Ok man. I get it. Anything that costs money is bad. Let’s never speak the name of any for profit company or business as it may give them free advertising. Thank you for keeping us all safe.
I briefly looked through user tal’s comment history, and found that they also italicized Google as a source of info in another comment. Does this mean they’re also shilling for Google? Imagine how pissed Kagi would be if they found out…
Maybe people shouldn’t promote either corporation this way? Or is that beyond the real of possibility and we should just accept that corporations will use people like this with quiet dignity?
Back to my original comment, I just don’t see how it was intended as a promotion. It was supportive to the comment to add context to the information contained thereof. It was literally one word in a long comment. No hyperlink. On top of that, most people don’t even know what Kagi is and there was no discernable effort to introduce or promote it.
What about that makes you so sure that they’re being used by a corporation? Should they have just listed the source as “internet search engine”?
If they “shill” for a not for profit search engine will you call that out as well?
What about that makes you so sure that they’re being used by a corporation?
Because… they are? Free advertising is free advertising even if that isn’t the intent. Just like everyone who ‘googles’ something is being used by Google as free advertising.
If they “shill” for a not for profit search engine will you call that out as well?
Of course not. Did you entirely miss my point about this being about capitalism or are you ignoring it in order to argue?
So by your logic, if I post information I found on Wikipedia and list it as a source, cool. But if I find information on Yahoo and list that as the source, then I’m shilling for capitalism and must be called out?
Professional journalism? You mean the thing that’s usually paid for with advertising?
Ok man. I get it. Anything that costs money is bad. Let’s never speak the name of any for profit company or business as it may give them free advertising. Thank you for keeping us all safe.
Why do you think this is about safety and not just wanting there to be one space on the internet where people aren’t shilling for corporations?
It was a joke, mate.
I briefly looked through user tal’s comment history, and found that they also italicized Google as a source of info in another comment. Does this mean they’re also shilling for Google? Imagine how pissed Kagi would be if they found out…
Maybe people shouldn’t promote either corporation this way? Or is that beyond the real of possibility and we should just accept that corporations will use people like this with quiet dignity?
Back to my original comment, I just don’t see how it was intended as a promotion. It was supportive to the comment to add context to the information contained thereof. It was literally one word in a long comment. No hyperlink. On top of that, most people don’t even know what Kagi is and there was no discernable effort to introduce or promote it.
What about that makes you so sure that they’re being used by a corporation? Should they have just listed the source as “internet search engine”?
If they “shill” for a not for profit search engine will you call that out as well?
Because… they are? Free advertising is free advertising even if that isn’t the intent. Just like everyone who ‘googles’ something is being used by Google as free advertising.
Of course not. Did you entirely miss my point about this being about capitalism or are you ignoring it in order to argue?
So by your logic, if I post information I found on Wikipedia and list it as a source, cool. But if I find information on Yahoo and list that as the source, then I’m shilling for capitalism and must be called out?
So yes, you are deliberately ignoring that despite me literally saying:
Sorry, the alternate Flying Squid who you pretend exists isn’t here.