Increase number of excludable keywords for a custom lens

nissa

Content is often referenced or labeled using multiple strings that may be substantially distinct from one another; this is especially prevalent on websites containing user-generated content - folks' chosen vocabulary naturally has some variance (may be greater or smaller depending on the specific content.) The result is that effective filtering can require 4-5 negative keywords for a single item, such that the current cap of 5 excluded keywords for a given custom lens limits the value of the feature.

Feature request: Increase the cap of excluded keywords for a given custom lens.

Vlad

nissa What is the limit you would be satisfied with?

nissa

Vlad Off the cuff, I suspect ₁₀₀ would fit most use cases (using as a proxy the ballpark length of effective negative prompts for image generation using diffusion models.) If an inflection point exists at a lower number (above which it becomes less compute-efficient to add keyword capacity,) that may be a reasonable first step to enable folks to experiment with expanded capabilities and for you to be able to gauge usage of the feature before further incremental investment.

ce86

@Vlad I am also interested in this. I think 100 would work well. I would also request, if possible, to add the ability to exclude keywords to general Web search outside of lenses.

KagiForMe

ce86 Use fruit -banana

JohnTheWizard

Hello! I would love to see this feature implemented. For me, the main use case of Kagi is filtering political content. Outside the US, especially in Brazil, search engines are often flooded with political content, particularly during election years when public money is used for advertising. The world is so polarized right now that sometimes you just want to mute all of this noise to focus on what you can actually change. I believe Kagi can help with that.

Currently, my excluding keywords includes: Bolsonaro, Trump, Biden, Congresso, Senado, Moraes.

However, there’s a problem: with just five ignore filters, I can only include a few words and names. I need many more to create a consistent filter. With only a few names, it tends to favor one side of the political spectrum, which can hinder rather than help. I think having 50 to 100 filters would be ideal, and if this feature were implemented, I would be willing to pay for it.

In the end, I believe this aligns with Kagi's philosophy. Kagi empowers users, allowing them to make their own search choices and putting them first, unlike major search engines. With that said, I think Kagi should prioritize implementing this feature!