That's not sovereignty. Sovereignty doesn't imply anything and it is not a designation bestowed by some other entity. It is purely descriptive of an evident state. If you can defend your claim to sovereignty, you are sovereign. Moreover, no claim need be made.
It's the architecture. That's the correct answer here. The current models produce good implementations. They're also quite good at identifying and planning for edge cases. But, today, a successful software project requires picking the right atoms for the job.
Some of the calculus for that picking will change, since volume of code that must be produced becomes less of an issue. And I don't doubt that models next year and year after will be able to make better formative architectural choices. But as it is now, I'm certain that actual systems handling real workloads require a human designer.
Someone who knows what good software looks like is empowered with agents. Someone without that knowledge isn't going to create a high quality system yet.
The prosecutors aren't on the hook, anyway. They have absolute immunity. The decision to charge is protected. The prosecutor would have to have done one of the few, enumerable things outside the scope of the role, like conducting an investigation without probable cause or hiding exculpatory evidence.
Not only that they can review flagged content, but they tend to have separate retention policies for flagged content. Anthropic's is this: "We retain inputs and outputs for up to 2 years and trust and safety classification scores for up to 7 years if your chat or session is flagged by our automated trust and safety systems as violating our Usage Policy."
So don't run for office or anything like that. Someone, somewhere will have a contact that will get that.
The AI is pretty benign, too. They offer diverse models and they make it as privacy-preserving as possible, considering you can opt to use closed models. They are very open about training and retention: https://help.kagi.com/kagi/ai/llms-privacy.html. An interesting note there on models served by OpenAI: "The Assistant does not include a unique user identifier for these requests." I don't know if you can trust OpenAI, but Kagi is at least doing its part.
Also, All the AI integration into the product is gated by a single setting.
In addition to what other have said about extensions, ad blocking, no telemetry, and some nice features like tab management, it works in the Apple ecosystem. If you use a mac and an iphone, you get the native sync services for history, bookmarks, passwords, etc. Makes sense that they're focusing on that.
Developing internally initially, as opposed to making it open source, was probably the only practical way for a small team with a specific goal to get there. I don't see any problem turning it over to community development for secondary platforms. If it gets adoption, great. If it fizzles out on linux and windows, nothing is lost.
I think it's pretty subjective if you mean "lead" to be capability and not raw number of users. I jumped back and forth quite a bit last year because there were some pretty major shortcoming in both. Now they're both quite reliable without too much hand-holding. Codex now consistently works better for the kind of work I'm doing, and it's good enough that I'm not inclined to go to claude, because I don't have any significant problems.
reply