Please add: https://grokipedia.com/

kirkmc

No one is suggesting that Kagi not show it when you search. The suggestion was to add it instead of the Wikipedia widget. Big difference.

carl

kirkmc No, that's where you might have misunderstood the OP. The suggestion is not to replace Wikipedia, the suggestion is to add Grok as an option for those who prefer it to Wikipedia.

Gredharm

kirkmc No, that was never the suggestion, re-read the OP. The suggestion was for it to be an optional alternative.

Kagi is about providing information tailored to what users want. Grokipedia provides an alternative that some people will prefer. The more options the better. It isn't Kagi's job to tell people what the truth it. If people want that, they can use Google instead.

And to respond to some other comments. I could see Kagi in the long term maybe offering optional paid widgets. For example pay $X per month for the Britannica widget, and they could go into an agreement with Britannica to provide that. I'd absolutely pay maybe a few dollars extra a month to have Britannica show up for any topic it covers, and for its articles to be included as sources in LLM web search queries. Add as another widget, a bunch of legit dictionaries, the full 20 volume Oxford, plus simpler dictionaries as well. Again, would 100% pay for that.

And personally, I'd choose to include both Wikipedia and Grokipedia results. So I can get both biased opinions, and form my own.

Dustin

This discussion was also happening with Wikipedia 20+ years ago. Whether you believe Wikipedia is an authoritative, trustworthy source in 2025 is irrelevant because back then, it was not yet seen as such.

Putting aside the person behind Grokipedia, the reason for its creation, the manner in which information is 'acquired', the explicit and overt political goals, the low quality product, the accessibility shortcomings, the poor UX, the corporate control... Grokipedia is about 7 minutes old and is not yet proven to be of any value to the concept of information sharing or to the world as a whole.

I agree Kagi should absolutely seek out options to add alternatives to Wikipedia (like Britannica) to allow users more choice.

Ultimately, Kagi's product is worth paying for because it prioritizes surfacing high quality, human-centric, user respecting sources.

kirkmc

Is Britannica free? I doubt it. I can't see Kagi paying to license that.

carl

kirkmc That's a cost-benefit question, which would only be known after Kagi negotiates with Britannica. If both companies have interest in it.

For me, it would be a pleasure to pay extra for Kagi to give me the option to replace the Wikipedia widget with a gallery of images instead. It's easy enough to find Wikipedia articles, without the need of a sidebar.

kirkmc

carl So "let's give users a nazi option, if they want it?" That's something an ethical service should do?

carl

I don't think your comment adds much. Not everybody who is different from you are nazis.

kirkmc

carl I think it has been shown that the person behind this "encyclopedia" has such tendencies. It's not that he's different from me, it's that he has shown active political hostility.

tux0r

kirkmc I think it has been shown that the person behind this "encyclopedia" has such tendencies.

Kagi is a search engine. A search engine that filters its sources by what a website’s founder thinks about politics is broken.

tux0r

kirkmc It is a biased, AI-generated rip-off of Wikipedia.

Remove Wikipedia then. It’s biased.

kirkmc

tux0r The suggestion isn't about search results.

Gredharm

oxlvlnle Because EVERYTHING on the Internet is politically biased one way or another. English Wikipedia is openly Western Atheist culturally oriented and left leaning. You can simply read the edit comments and discussions, it isn't hidden. Grokipedia is openly Western Christian(ish?) and right leaning orientation. Neither even try to provide truly balanced perspectives.

The more information and perspectives available, the better. And then you can simply turn them on or off as you choose, a key feature of Kagi.

kirkmc

Gredharm Wikipedia is certainly - for the most part - western culturally oriented. But it's not got AI generated articles, tuned to express very clear political opinions.

Gredharm

kirkmc I don't think we will ever agree on the political bias side of things. Personally, I think Wikipedia is also extraordinarily biased on some topics.
My point is, I don't care, I still use it. I rely in my own judgement to evaluate data and sources. I don't need Kagi or anyone else to filter it for me.

RoxyRoxyRoxy

Thank you to all who've commented, this has been a pleasantly civil discussion 🙂
Obviously this is a contentious discussion, and nearly anything we do with Grokipedia specifically is going to leave someone unhappy. Therefore I think a reframing of the discussion is appropriate; alternate language wikis were discussed in thread, and I think that's a great idea. How would you feel if we added the option for any alternative encyclopdia (Grokipedia included), within technical reason (e.g. must have a Wikipedia compatible API)? I would like to get everyone's opinion, pro- and anti- Grokipedia, on this.

Gredharm

RoxyRoxyRoxy My view on everything in any way related to this, is the more data the better. I'll take data straight from a North Korean propaganda mill, straight from the Democratic AND Republican national conventions. Give me the musings of Bill Gates, Hillary Clinton George Soros, Elon Musk, Tucker Carlson and Trump, If you have data from God and Satan themselves, I want it. If Satan writes an encyclopedia of the damned, that kills any man who dares read it, I still want the option of accessing it.

I also want the ability to turn off the ones I find I am not interested in.

kirkmc

RoxyRoxyRoxy If you do include Nazipedia, it should not be turned on by default. If you are going to include other options for the "'pedia" widget, then this makes the settings multi-level. Currently, there's just an on/off toggle for Wikipedia. If you offer other options, you need a toggle and a drop-down menu, most likely, where users can choose.

fxgn

RoxyRoxyRoxy are there other encyclopedias with a wikipedia-compatible API?

tux0r

kirkmc Nazipedia

It is really hard to discuss features with someone without basic human decency.

kirkmc

tux0r Basic human decency is recognizing a racist, biased, propaganda laden source of information and not trying to defend it, unless you ascribe to those things.

« Previous Page Next Page »