3 ms·

Wait until you hear about the EU! https://e360.yale.edu/digest/europe-russia-ukraine-war-natural-gas-2024 https://e360.yale.edu/digest/europe-russia-ukraine-war

Wait until you hear about the EU! https://e360.yale.edu/digest/europe-russia-ukraine-war-natural-gas-2024 https://e360.yale.edu/digest/europe-russia-ukraine-war-natur... Hell, a Spanish company just violated export sanctions and sold a machine used to make artillery barrels to Russia, and the Spanish government just shrugged. I'm not sure why Kagi has to be squeaky clean down to the last dollar when our own governments don't even have to meaningfully enforce their own sanctions.

jwr 1y ago
This kind of whataboutism is what leads to the current sad state of the world. One can look at any moral choice issue, say "but what about… [insert something here]" and then proceed to ignore it and do nothing. I choose to take moral stands. Yes, it might be insignificant in the grand scheme of things, but I still choose to do so. Having read the (rather disappointing) responses: all of them create some sort of artificial construct and result in doing nothing. I cannot do nothing.
- EA-3167 1y ago
  Happily the state of the world isn't the result of recognizing the state of the world, and attempting to avoid hypocrisy. Instead the world is a complex system that defies easy discussions on social media, motivated by overly simplistic and selectively applied moralism. For example I'm able to compare the impact on the world of Google, AdSense, etc... and Kagi's partial reliance on Yandex. Something tells me that's going to be taken as another case of "whataboutism" rather than realism.
- sieabahlpark 1y ago
  [dead]
- dingnuts 1y ago
  Oh you're taking a moral stance? So how do you get by without search? Because surely Google and Microsoft have many other moral problems, likely even the same ones. But you're morally pure so you use no search at all right?
  - throw123xz 1y ago
    You can install an adblocker and Google/Microsoft end up losing money if you use them. You can't stop Kagi from sending money to Yandex, unless of course you stop using Kagi.
    - nulld3v 1y ago
      One big reason to use alternative search engines like Kagi is to try to break the search engine monopoly. A bit of a tangent, but I would argue that if search became revenue-neutral, Google would still continue to support and promote it. Control over search is incredibly valuable.
- wswope 1y ago
  You don’t have a leg to stand on when dismissing criticism as whataboutisms, chief. “Kagi is superior product and a vital competitor to breaking the search oligopoly — but what about their loose and indirect association with the Russian economy?!”
- rpdillon 1y ago
  I don't find moral stands particularly compelling, because they're an excuse to indulge in single-factor analysis, and make complex decisions using only the most basic criteria. Kagi produces a product you find useful, and they are trying to run an honest business model that doesn't focus on surveillance, charges a subscription, and earns that by working to return the best results. Is it really a net win to boycott them?
  - radlad 1y ago
    > I don't find moral stands particularly compelling, because they're an excuse to indulge in single-factor analysis, and make complex decisions using only the most basic criteria. I don't think this follows. While some people may use morals as an excuse to indulge in single-factor analysis, it's also entirely possible to use a moral stance as just one of many facets of evaluation. > Is it really a net win to boycott them? How much you value that facet is of course a personal decision. I personally wonder how much less useful Kagi would really be without Yandex? Only Kagi knows, really.
    - rpdillon 1y ago
      > it's also entirely possible to use a moral stance as just one of many facets of evaluation. Agreed. I'd need to see evidence of that, though. People are lazy, and they hide behind moral stances that are completely impractical to avoid having to think through the complex moral realities of the decisions we make. I don't have a lot of patience for this. If it's part of a multi-faceted analysis, then I'd expect to see that reflected in the comments the person makes. That's not true in this case. > I personally wonder how much less useful Kagi would really be without Yandex? Only Kagi knows, really. It's not your decision. Your decision is whether or not to pay Kagi for their service. Kagi produces a product that tries to provide the best value, and doesn't surveil you.
      - radlad 1y ago
        I've debated replying at all, but I am genuinely perplexed by this comment as a response to the quoted text: > It's not your decision. Your decision is whether or not to pay Kagi for their service. Kagi produces a product that tries to provide the best value, and doesn't surveil you. Did I imply it was my decision? I don't think I did. In fact, I pointed out that I don't even have the data available to me to evaluate the decision against the decision-making axis I provided (how much value is Yandex providing to the search results?) I am struggling to understand what you're trying to get across here besides contrarianism. The hard fact of the matter is that you are obviously right: I cannot make decisions for Kagi. This was never in question. I can share my feedback with them and vote with my money. > Kagi produces a product that tries to provide the best value, and doesn't surveil you. This is another unprovable statement.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- rpdillon 1y ago
  You've edited your post. > Having read the (rather disappointing) responses: all of them create some sort of artificial construct and result in doing nothing. The acknowledgement that issues are not one-dimensional is not artificial. Sincerely: you're deluding yourself that you're helping Ukraine by not subscribing to Kagi.

jwr 1y ago

This kind of whataboutism is what leads to the current sad state of the world. One can look at any moral choice issue, say "but what about… [insert something here]" and then proceed to ignore it and do nothing. I choose to take moral stands. Yes, it might be insignificant in the grand scheme of things, but I still choose to do so. Having read the (rather disappointing) responses: all of them create some sort of artificial construct and result in doing nothing. I cannot do nothing.

EA-3167 1y ago
Happily the state of the world isn't the result of recognizing the state of the world, and attempting to avoid hypocrisy. Instead the world is a complex system that defies easy discussions on social media, motivated by overly simplistic and selectively applied moralism. For example I'm able to compare the impact on the world of Google, AdSense, etc... and Kagi's partial reliance on Yandex. Something tells me that's going to be taken as another case of "whataboutism" rather than realism.
sieabahlpark 1y ago
[dead]
dingnuts 1y ago
Oh you're taking a moral stance? So how do you get by without search? Because surely Google and Microsoft have many other moral problems, likely even the same ones. But you're morally pure so you use no search at all right?
- throw123xz 1y ago
  You can install an adblocker and Google/Microsoft end up losing money if you use them. You can't stop Kagi from sending money to Yandex, unless of course you stop using Kagi.
  - nulld3v 1y ago
    One big reason to use alternative search engines like Kagi is to try to break the search engine monopoly. A bit of a tangent, but I would argue that if search became revenue-neutral, Google would still continue to support and promote it. Control over search is incredibly valuable.
wswope 1y ago
You don’t have a leg to stand on when dismissing criticism as whataboutisms, chief. “Kagi is superior product and a vital competitor to breaking the search oligopoly — but what about their loose and indirect association with the Russian economy?!”
rpdillon 1y ago
I don't find moral stands particularly compelling, because they're an excuse to indulge in single-factor analysis, and make complex decisions using only the most basic criteria. Kagi produces a product you find useful, and they are trying to run an honest business model that doesn't focus on surveillance, charges a subscription, and earns that by working to return the best results. Is it really a net win to boycott them?
- radlad 1y ago
  > I don't find moral stands particularly compelling, because they're an excuse to indulge in single-factor analysis, and make complex decisions using only the most basic criteria. I don't think this follows. While some people may use morals as an excuse to indulge in single-factor analysis, it's also entirely possible to use a moral stance as just one of many facets of evaluation. > Is it really a net win to boycott them? How much you value that facet is of course a personal decision. I personally wonder how much less useful Kagi would really be without Yandex? Only Kagi knows, really.
  - rpdillon 1y ago
    > it's also entirely possible to use a moral stance as just one of many facets of evaluation. Agreed. I'd need to see evidence of that, though. People are lazy, and they hide behind moral stances that are completely impractical to avoid having to think through the complex moral realities of the decisions we make. I don't have a lot of patience for this. If it's part of a multi-faceted analysis, then I'd expect to see that reflected in the comments the person makes. That's not true in this case. > I personally wonder how much less useful Kagi would really be without Yandex? Only Kagi knows, really. It's not your decision. Your decision is whether or not to pay Kagi for their service. Kagi produces a product that tries to provide the best value, and doesn't surveil you.
    - radlad 1y ago
      I've debated replying at all, but I am genuinely perplexed by this comment as a response to the quoted text: > It's not your decision. Your decision is whether or not to pay Kagi for their service. Kagi produces a product that tries to provide the best value, and doesn't surveil you. Did I imply it was my decision? I don't think I did. In fact, I pointed out that I don't even have the data available to me to evaluate the decision against the decision-making axis I provided (how much value is Yandex providing to the search results?) I am struggling to understand what you're trying to get across here besides contrarianism. The hard fact of the matter is that you are obviously right: I cannot make decisions for Kagi. This was never in question. I can share my feedback with them and vote with my money. > Kagi produces a product that tries to provide the best value, and doesn't surveil you. This is another unprovable statement.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
rpdillon 1y ago
You've edited your post. > Having read the (rather disappointing) responses: all of them create some sort of artificial construct and result in doing nothing. The acknowledgement that issues are not one-dimensional is not artificial. Sincerely: you're deluding yourself that you're helping Ukraine by not subscribing to Kagi.