[kelnos]

> Kagi doesn't strike me as a privacy alternative given that all my searches are necessarily tied to a user id which is further tied to a payment method.

I agree to some extent, but also consider: if you are not paying for search, then they are going to have to monetize somehow, and the most likely way they'll do that is through selling search history/data.

The only way to be respected as a customer is to actually be a customer, and for that you have to pay. Presumably Kagi could start accepting anonymous payments, but your searches would still be tied to an account.

[Ferret7446]

> the most likely way they'll do that is through selling search history/data

No? Google, the largest search engine, doesn't monetize by selling search history/data. I would hazard a guess that not a single free search engine monetizes by selling search history/data.

Selling ads is extremely and literally different from selling search history/data.

[sph]

> Google, the largest search engine, doesn't monetize by selling search history/data.

Google, the owner of the largest ad network in the world, does not make money from your searches? Are you trolling or completely misinformed?

[palata]

I think they are being pedantic. The point they are making is that Google does not sell your search data directly, rather it sells ads that are optimized thanks to your search data.

IMO it's a moot point.

[rippercushions]

Google indeed does not sell your search history to third parties. They make money by letting third parties target ads to you with it.