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

331–340 of 512 posts

Re: Fair Pricing

#331

Post by fastball »

bayindirh wrote: post #256
fastball wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't know. Maybe we shouldn't live in a world which puts profits and companies over people and a qualitatively better world. Hard questions.

The status quo is equal footing. Profits and companies are not being put over people when you require people to cancel a subscription that they created. To claim that is to assign almost zero agency to "people".

Forcing companies to do this would absolutely be putting people over profits and companies, however.

Re: Fair Pricing

#334

Post by ryukafalz »

This actually makes me a lot more likely to sign up for Kagi! I've been hearing good things about it so I've been interested, but these days I'm very subscription-averse because there's just so dang many of them. But only paying for it if I actually use it makes signing up lower risk. (I know myself well enough to know that there's a good chance I forget to cancel otherwise.)

Re: Fair Pricing

#335

Post by Novosell »

mbix77 wrote: post #319
Novosell wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you under the belief that the US, in which bing, kagi and google primarily operate, has never done anything repugnant? Seems like ignoring that while cutting ties with Yandex because of Russia is a very political move.

Yes, you're completely correct. Kagi seems to have a very good product, it would become better if it would become a "good" company. I do everything to not use any big-tech software and services. In search it seems the options are limited.

Aye, the search situation is rather dire. I also try to distance myself from big-tech as much as possible, but it is rather difficult if you still wanna live a digital life. I don't feel like going full Richard Stallman, having to entirely avoid web browsers.

Just gotta cut your losses at certain points and accept less-than-perfect-but-still-better solutions.

Re: Fair Pricing

#336

Post by ethbr1 »

joseda-hg wrote: post #279
scott_w wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I... really like this idea. It's an interesting problem and something that a challenger service could possibly use (assuming they can resolve potential cash flow issues around content licensing). From an incumbents' perspective, it's less desirable since the fact I already have Netflix, Crunchyroll, Amazon Prime, Apple TV makes me less inclined to add Disney+ or a new service to my list of monthly outgoings.

There's a separate cash flow problem on doing this, a big chuck of the expected revenue comes from people that setup the subscription and forget about it I tend to care lot less on keeping something like dropout even if I don't use it all the time (I like to think I contribute keeping it afloat, and watch it whenever), but I cancel other subscriptions a lot more aggresively (I've unsubbed/resubbed to Gamepass plenty…

It's an interesting point, because it gets to when streaming services' content costs are paid.

Are they upfront? Or do they pay per view royalties at the end of a streaming period? Or likely mix of both, varying by each piece of content terms?

Hypothetically, if a streaming service structured most of their obligations in the form of post-view true-up's, they wouldn't have any problem doing this. And could make bank on the float between customer payment (first of month) and paying for their content (end of period).

Re: Fair Pricing

#338

Post by shortrounddev2 »

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!

I just wish the unlimited plan was $5 instead of $10

Re: Fair Pricing

#339

Post by dizhn »

g_p wrote: post #312
dizhn wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real privacy oriented solutions REMOVE their ABILITY to keep your data. This is the reason I will probably never use Kagi. I am not logging into a search engine. Period. (I know this is futile,but it's the principle of the thing. And I don't want this to be more commonplace than it already is.)

You might find Privacy Pass of interest then - https://help.kagi.com/kagi/privacy/privacy-pass.html It should be out in the next day or so.

Awesome. I didn't see much detail about how it works in the page. Something like this would be useful for other sites as well. Is this using an existing technology?

(Firefox extension is not found. It's probably not in the store yet. Can't find with search either.)

Re: Fair Pricing

#340

Post by Propelloni »

weird-eye-issue wrote: post #231
Propelloni wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's built in. EU laws usually have a fining mechanism that says X % of {global/EU/regional} sales or a fixed sum, whichever is higher. For example the GDPR says in Art. 83(5) [1]: > Infringements of the following provisions shall, in accordance with paragraph 2, be subject to administrative fines up to 20 000 000 EUR, or in the case of an undertaking, up to 4 % of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding…

Yes, exactly. So those "huge fines" won't really scare a normal company since it would not apply to them

Can you explain what you mean? I get the sense of sarcasm, but I'm not sure. 4 % of annual turnover [1] or 20 Mio, whatever is higher, appears substantial to me. If Alphabet would have been fined once in 2024 it would have to pay 4 % of its annual turnover of the year 2023, 307 billion US$, which amounts to ca. 12.3 billion US$. Or do you think 4 % is not enough?

Recital 37 [2] of the GDPR gives a definition of what an undertaking means in the context of the GDPR.

[1] https://www.munich-business-school.de/en/l/business-studies-...

[2] https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-37/

Post reply on HN