I'm not searching for anything terrifyingly illegal, and for the rest Google and MS already scrape and compile every byte of data I've ever generated. Why would it suddenly be a problem when a more reliable and less vicious company is doing a fraction of that?
You have to understand that most of us aren't fighting some battle for "perfect privacy," I just want a search engine that works for me, rather than advertisers, at the level of the search results themselves.
I get your perspective. A lot of us just want a search engine that serves the user first, not advertisers, especially at the results level. It's about function over strict privacy for many--everyone has their own privacy threshold.
But it's also about digital data autonomy. It's not just about avoiding surveillance over sensitive searches, but having control over our data's destiny. Even mundane data, in aggregate, can sometimes be used in ways we can't predict.
Personally privacy is a strong concern for me; I have many aspects of my digital life set up less conveniently in exchange for privacy.
In this case though we've have on one hand a product that definitely does aggregate data about searches, and doesn't do what I need very well; and the other a product that could, but does not currently aggregate data, and does an excellent job serving my needs.
And importantly there is no option of a product, available now, that is verifiably prevented from aggregation. Even a VPN unless I disconnect and get a new random IP between every individual search does not provide that protection. (And then browser fingerprints even.)
What is counted as "terrifyingly illegal" changes without a moments notice on the whims of your rulers. So even if you're not googling on how to bomb the government, there are hundreds of other subjects and opinions that could in the future make the majority of your neighbours, family and workmates think you deserve to be shunned, fired, in prison, or worse. That is why people want to protect their privacy.
Ok, but again Google and a hundred data brokers already scrape every detail of my life no matter what I do. Even if I become a hermit in the woods the existence of my friends and family who don't take those precautions would make my efforts worthless. Meanwhile we're talking about Google/Bing vs. Kagi... not "Super Secret Perfect Privacy Magic" vs Kagi.
So while I understand your overall concern, that ship has sailed for search engines and the internet. We're living in a world full of networked cameras that people voluntarily and happily install, of people broadcasting their lives 24/7. The idea of perfect privacy is getting downright mystical/religious.
Sure, and for what it's worth I trust Kagi. But I can understand those who are more strict with their privacy.
In the end I think we have to accept in some way that everything we say, write and do is subject to surveillance, and that the government might want to kill you for any reason that you'd have no chance of preventing.
You have to understand that most of us aren't fighting some battle for "perfect privacy," I just want a search engine that works for me, rather than advertisers, at the level of the search results themselves.