions that work for me
       | as a news junkie:
       | 
       | News Minimalist [1] and Boring Report [2]. Both aggregate news
       | and (IMO) most importantly provide links from multiple outlets
       | for the same stories. Really made me notice the clickbait and
       | allows me to be more selective in choosing reputable sources.
       | 
       | Both use AI, with the former ranking news based on importance,
       | while the latter summarizes articles. (That doesn't feel useful
       | for supporting journalism as a whole so I typically click through
       | and read the articles unless I don't like the outlet reporting)
       | 
       | [1] https://www.newsminimalist.com/
       | 
       | [2] https://www.boringreport.org/app
        
         | leakycap wrote:
         | News Minimalist with the cute turtle header has become my daily
         | "newspaper"
         | 
         | > _Both use AI, with the former ranking news based on
         | importance_
         | 
         | I like this! If I'm in a rush, I check for very high priority
         | stories. Usually there are 3 or even none. Done!
         | 
         | On days I want to sit back and read, it provides nice sources.
        
       | not--felix wrote:
       | I'm biased because I build my own RSS reader[0] and I feel that
       | with this approach the thing I love the most about RSS, to follow
       | small niche sources gets lost. That said, I think for big news it
       | could be great.
       | 
       | [0] https://ivyreader.com
        
       | clcaev wrote:
       | What is the business model / exit strategy for Kagi's founders
       | and investors? What is the news curation process and its relation
       | to the public interest?
       | 
       | Are these articulated in a manner which gives stakeholders
       | (investors, users, and staff) assurances and standing?
       | 
       | ...
       | 
       | What are competitors and collaborators in this space? Semafor
       | seems to have a similar product, what are the differentiators
       | and/or collaboration opportunities?
       | 
       | ...
       | 
       | Netflix was subscription only, till it was "pay to get rid of
       | ads". Then there is the whole business of profiling customer
       | interest, etc.
       | 
       | We have product labeling for food, why not web services?
        
         | cogman10 wrote:
         | And just like Netflix, if kagi turns into paid Google I'll
         | cancel my subscription.
         | 
         | IDK what their future plans are, but there current plans work
         | well for me as a consumer.
        
         | hereme888 wrote:
         | Read the "About" section of the page.
        
       | guilamu wrote:
       | Looks pretty good at first sight.
       | 
       | However, I set my feed up on the web app, seeing that it should
       | sync on "all my devices".
       | 
       | Next, I installed the Android app, and mybe I missed something,
       | but I don't see any way to connect to my Kagi account.
       | 
       | So much for syncing...
        
         | dani_kagi wrote:
         | Thanks for the feedback, it's on our list.
        
       | e40 wrote:
       | I'm not affiliated, but I've used https://www.memeorandum.com/
       | for more than a decade.
       | 
       | Gives me a good high-level view of the news. I'm a Kagi customer
       | and I definitely don't want anything they do with the news.
        
         | bdunks wrote:
         | > I'm a Kagi customer and I definitely don't want anything they
         | do with the news.
         | 
         | Can you expand on why?
        
           | corysama wrote:
           | Can anyone in here explain why there are so many vague "I
           | don't trust Kagi" comments in here? I don't know who they
           | are. And, I haven't seen anyone expand on why.
        
         | tolerance wrote:
         | This is it. This the one. How have I never heard of this and
         | its related services? It looks perfect. Your own blog is
         | interesting too.
        
         | rsingel wrote:
         | Gabe Rivera has been doing that right for almost 20 years.
         | 
         | If you haven't seen it there's also an amazing feature that you
         | can go back and see the homepage as it was from any point in
         | time in the last 20 years
        
       | joshstrange wrote:
       | I wish there was a way to look at a previous day's news. I can't
       | seem to find any buttons/UI that lets you look at news from any
       | day but today.
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | That's a good idea. If they implement it, I would however
         | suggest putting a limit on to it - perhaps only let you see the
         | news within the last week/month.
        
         | luxurytent wrote:
         | This seems to go against the principle of the product (see
         | endless scroll)
         | 
         | If you missed a day of news, whatever was really important will
         | re-surface in today's news (major world incident)
         | 
         | Otherwise, perhaps what was missed is noise!
        
         | khaleel-kagi wrote:
         | We've Time Travel feature coming soon to both the web and
         | mobile apps. It'll allow you to browse the stories from any
         | date since we started aggregating news ;)
        
       | andhuman wrote:
       | Nice idea, I've been toying around the idea of consuming news
       | only once per day. But for me I think I want an actual newspaper
       | with in depth articles rather than short news posts from online
       | news.
        
       | imiric wrote:
       | I've been using this since the beta launch, and I really like it.
       | They're spot on about news being broken.
       | 
       | That said, I do think the service could be improved. Often the
       | summary is a very short blurb that forces me to go to one of the
       | original sites for the content, and hopefully land on one that is
       | not obnoxious to use, which kind of defeats the purpose. The
       | event timeline sounds interesting, but when it essentially shows
       | 2 or 3 events that are obvious from the context, it's not so
       | useful in practice. I always skip the "Quick questions" section,
       | since it reads like an elementary school report, and the
       | questions are really basic. How about letting me ask the
       | questions I want?
       | 
       | Also:
       | 
       | > We don't scrape content from websites. Instead, we use publicly
       | available RSS feeds that publishers choose to provide.
       | 
       | I think this is a mistake. Most publishers are hostile to RSS and
       | often don't offer it. Scraping is, unfortunately, a requirement
       | if you want to consume public content on your own terms, which is
       | the entire point of this service. Besides, scraping is how all
       | search engines generate their index, so as long as the bot is
       | well behaved and doesn't hammer the site, follows robots.txt or
       | perhaps even bends the rules a bit, it should be fine. I would
       | rather Kagi wasn't so respectful of publishers' wishes, if that
       | would allow them to offer a better service. I understand if they
       | want to avoid getting in trouble with publishers, but the
       | alternative would be better for their users.
        
       | rfarley04 wrote:
       | lol I added 'trump', 'republican', and 'democrat' as custom
       | filter keywords and now it's showing zero stories in the USA
       | category. So apparently, that category is a stand in for
       | politics? Although I have the Thai category enabled (since I live
       | there) and that's all run of the mill national (non political)
       | news.
       | 
       | Nice release nonetheless!
        
         | insane_dreamer wrote:
         | It's probably hard to find an article these days that doesn't
         | mention one of those words (except maybe celebrity gossip). The
         | world we live in.
        
           | BeetleB wrote:
           | In other words, this is exposing a long standing flaw in
           | journalism. I know things are super polarized now, but even
           | 20 years ago, when mentioning a Congressperson regarding a
           | particular social problem, they would specify if he was a
           | Democrat/Republican.
           | 
           | I really don't need to know which party he is part of. If the
           | article was about a party's stance, it makes sense - but the
           | article is about one politician.
        
             | 1_1xdev1 wrote:
             | Sure you do, to understand actual patterns in actions of
             | members of the party.
             | 
             | And ignoring that, it's general context. Part of the job of
             | a journalist.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | > to understand actual patterns in actions of members of
               | the party.
               | 
               | Or to construct patterns that don't reflect reality.
               | 
               | Should we also list their ages, ethnicity, religious
               | affiliation(s) in each article mentioning a
               | Congressperson and construct those patterns as well?
               | 
               | Sorry, I'd like to think on my own.
        
       | boxed wrote:
       | I think a fundamental issue with news is that it doesn't try to
       | push people to have a more correct mental model of the world.
       | 
       | Some things that could change that:
       | 
       | - Deep fact checking. Community Notes on twitter do a better job
       | at this than any other system I've seen. The reason it doesn't
       | really work in practice is that the stream of misinformation and
       | confusion is orders of magnitude larger than the Community Notes
       | community. A news app should not have that scalability issue.
       | 
       | - Follow up. If I read something that later turns out to be false
       | _I need to be notified of that_. This unfortunately requires that
       | the app track what I have read.
       | 
       | - Context. If you have a news article about a stabbing, it sounds
       | like stabbings are up. The context that they are going up or down
       | statistically is extremely relevant. The lack of context can turn
       | a tiny truth into a bigger lie.
       | 
       | - Deep confusion analysis. Figuring out where people are confused
       | statistically and focusing on trying to manage that
       | misinformation gap is not something that is dealt with at all. I
       | would like to become LESS confused by information sources not
       | more.
        
         | lyu07282 wrote:
         | That's just media literacy I think. I would add to that
         | "Sourcing": if the article just parrots some press release or
         | badly summarizes some paper, it should at least link to that
         | but they rarely do. Then it is hard to find the primary source,
         | because you'll only find articles about it, not the actual
         | primary source that they bury in google search.
        
       | self_awareness wrote:
       | Feels good to be free from Google, even if it costs money.
        
       | Sweepi wrote:
       | "Indonesia school collapse leaves 38 missing, 77 hurt" is
       | categorized as "Disaster". I cannot see where to disable this
       | category.
        
       | TanishqSingla wrote:
       | The UI looks neat, can't wait to try this out
        
       | sciencejerk wrote:
       | Haters gonna hate, but I just downloaded Kagi News and LOVE it. I
       | want to QUICKLY see all the news headlines and drill deeper in as
       | needed, and Kagi News seems to do exactly this.
        
       | embit wrote:
       | Another one you can check out is one I have made for myself and
       | used by friends [1], although only tech news. It also uses more
       | than 100 RSS feeds to aggregate the top 10 news every few hours.
       | Also has tags that can be used to read topic related news.
       | 
       | [1] https://embit.ca
        
       | acd wrote:
       | Any payments to journalists and news sites?
        
         | sidrag22 wrote:
         | As much as i hate modern news sites and our ad riddled culture,
         | its pretty hard to ignore that this tool couldn't exist without
         | the articles that those same news sites are creating. 100 years
         | ago, imagine a service that just took all newspapers and
         | summarized them like this somehow, and everyone knew they had
         | no actual writers but just an advanced printer that could merge
         | articles or some goofy w/e.
         | 
         | can't imagine it would go over well in the court system.
        
       | d--b wrote:
       | or you could read the new york times
        
       | kylehotchkiss wrote:
       | I really like the balance here. No "brand names" in the headline
       | summaries, no imagery or videos on the homepage, summarize
       | multiple sources. It's daily so no need to refresh.
       | 
       | I've been really enjoying Semafor's emails too, but their 2x a
       | day is tough for me to keep up with. I'll try to get a habit of
       | looking at Kagi News to stay informed.
        
       | patrakov wrote:
       | Feedback (if someone reads it): offer an option to translate
       | everything to English. For example, news from/about Russia are in
       | Russian, and thus I can't meaningfully share them to non-
       | Russians.
       | 
       | That's despite the appropriate HTTP header:
       | 
       | Accept-Language: en-US,en;q=0.5
        
         | khaleel-kagi wrote:
         | Hey, thanks patrakov for trying the app! Users can actually
         | change the content language of the app from Settings. All
         | stories will be automatically translated to their preferred
         | language.
         | 
         | When you share a Russian story with a non-russian speaker, they
         | will still be able to read the story in their own set Content
         | Language in the Settings. We're working on improving the UX of
         | language, sharing a story, and more.
        
       | jwitchel wrote:
       | I've been using Kagi search for a while now and frankly it's
       | fantastic. Google looks like AOL to me now.
       | 
       | These guys are doing great work and this news product is exactly
       | what I want... Once a day hit. What is happening in the world? As
       | far as pmf goes they hit the mark for an old fart like me.
        
       | lyu07282 wrote:
       | I never found the lowest most common denominator news "curation"
       | to be at all interesting, let alone algorithmically driven ones.
       | The issue with news has nothing to do with curation of mainstream
       | media. There is very little value in reading a state department
       | or law enforcement press release summarized by some overworked
       | stenographer/journalist. Or some NGO's push to drive some
       | nondescript narrative uncritically parroted. Or some SEO driven
       | click bait or tragedy porn.
       | 
       | If you wanted to fix the news you'd begin by critically curating
       | mainstream news and throwing 80% of it in the trash, then you'd
       | add 80% of material and critical analysis back to the 20% that
       | had none of that.
        
       | tantalor wrote:
       | The grounding is really strange.
       | 
       | This example includes a Reddit post as a source:
       | 
       | https://kite.kagi.com/s/hjgy55
       | 
       | But that post is actually a link to reuters.com
       | 
       | There is also a list of "citations" which are referenced from the
       | generated text, and "sources" which are not referenced anywhere.
       | It's not clear if they used reddit or reuters to generate any of
       | the text.
       | 
       | I also see lots of citations to "common knowledge"... which is
       | um, weird.
       | 
       | For example:
       | 
       | > National Guard activation: Guard forces can serve under state
       | control (Title 32) or be federalized (Title 10), which determines
       | who directs missions and the scope of authority [*].
       | 
       | Is this common knowledge?
        
         | giorgio-kagi wrote:
         | Hey - Reddit is included as a source because posts can contain
         | firsthand accounts and independent analysis. The RSS feed we
         | use from Reddit provides the post title and text. So to answer
         | your question, when you see Reddit as a source we are using the
         | aforementioned data, not what it links to.
         | 
         | About "common knowledge" sources - we validate all content for
         | accuracy. When the LLM needs to add context that's missing from
         | sources (e.g. historical background), we mark these as "common
         | knowledge" since this generated content can't be validated
         | against the original sources. You're right that your example
         | isn't common knowledge at all, we'll work on adding actual
         | sources for these claims too.
         | 
         | Thanks for trying it out!
        
           | tantalor wrote:
           | If the content can't be grounded then it should be dropped.
        
       | drewbitt wrote:
       | I'm probably online too much, but a lot of the news I see is from
       | yesterday. Supposedly it just refreshed with today's news, but
       | does that really clear out anything older if some outlets publish
       | their stories later than others? I would not describe some of
       | this as "today's headlines"
        
         | eterm wrote:
         | You might be online too much if you don't consider something
         | that happened yesterday to be news.
         | 
         | An attitude of "Hook me up to the novelty juice, this is old
         | weak sauce", is a sign of internet / news addiction.
        
           | drewbitt wrote:
           | I don't _need_ the latest news. I would just like to know if
           | something published happened yesterday or today at a glance.
        
       | unshavedyak wrote:
       | I like this a lot, going to try it! One issue i have though is in
       | the current world of LLMs scraping content, i'd prefer there to
       | be more discussion about compensation of authors.
       | 
       | I know the announcement page talks about not scraping, but to me
       | personally the value i see in this product is that i don't have
       | to go to those ad ridden, poorly organized and often terrible
       | pages of the authors. Which then seems really unfair to the
       | actual content providers.
       | 
       | I'd like to see this type of service cost $3-5/m ontop of my
       | normal Kagi sub to compensate the authors of the articles i read.
       | A Streaming Music model for news, ish.
       | 
       | This proposed value is quite small, but my assumption is only a
       | very small amount of money would reach them from my ad views
       | anyway so a $10/m addition feels extreme to me.
        
       | flyer23 wrote:
       | I AM using it for a long time, its brilliant but as any ai can
       | hallucinate. Joining 4 separate technical topics about 4
       | different companies and initiatives is funny but misleading. Wont
       | go back though - HN+Kite is all I do.
        
       | clueless wrote:
       | Looks like a decentralize and locally hosted version of
       | https://particle.news
        
         | HelloUsername wrote:
         | My thoughts too! Strange that got much less traction when the
         | app was posted half a year ago
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43698590
        
       | lagrange77 wrote:
       | Awesome, i like it a lot!
       | 
       | Some UX friction i noticed: To get back to the homepage from an
       | article, i have to click on the article headline. While this is
       | elegant and you likely get used to it, once you know it, it's not
       | exactly intuitive.
        
       | skybrian wrote:
       | Do the checkmarks do anything? I expected them to disappear after
       | a reload (like hiding a post on Hacker News), but apparently
       | that's not what they're for.
       | 
       | "Mark as read" checks all the checkmarks, but since they're still
       | there after a reload, I don't see the point.
        
         | 0xffff2 wrote:
         | The really weird thing to me is that the check marks don't
         | persist across categories. I.e. I marked the story about
         | Youtube as "read" in the "World" tab, but it doesn't get a
         | check in the "USA" tab. Seems like the feature is pretty half
         | baked.
        
         | 4dm1r4lg3n3r4l wrote:
         | It automatically marks stuff you've seen - it's just a visual
         | cue. Similar to how search engines (like Google) show visited
         | links with a different color.
         | 
         | I think keeping them on the page instead of automatically
         | hiding them makes more sense for a product that's trying to
         | update their news feed once per day. You feel more in control,
         | as if it's not a stream of never-ending stories, but rather a
         | fixed amount of stories that you can realistically power
         | through. Seeing all items checked sort-of supports this
         | philosophy.
        
           | skybrian wrote:
           | For me, this is fairly useless because it mostly displays
           | stories I've already seen elsewhere.
           | 
           | A news site has to display some uncommon stories to have any
           | appeal.
        
       | ramesh31 wrote:
       | >News is broken. We all know it, but we've somehow accepted it as
       | inevitable.
       | 
       | News is broken because journalism is no longer a viable career
       | path. No amount of RSS aggregators will fix that.
        
       | aleatorianator wrote:
       | that "Kagi News" is at the top of "Hacker News" speaks volumes
       | about the state of the "hacker"
        
         | JohnFen wrote:
         | HN has never really been for or about hackers.
        
       | tower-shield wrote:
       | I like Kagi and want them to succeed. But currently (according to
       | LinkedIn) theres 26 employees. They are building search, LLM
       | assistant wrappers, a browser and now news. Please don't
       | overextend the same way Proton is currently doing.
        
         | hn111 wrote:
         | I used to love Proton, but they focus too much on feature
         | development instead of stability and fixing long-standing bugs.
         | E.g. zooming has been broken for years in ProtonMail on iOS.
         | Some emails won't even render at all :(
        
           | thoughtpalette wrote:
           | FWIW, I have not had any issues with email rendering in the
           | iOS app so YMMV. Have not noticed any zooming problems.
        
           | DavideNL wrote:
           | Yup, i quit Proton (Mail) for the same reason. I had been
           | using it for a long time... There are so many little bugs and
           | annoyances, it's frustrating to see new features being
           | released all the time while obvious bugs and shortcomings are
           | not fixed.
           | 
           | It was a very big relief going back to a normal email client.
           | 
           | I still support Proton (i pay for Proton VPN) and hope they
           | will succeed in their mission.
        
         | bl4ckneon wrote:
         | How is Proton over extending? All of their services are pretty
         | great imo. I'm happy with them. Doesn't mean I am ever going to
         | use their bitcoin wallet app thing, but if they want to build
         | it, great, they know their customer base so it's probably not
         | out of left field.
        
       | boxerab wrote:
       | When I filter on Kirk, I get No Results Found - seems legit.
        
         | hexator wrote:
         | If you read the post, you would learn that it only reports on
         | news from the same day.
        
       | the_real_cher wrote:
       | Trump just said we should use the military on American
       | cities...and it's not reported in Kagi news. That's a showstopper
       | for me.
        
         | cyberpunk wrote:
         | When? It's updated once daily and afaik he's been doing that
         | for months hasn't he?
        
       | ctrlp wrote:
       | There is almost no good reason to keep up with current events in
       | a "news feed" style. I'd maybe like a feed that has a 1 month
       | window summarizing any news cycle that survived 3 days. If it
       | came and went in one cycle, then just don't bother about it. Most
       | of the news is just propaganda anyway. I suppose it's wise to
       | have a sense of the "current thing" so you don't put your foot in
       | it with colleagues who are inhabiting a tighter timeline than you
       | are, but other than that there doesn't seem to be many use cases
       | for keeping tabs in a news feed. Maybe if you're in the business
       | of disrupting/reinforcing people's OODA loops you might need to
       | know some of this stuff, but otherwise it's just a self-own to
       | keep up with the news.
        
       | mr_machine wrote:
       | I'd like to install and try this, but I don't use Google Play and
       | it's not in F-Droid. Wish they'd just make an APK available.
        
         | xnacly wrote:
         | Same here, the website seems to be working fine on mobile tho
        
         | dani_kagi wrote:
         | Thanks for the feedback, we are looking into providing the app
         | without any Play services dependencies.
        
       | tuckwat wrote:
       | It actually seems nice. I realize Reddit is not a news source but
       | it used to be a great way to see current events and get level-
       | headed takes on those events. This approach could be a better
       | non-biased* alternative.
       | 
       | * for now
        
       | BatteryMountain wrote:
       | Between this app (kagi) and the Harmony hacknernews client, I'm
       | super happy if this is my only content consumption on the
       | internet/smartphone. The kagi app just needs a black/oled theme
       | please, and can we bump the aricles from 12 to 20 or 30? 12 is
       | just a tiny bit shy.
        
       | liquid_thyme wrote:
       | Is the future where we pay a premium for human generated content?
        
       | kubafu wrote:
       | This but let me choose over what period I want news summarised.
       | Daily is too often, even week is (at least to me).
       | 
       | Let me open the app once a month and see a summary of what has
       | happened over it.
        
         | timeinput wrote:
         | This defiantly doesn't do exactly what you want, but you might
         | enjoy Delayed Gratification at https://www.slow-journalism.com/
        
       | al_borland wrote:
       | I've been using this for a few days now. I stumbled across it in
       | the App Store last week.
       | 
       | I hoping this can fill a gap for me currently. I want something
       | that will give me broad awareness of big news I should probably
       | know about, that's not a 24 hour firehose of news.
       | 
       | I like the once-per-day update and the relatively short list of
       | stories. The jury is still out on how sticky it will be, in terms
       | of being my go-to place for a daily update.
        
         | dingaling wrote:
         | The Economist's 'World in Brief' might appeal:
         | 
         | https://www.economist.com/the-world-in-brief
        
       | fresh_broccoli wrote:
       | I think this is the wrong direction. We need better journalism,
       | not better summarizing aggregators.
       | 
       | Summaries are no substitute for real articles, even if they're
       | generated by hand (and these apparently are not). Summaries are
       | bound to strip the information of context, important details and
       | analysis. There's also no accountability for the contents.
       | 
       | Sure, there are links to the actual articles, but let's not kid
       | ourselves that most people are going to read them. Why would they
       | need a summarizing service otherwise? Especially if there are 20
       | sources of varying quality.
       | 
       | There are no "lifehacks" to getting informed. I'll be harsh: this
       | service strikes me as informationally illiterate person's idea of
       | what getting informed is like.
        
         | fresh_broccoli wrote:
         | Also, they talk about "echo chambers" and "full spectrum of
         | global perspectives". Representing all perspectives sounds
         | great in theory, but how far should it go?
         | 
         | Should all politicians' remarks be reproduced verbatim with
         | absolutely no commentary, no fact-checking and no context?
         | Should an article about an airplane crossing the Pacific
         | include "some experts believe that this is impossible because
         | Earth is flat?"
         | 
         | Excessive bias in media is definitely a problem, but I don't
         | think that completely unbiased media can exist while still
         | being useful. In my expierence, people looking for it either
         | haven't thought about it deeply enough, or they just want
         | information that doesn't make their side look bad.
        
           | carlosjobim wrote:
           | > Should all politicians' remarks be reproduced verbatim with
           | absolutely no commentary, no fact-checking and no context?
           | 
           | Yes. That's an interview, and is much better than
           | summarizations and short soundbites and one-sentence quotes.
        
             | mac-attack wrote:
             | This presupposes that you have an informed population that
             | already knows the facts and context
        
           | UberFly wrote:
           | > Representing all perspectives sounds great in theory
           | 
           | A bigger bias problem by far is bias by omission, so
           | including all stories whether they meet the presenter's
           | political agenda or not would be a great start.
        
             | hatthew wrote:
             | Who decides whether or not a given perspective is in the
             | overton window?
        
         | imiric wrote:
         | > We need better journalism, not better summarizing
         | aggregators.
         | 
         | I agree, but how do you envision that happening? Journalism
         | died a long time ago, arguably around the birth of the 24-hour
         | news cycle, and it was further buried by social media. A niche
         | tech company can only provide a better way to consume what's
         | out there, not solve such large societal problems.
         | 
         | > There are no "lifehacks" to getting informed.
         | 
         | I don't think their intent is to change how people are
         | informed. What this aims to do is replace endless doomscrolling
         | on sites that are incentivized to rob us of our attention and
         | data, with spending a few minutes a day to get a sense of
         | general events around the world. If something piques your
         | interest, you can visit the linked sources, or research the
         | event elsewhere. But as a way of getting a quick general
         | overview of what's going on, I think it's great.
        
           | danielskogly wrote:
           | We're seeing success with giving journalists better tools to
           | create engaging journalism (which HN hates :). Many outlets
           | are now seeing that they have to once more prove their value,
           | and there exists some really great subscription-only media
           | here in the Nordics and France.
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | That's precisely what Axios does, and they make money from this
         | (and they don't list their sources). So I can see Kagi pursuing
         | this.
         | 
         | FWIW, I agree with you.
         | 
         | I used to be a news junkie. I've always thought of writing the
         | lessons I learned, but one of them was "If you're a casual news
         | reader, you are likely more misinformed than the one who
         | doesn't read any news." One either should abstain or go all in.
         | 
         | I guess I'd amend it to put people who only glance at headlines
         | to be even more misinformed. It was not at all unusual for me
         | to read articles where the content just plain disagreed with
         | the headline!
        
       | numbers wrote:
       | I really like the once-a-day updates, makes it so that I can drop
       | in and check on the news but not constantly refreshing for
       | updates.
        
       | numbsafari wrote:
       | This is awesome. Only thing that is missing is a place for me to
       | ask a question from Kagi Assistant about the current story I am
       | looking at, using the story as part of the context of my
       | question.
        
       | jscd wrote:
       | This is honestly very disappointing. Not using LLMs, but the
       | complete lack of transparency about their usage. You can already
       | see in the repository issues related to hallucinations[^1]. This
       | is _fine_, but not if you seem to obscure the fact that these can
       | be very, very wrong. This seems to only be mentioned in the very
       | brief loading screen and at the bottom of the about page[^2].
       | Also, apparently many of the "core RSS feeds" are just...
       | reddit[^3]???
       | 
       | For me, this is only useful as a curated list of news feeds (and
       | subreddits I guess), but nothing more.
       | 
       | [1]: https://github.com/kagisearch/kite-
       | public/issues/97#issuecom...
       | 
       | [2]: https://kite.kagi.com/about
       | 
       | [3]: https://github.com/kagisearch/kite-
       | public/blob/main/core_fee...
        
       | zkmon wrote:
       | There is a more fundamental problem here. The news feeds are
       | going in this direction for a reason. I don't think you addressed
       | that reason.
       | 
       | You have defined the desirable news as "pure, essential
       | information". What's that again? How do you know what's pure and
       | essential info for any user? The traditional news media had
       | started there, with that pure news, and ended up here where they
       | are today.
       | 
       | Ultimately, you will realize that your content need to grab
       | attention enough so that people consume your feed. People's
       | attention goes to where things look weird, exciting, sensational,
       | emotional, trivia, gossip etc. You can't do away with all that
       | and just dish out the pure and essential info. It didn't work.
       | People tried it.
        
       | artursapek wrote:
       | This rocks. I'm gonna start looking at it instead of NYTimes.
        
       | thm wrote:
       | If you don't need/like links there is https://rawdiary.com/
        
       | wewtyflakes wrote:
       | I'm just happy to be able to entirely remove topics like sports.
       | Google News no longer lets you do this, and gleefully pushes
       | topics on me even when I religiously press "Show fewer stories
       | like this"; it is infuriating. No I do not care about celebrities
       | or football; stop insisting that I do!
        
       | cgriswald wrote:
       | Given that this news is generated I have no idea why the default
       | would be to be in the native language of the sources. And if that
       | makes any sense I would need to be able to select multiple
       | languages I want to read in because I can't read _all_ languages.
        
       | systemstops wrote:
       | Something similar that collects news from various sources, plus
       | it adds social media context: https://truenorthnews.app/
        
       | hshshshshsh wrote:
       | How did this get so many upvotes? Did I wake up in 2004?
        
       | rsingel wrote:
       | Looks like yet another aggregator that will send almost no
       | referral traffic to the folks who actually put labor into
       | writing.
       | 
       | Parasitic by definition.
       | 
       | And embracing the news from nowhere perspective.
       | 
       | So both a parasite and boring at the same time.
       | 
       | I wish more tech folks who want to "fix the news" would learn
       | from Gabe Rivera's Techmeme, Memeorandum, and Mediagazer.
       | 
       | He's done aggregation right for 20 years
        
         | graynk wrote:
         | It uses RSS from the folks who actually put labor into writing
         | and links to the sources under every article.
        
         | notsydonia wrote:
         | Exactly. I also wonder what the end game is. If creating
         | content becomes a loss-making exercise, people will logically
         | stop and the LLMs will have less and less to content to 'train
         | on.' And as even large news corps are increasingly deploying
         | internal LLMs, the deadening banal style of LLMs, A.I. over-
         | view etc will inevitably drive readers away. I use Perplexity
         | for search in place of Google and it surfaces good links most
         | of the time. But what do tech and media companies - even
         | spotify - think they will do when the artists, reporters and
         | creatives stop feeding them? Or readers don't want to read
         | banal summaries of everything?
        
       | maelito wrote:
       | It's funny how awkward the French version is.
       | 
       | - Parquet de Paris ouvre 24 enquetes pour menaces
       | 
       | - Update: famille et experte ADN au proces Jubillar
       | 
       | - Intersyndicale appelle a la greve du 2 octobre
       | 
       | This won't be used by French speakers as is.
        
       | msqinfo wrote:
       | Just plugging my service, https://mosaique.info/. It only uses an
       | LLM to generate a short summary, and other ML algorithms
       | structure the information (comments from officials and experts,
       | classification...).
       | 
       | I'm currently working on a major overhaul to provide more
       | holistic context around news by better surfacing less-discussed
       | events.
        
       | ElijahLynn wrote:
       | love love love how it doesn't infinite scroll!!!
        
       | jrowen wrote:
       | This doesn't really seem to touch on the problem I have with
       | news, which is that it is all doom and gloom, FUD and outrage.
       | The headlines I saw:
       | 
       | Trump, Congress deadlock as shutdown deadline nears
       | 
       | Taliban cuts internet nationwide, flights grounded in Afghanistan
       | 
       | Indonesia school collapse leaves 38 missing, 77 hurt
       | 
       | YouTube settles Trump suspension lawsuit for $24.5m
       | 
       | German court jails AfD aide for China spying
       | 
       | US deports 120 Iranians after deal
       | 
       | Russian drone strike kills family of four
       | 
       | Is this really what I need to know in the world? Am I saying
       | "informed"? This is not helping the anxiety from reading news
       | described in the article. This is not good for people.
        
       | kevcampb wrote:
       | > This is pulling the content of the RSS feeds of several news
       | sites into the context window of an LLM and then asking it to
       | summarize news items into articles and fill in the blanks?
       | 
       | This is awful. It's cutting out any money going to the news
       | agencies that go out there and write news. If they didn't exist,
       | Kagi wouldn't work.
        
         | 4dm1r4lg3n3r4l wrote:
         | > This is awful. It's cutting out any money going to the news
         | agencies that go out there and write news. If they didn't
         | exist, Kagi wouldn't work.
         | 
         | Why would Kagi stop working if news didn't exist? Kagi is a
         | search engine first and foremost, Kagi News is not a money
         | making product of theirs. Kagi would still be making money with
         | their search engine.
         | 
         | Also, this should entice news writers to write better news. The
         | main reason people use products such as this is that they are
         | sick and tired of going to news sites only to have to power
         | through filler material to get the 10% that actually matters...
        
         | Spivak wrote:
         | This is true in a big picture sense but that's not the concern
         | of someone who's making a tool meant to be useful to users. The
         | consequences of this existing will be what they will be.
        
       | hughes wrote:
       | I don't understand how this is 100% free, no subscriptions, no
       | purchase, apparently no ads or tracking and yet I'm also the
       | "customer" and not the product. What's the catch?
        
         | luxurytent wrote:
         | It seems fairly low effort (from a cost perspective) to deploy
         | and maintain this feature, so I think it's a great way to get
         | the Kagi name out there, which may perhaps lead to a few new
         | users!
         | 
         | Sort of like a loss leader, eg the Costco hot dog :-)
        
       | kkukshtel wrote:
       | One of the best news sites (still running) that I use frequently
       | is http://68k.news/ - it's sort of like this minus the AI summary
       | and info part of the article.
       | 
       | It's just plain text web 1.0 page that uses some ranking algo to
       | figure out the top stores of a given day across categories, and
       | shows that headline and under it similar headlines across
       | different news sources.
       | 
       | It used to pull in RSS from the sources so you could also read
       | the articles in plaintext, but that broke a bit ago and the dev
       | hasn't fixed it.
       | 
       | Regardless, I still find it a great site to quickly get up to
       | speed on top stories of the day!
       | 
       | But also I really like (and pay for!) Kagi so happily support
       | their own effort here.
        
       | durakot wrote:
       | It's good. And always happy to see SvelteKit in action.
        
       | matcha-video wrote:
       | Similar to ground.news or thenewpaper.co ?
        
       | alphazard wrote:
       | What everyone gets wrong about news curation is thinking people
       | want the same news as everyone else, or "both sides" of a
       | situation, or whatever mechanism for exposing them to things that
       | someone else thinks are true.
       | 
       | What I actually want is a curated set of things that are _useful
       | to me_ personally _given my situation_. The most important things
       | about my situation to give me useful news are things like: net
       | worth, income, citizenship, family situation, where I live, what
       | industries I work in, current investments, travel destinations,
       | regulatory and political risks associated with any of those
       | things, etc.
       | 
       | Because those are the things that dictate how the parts of the
       | world I can't control are going to affect me (especially if I
       | don't react). I don't want to hear about random things that
       | aren't going to affect me when I'm looking at the news. Sometimes
       | I want to learn new random/useless things for fun, but that's a
       | leisure activity. It's totally separate from the "news", which is
       | a thing that adults consume as a chore to better plan their
       | lives.
       | 
       | The fundamental problem is that myself and others are not going
       | to willing give out the personal information required to curate
       | useful news feeds, so the news will always be filled with noise.
       | Maybe local AI can help with that.
        
         | pants2 wrote:
         | ChatGPT Pulse has actually done a great job at this for me. It
         | knows about an upcoming vacation I have planned and gave me
         | some specific news about closures and events there, with
         | recommendations on what activities to book in advance.
        
       | alexfromapex wrote:
       | Don't want to sound too contrarian, but I feel like having LLMs
       | involved with the process of disseminating news is a bit
       | dystopian.
        
       | benrapscallion wrote:
       | Link to iOS App: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/kagi-
       | news/id6748314243
        
       | TiredOfLife wrote:
       | Another russian disinfo laundering service.
        
         | lostlogin wrote:
         | This aspect matters and there is little comment here on this
         | (other threads on Kagi have raised it).
         | 
         | Kagi's 'neutral' stance on politics, their association with
         | Yandex/the Russian state mean this will be interesting to
         | watch.
         | 
         | It's by far the best search I've ever used.
         | 
         | https://old.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1gvcqua/psa_the_ka...
        
       | amarant wrote:
       | I really like this!
       | 
       | I do wish I could have better control of what languages I'm
       | getting. Right now the option is to either translate everything
       | or nothing. I'd prefer news in their original, untranslated form
       | if it's one of the 4 languages I speak, otherwise translate them
       | to English.
       | 
       | I added the category "Israel" and everything was in Hebrew, so I
       | had to set my language to English, but now news in my native
       | Swedish are translated to English and I have to kind of translate
       | it back in my head as I read them.
       | 
       | It's not the end of the world, but it seems like fairly low-
       | hanging fruit!
        
         | maleldil wrote:
         | That's weird. I set the language to English, but the stories in
         | the Brazil category are still in Portuguese.
        
           | amarant wrote:
           | There are different settings for interface language and story
           | language. Might it be that your story language is "default"
           | (this appears to mean untranslated) and your interface
           | language is set to English?
        
       | guywithahat wrote:
       | One thing I found working on a startup which touched on the
       | political sphere is people don't want curated lists imposed on
       | them, they want to impose their curated lists on other people.
       | 
       | I like that it only provides the list once a day (I do think
       | that's a clever feature), but the inability to influence bias
       | seems like a mistake, especially since the sources already seem
       | to follow a bias.
        
       | carlosjobim wrote:
       | "Community-driven sources: Our news sources are open source and
       | community-curated through our public GitHub repository. Anyone
       | can propose additions, flag problems, or suggest improvements."
       | 
       | This sounds like it's going to be a massive headache. Activists
       | with nothing to do all day will be all over this, for their
       | chance to try to have influence over what other people read.
        
       | k2enemy wrote:
       | I like 1440 (https://join1440.com) for this. Once a day daily
       | email digest. I like the email format because I'm less likely to
       | start clicking around compared to a web site, and it doesn't
       | require a separate app.
       | 
       | I think it is human curated, but I'm not positive about that.
        
       | sam0x17 wrote:
       | one quick little usability thing, clicking the logo on the web
       | version doesn't bring me back to the main page
        
       | stared wrote:
       | Nice to see an approach to reduce doomscrolling (for myself, and
       | most of my bubble, the biggest addiction, impacting productivity,
       | mental health, and neck).
       | 
       | Yet, there is Hacker Newsletter (https://hackernewsletter.com/,
       | which I like and use), there are others pointed by GPT5 that I
       | don't Mailbrew and Digest. Kagi looks like the true former.
       | 
       | What I do want is personalization - not by picking interest, but
       | actual personality, prompt, tastes, good enough that it puts
       | something other, rather than only narrowing and narrowing my
       | view. Yet high quality, rather than clickbaits and other "fluff".
       | Otherwise, following a few Reddits would do the job (with some
       | API to send emails).
       | 
       | What I would like even more is something that actually turns my
       | social media into daily emails.
        
       | Vexowsky wrote:
       | I liked Kagi, was paying for it for a few months, but $10 is just
       | too much
        
         | 4dm1r4lg3n3r4l wrote:
         | I don't find it too much. For $10 I get a search engine better
         | than all the others, I get access to many AI models via Kagi
         | Assistant and Kagi Translate.
         | 
         | While I understand different people find value in different
         | things, dismissing Kagi generally as "too expensive" is
         | ignorant IMO.
         | 
         | I think it also depends what you use it for. I use both their
         | search and their AI models for software development and it
         | saves me precious time when looking for information - in a way
         | it pays for itself.
        
           | Vexowsky wrote:
           | I also used it for software engineering and personal use as
           | well.
           | 
           | I had two major issues with it:
           | 
           | - it wasn't as snappy as google, but I _kind of_ got used to
           | it
           | 
           | - I wasn't trusting it (if that makes sense) and was falling
           | back !g to make sure everything was searched
           | 
           | For $10, I expect to get a premium service, not a just good
           | enough one.
           | 
           | I have to admit that I liked the idea, feeling of privacy and
           | the ability to tailor a search engine for my needs.
           | 
           | Unfortunatelly I think that they are not where they need to
           | be for the $10 pricing plan.
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | I get by with the $5 plan. I don't use it at work, and it
         | shows. I often curse during work that I can't exclude certain
         | domains permanently from my Google search!
        
       | insane_dreamer wrote:
       | Every single news aggregation services promises the same "signal
       | over noise" and "just the facts". I'm so numb from hearing that,
       | that I don't believe it anymore.
       | 
       | I do however like the fact that Kagi only pushes _once_ a day.
       | Drinking from the firehose is physically and mentally exhausting.
       | Even daily feels like too much these days other than a quick
       | check to make sure the world didn't implode or the Rapture
       | happened while I was busy trying to get CC to behave.
        
       | digest wrote:
       | Thanks for providing RSS feeds for Kagi -- just added them all to
       | https://usedigest.com so users can use this as a drop-in
       | replacement for their news instead of adding various RSS feeds
       | from other news outlets.
        
       | guybedo wrote:
       | i'm doing something like this, summarizing HN posts because most
       | of the time when there's hundreds or thousands of comments, it's
       | not possible to read everything and i feel like i'm missing
       | something.
       | 
       | So far, i quite enjoy having a summary with bullet points.
       | 
       | For example, here's the summary of this discussion:
       | https://extraakt.com/extraakts/kagi-s-daily-news-ritual-spar...
        
       | ashivkum wrote:
       | Given that Orion (which I repeatedly attempt to daily drive due
       | to the dearth of browsers meeting my requirements right now on
       | macos) is still full of bugs that hamper usability, and seems to
       | introduce new ones with every update, I don't know why Kagi
       | insists on overextending itself like this. They just started
       | porting their broken browser to Linux, they're creating a maps
       | app, all while they clearly do not have the manpower to finish
       | the projects they've already started.
        
         | tiltowait wrote:
         | Which bugs do you encounter? Orion works nearly perfectly for
         | me.
        
           | ashivkum wrote:
           | A selection of recent ones:
           | 
           | - Site blocking with /etc/hosts doesn't work consistently
           | with Orion, it intermittently and inconsistently ignores
           | these rules. (this is sort of niche but it's bizarre for a
           | browser based on WebKit)
           | 
           | - The password manager is busted on certain websites that
           | have a third input box (so a captcha or 2FA code), where
           | it'll fill the password twice
           | 
           | - Kept randomly getting the error "Orion can't open this
           | page: This operation couldn't be completed. Cannot allocate
           | memory" with like 10 windows, ~30 tabs open. Haven't seen it
           | recently but like many Orion bugs it is intermittent and hard
           | to reproduce consistently.
           | 
           | - Switching between Chrome and Orion sometimes
           | (inconsistently) switches me to the last Orion window I had
           | open (often on a different Desktop) rather than the one I
           | clicked on.
           | 
           | - On networks where I can form WebRTC connections in Safari
           | and Chrome, I cannot in Orion.
           | 
           | - This was just fixed but until like yesterday, the highlight
           | color in their PDF viewer for ctrl F was a barely visible 10%
           | opacity highlight that was totally unusable.
           | 
           | - Various other intangible performance bugs that seem to pile
           | up when you haven't restarted in a day or two. It starts out
           | really snappy and tends to get slower the longer you've had
           | it open.
           | 
           | I should note that the pace of developement would be much
           | faster if they would open source the browser, but instead of
           | that they keep starting new, closed source projects that will
           | likely have the same fate. Their Linux Orion port is from
           | scratch, none of their macOS code is reusable.
        
             | GuinansEyebrows wrote:
             | > - Site blocking with /etc/hosts doesn't work consistently
             | with Orion, it intermittently and inconsistently ignores
             | these rules. (this is sort of niche but it's bizarre for a
             | browser based on WebKit)
             | 
             | oh i hate it when developers get cute with DNS. this
             | doesn't happen with Safari? i've also had issues with the
             | password manager (even after telling it i want to use
             | Passwords, it just... doesn't sometimes).
             | 
             | i've been in the same boat as you - i really want to
             | diversify the browser ecosystem, so i've been daily driving
             | orion for a bit, but their stance toward open source (which
             | you mentioned) is a big bummer.
        
               | ashivkum wrote:
               | hmm last time i tried it, Safari blocked the sites
               | correctly as did Chrome. just tried it again and Safari
               | let me through, so maybe that one's not on Orion.
        
       | iLoveOncall wrote:
       | If I was giving my money to Kagi I'd be mad that they invest it
       | in bullshit side products like this instead of search.
       | 
       | It seems like all their recent releases are just following into
       | the AI hype.
        
       | davelacy wrote:
       | Nice design. I like the "today in history" feature
       | 
       | Lately I've been working toward less app time and more boredom
       | https://youtu.be/orQKfIXMiA8?si=ZyvxO0SFjoGGHbdK -\\_(tsu)_/-
       | works wonders
        
       | richardanaya wrote:
       | I love Kagi!
        
       | sktrdie wrote:
       | Cool but how does it compare to something like subreddits? There
       | are still biased moderators behind the scene just like
       | subreddits. Seems to not have the upvoting/downvoting side of it
       | which imo is crucial to democratize the entire thing.
       | 
       | I think upvoting/downvoting is a crucial aspect to
       | news/information/knowledge. But we've been doing it with just
       | numbers all along. Why not experiment with weights or more
       | complex voting methods? Ex: my reputation is divided in
       | categories - I'm more an expert in history then politics hence my
       | vote towards historical subjects have more weights. Feels like
       | that's the next big step for news. Instead of just another
       | centralized aggregator?
       | 
       | No offense to the cool system and website though
        
       | larodi wrote:
       | I doubt anything comes close to Perplexity News at the moment,
       | its truly amazing.
        
       | kkfx wrote:
       | I'd like to pay Kagi if I can submit my feeds and the insights
       | from them, as I see from the portal now it's not that
       | interesting...
        
       | ta2112 wrote:
       | Am I the only one thinking that "Cagey News" sounds like anti-
       | marketing?
        
       | nvarsj wrote:
       | Because Google news was such a great idea. I'm enjoying Kagi but
       | this isn't it.
        
       | W0lfEagle wrote:
       | I really like this for practising a foreign language by switching
       | the content language. I do agree with other comments here though
       | that it will need greater control over which languages are
       | translated.
        
       | alexsmirnov wrote:
       | Funny coincidence. This morning, my news aggregator delivered its
       | daily results. The stack:                 Miniflux
       | (https://miniflux.app/) in Docker, fetching 75 RSS feeds I've
       | collected over the years            ~200 lines in a Jupyter
       | notebook:       - Fetch entries from Miniflux API (last 24-48
       | hours)       - Convert to CSV, feed to LLM. GPT-5 identifies
       | trending stories across sources       - Each article gets web-
       | fetched and summarized via Gemini-2.5-flash       - Results
       | render via IPython.display            Ten minutes per day, fully
       | informed.
        
         | BOOSTERHIDROGEN wrote:
         | Mind sharing that feeds and 200 line code? Thank you
        
       | ugoasidjg wrote:
       | Kagi, I'm willing to pay if you hire people to fact check the
       | generated articles. Or maybe have the community fact check and
       | visually distinguish checked sentences from unchecked sentences.
        
         | ed_mercer wrote:
         | Or just let an advanced model do extended research on each
         | article
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Nice, but navigation is awful. After reading a story, the back
       | button doesn't take you back to the table of contents.
       | 
       | (Edit) Now I see. You have to scroll through the story and click
       | "Close story" to get back. It's "mobile first".
        
       | 28304283409234 wrote:
       | As a paying customer of kagi (family account) it saddens me to
       | see my money spent this way.
        
         | kstrauser wrote:
         | As a paying customer of Kagi (family account), I'm delighted to
         | see them spend my money in a way that seems utterly compatible
         | with their history of making the web pleasant to use again.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-09-30 23:00 UTC)