Kagi founder here. I am personally not an LLM-optimist. The thing is that I do not think LLMs will bring us to "Star Trek" level of useful computers (which I see humans eventually getting to) due to LLM's fundamentally broken auto-regressive nature. A different approach will be needed. Slight nuance but an important one.
Kagi as a brand is building tools in service of its users, no particular affinity towards any technologies.
You claimed reading LLM summaries will provide complete understanding. Optimistic would be a charitable description of this claim. And optimism is not limited to the most optimistic.
Another LLM-pragmatist here. I don't see why we should treat LLMs differently than any other tool in the box. Except maybe that it's currently the newest and most shiny, albeit still a bit clunky and overpriced.
Fwiw, I love your approach to AI. It's been very useful to me. Quick answers especially has been amazingly accurate and I've used it hundreds of times, if not thousands, and routinely check the links it gives
Kagi founder here. I am personally not an LLM-optimist. The thing is that I do not think LLMs will bring us to "Star Trek" level of useful computers (which I see humans eventually getting to) due to LLM's fundamentally broken auto-regressive nature. A different approach will be needed. Slight nuance but an important one.
Kagi as a brand is building tools in service of its users, no particular affinity towards any technologies.