Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fair Pricing

kagi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 512 posts

Re: Fair Pricing

#241

Post by pietz »

ajdude wrote: post #86

Unfortunately, I will never be able to take advantage of this policy, For the very reason that I have kagi Set as my exclusive search engine on every single device that I own, And there's no way that I could go even a Day, let alone a month, without using this fantastic service. Keep up the good work guys!

It's so crazy to me to hear these super positive opinions. I gave kagi a shot for several months but the results were quite a bit worse than Google or DuckDuckGo. Maybe it's because I live in Germany and kagi doesn't do well with German content but I never understood the hype of kagi.

Re: Fair Pricing

#242

Post by elnasca »

bandrami wrote: post #161
ogrisel wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similarly, for paywalled news/journals.

Fifteen years ago people were talking about micropayments per article for news services being just around the corner. What ever happened to that?

When people are confronted with the actual cost, they tend to say no. With a subscription, their head tells them that for 10 €/$ they get an infinite number of articles.

Re: Fair Pricing

#243

Post by fastball »

grayhatter wrote: post #20
fastball wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

What a needlessly toxic take. > People who can't wake up without an alarm, should be late for things. > People who are busy, clearly need to be punished! > Punishment is the best way to change behavior, it's why I always hit my dog! > Humans are better at remembering and scheduling things than computers are, obviously we should require humans do these types of things even when it would be trivial to do so programmati…

What in the world are you going on about? Continuing to pay for something that you agreed to pay for and didn't cancel is not a "punishment". If it is, that is the silliest definition of punishment I've ever heard. It is certainly not anywhere close to "hitting my dog". So I fixed it for you:

> People who don't cancel subscriptions will continue to pay for them.

> People who can't wake up without an alarm will be late for things.

Neither of those things is an injustice.

Paying for things you agreed to pay for is not a punishment. Punishment is fining companies that do not proactively cancel subscriptions on your behalf. You can set a reminder to cancel something (on a computer). Any argument you can make for a computer being used can apply just as well to the consumer as to the business.

It is very well known in basically every sphere of human endeavor that the less you do something, the less competent you will be at that thing. This doesn't need a citation – this is how humans work.

Re: Fair Pricing

#244

Post by fastball »

bayindirh wrote: post #44
fastball wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

People can leave their computers behind for vacations and try to not use their devices during said vacations or small sabbaticals, you know. Also, not all people use Kagi for their "search engine" per se. It also has other AI related services, so they might not need a GPU powered parrot every day, sometimes for longer periods.

The comment I was replying to suggested an FTC "mandate".

I think its great if Kagi proactively chooses to do this themselves.

I think it bad if you force companies to do this.

Re: Fair Pricing

#245

Post by tokai »

s_dev wrote: post #138

I will sign back up for a paid service when funding Russian search engine Yandex is dropped. Many like to forget there is a war.

Ah I was just looking into trying a subscription. Can't see how supporting genocide financially is impartiality.

Re: Fair Pricing

#246

Post by AiAi »

rsynnott wrote: post #223

> Introducing Fair Pricing This is _really_ weird marketing, in that it implies that previously the pricing was _unfair_. That's not an idea you generally want to put in your customers' heads.

I guess... Still a positive thing that they are trying to make their product/service more "fair", and are progressing in a good direction?

Re: Fair Pricing

#247

Post by hiAndrewQuinn »

zorked wrote: post #198
hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The immediate second order effect of such a law would be to raise subscription prices on everyone to account for this automatic churn. I would wager that most people who aren't watching their bills closely enough to notice they haven't actually used their Netflix account in a year aren't very price sensitive. They have money they are, by revealed preferences, willing to throw into the pot, which lowers the service co…

> The immediate second order effect of such a law would be to raise subscription prices on everyone to account for this automatic churn. That's fine.

It's not fine to the millions of monthly active users who would have to cancel because prices rose from 14€ to 16€. It's inherently a consumer-hostile action to pass such a law, despite how it first appears.

Re: Fair Pricing

#249

Post by benrutter »

percevalve wrote: post #217

I haven’t seen this mentioned in the conversation yet, so I’ll bring it up here. A research paper from a few years ago introduced the concept of “customer inertia.” It found that users tend to overestimate their difficulty in unsubscribing from a service. In other words, when a subscription includes auto-renewal (or a similar feature), a significant portion of potential users will choose not to subscribe because they…

That's really interesting as a concept. As one random person on the internet (not a sample) I definitely avoid services that look like they'll be a pain to unsubscribe from, and will be much more likely to try out a free trial of something if it looks like an easy one to cancel. Super interesting that some people are trying to factor in that things into wider-scale enomics.

Re: Fair Pricing

#250

Post by AiAi »

It would be great if they consider power purchasing parity to make the service more accessible for developing countries.
Post reply on HN