Agreed. I've been a subscriber for over two years. At first the depth of search results was not as good as Google's but I used Kagi nonetheless because of the no-ad policy. Today, the results are just as good as Google's and still no ad, making Kagi a no-brainer in my eyes.

Couldn't agree more. Definitely worth the $10 a month.

Thank your for taking the time (!) to articulate your thoughts. We think there will be many angles to look up our site: - Do other people share my name, n my country and in the word? - How rare is my first or last name? - How old is that person I met? What's their birthday? - Percentage of a population accounted for as proxy of a country's digital footprint. You will find these answers super quickly, without a great investment. That being said, we're also looking for volunteers: people who find lists or create dozens of records. As I'm sure you know, Wikipedia runs on 300,000 volunteers - that's 1 volunteer for 10,000 visitors! Wikipedia volunteers do it for the love of knowledge. I think we can find similar-minded people, probably among those currently active in genealogy. One last note about our name, we're a proper 501(c)(3) and our name is trademarked so I see little risk there. Thank you again for your constructive remarks.

i get those angles; growing up in a country where no one can even pronounce my name, it felt healthy to know that there was a world full of jareks haha

it's not about trademark risk - you should sit down with someone and say the name "The Population Project" out loud, without saying anything else about the project, and ask them what they _think_ it means

Shakespeare was being ironic: _everything_ is in a name

Got it. Do you think The Population Project is a bad name? I usually get pretty good feedback about it.

i think to the uninitiated it might sound like you're proposing a plan to do something about the population, which has never been well-received :)

once you're married to a name, it's biologically impossible to see it the same way from the inside, that's why you need to look into an outsider's eyes IRL while you say the name

try something fun, like "The Name Game" haha

Thank you for your remark. We try to address the issue in the Methodology section but it's a complex question. Roughly speaking, GDPR was passed to prevent merchants from contacting potential consumers without their consent. Well, we don't have anything to sell, we don't collect phone numbers or email addresses and we will never contact anybody.

Found it, thanks for the directions.

> Ours is that we perform a task in the public interest.

You really really want to change this. It will never hold. You need a legal basis for this condition (lett. e of art. 6). Not legal advice: a legitimate interest (lett. f, art. 6) looks more defendable

> We will erase any individual’s personal data at their request within 30 days, according to GDPR’s article 17.

30 days is a very long time

Also: I'm getting an internal server error, data collected: 0

Our metrics are low enough at the moment that we would notice anyone trying to add thousands or even millions or records. But I hear you.

That's what they said about wikipedia and here it stands 20 years later, stronger than ever. Trolls will always exist but there are ways to keep them at bay, we're working on it.

Thank you for your comments. We're well aware of the pitfalls you're pointing. Some of them can be avoided now, others will need a dose of AI down the road. For now, we log the data when we find it. Mentioning the sources is a tricky issue. Our philosophy is to say as little or as much about everyone. Barack Obama's record is no more developed than yours. Linking a record to Wikipedia or to the list of Minnesota's sex offenders would break that rule, and not in a good way in my opinion.

I didn't immediately understand the point you're making there because I don't think you'd ever need to use Wikipedia or a list of sex offenders as a source, but I think I see your point now: if for 98% of people the specified source is a government register of births then anyone who doesn't have that source mentioned will stick out and an astute reader will immediately infer that they were born in a place where the register of births is not easily accessible or they have changed their name or something like that. So mentioning the sources is, as you say, a tricky issue.

I don't think I was patting myself on the back but you're definitely spanking.

No need to be venomous. No, it's not an ego project. I'm not saying it will lift the Third World out of poverty but it's a genuinely disinterested endeavor. And I give to other charities, some of which you would probably approve of.

Proton. Import process is super easy. I would recommend going for a paying plan. You can import your own domain name, have multiple addresses, you get a VPN, lots of storage space, etc. And they'll never open your mailbox to the FBI.

And good customer service. Your questions will be answered.