Human-first ChatGPT alternative
A search engine with a brain and also a heart.
The mission
To offer internet search results as human perspectives, so we broaden our perspectives beyond summaries.
To create a visibility platform for independent bloggers who are currently hidden behind AI summaries, forums and famous sites, so they get the readers that they ought to have received.
ChatGPT and the other models are excellent at making lists, quick emergency information, solving maths or code. That is plainly useful. For decisions that require judgment and interpretation, we need a human voice, and the mission is to connect humans to humans.
How it works
- Moka looks through the highest-ranked articles for your exact question, in their ranked order, and goes deeper when it needs to.
- It reads the articles it is allowed to read, respecting each site's robots.txt.
- It checks that a real person wrote each one: a name, a byline, an about page.
- It checks every perspective against the article's own text. If the words are not there, the perspective is not shown.
- It shows seven perspectives at a time, with dates. If no verified human source is found, Moka says so.
AI works behind the scenes — to search, read, verify and organise. It is never the one talking.
A comparison
| ChatGPT / Claude | Mokapot | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it comes from | A model writes a new answer from everything it has read. | A person who wrote about it. You see who. |
| How many views | One. The model settles on a middle answer. | Seven. Different people, different opinions, side by side. |
| What you get | A simulated, assimilated version: an overview, oversimplified. | The actual perspective — the words used by people who felt something similar. |
| Who you meet | No one. | The author: picture, name, website, social links. |
| The words | Rewritten by the model. | Quoted exactly, checked against the article. |
| The shape | A few lines in a chat box, no headings — or a long document you did not ask for. | Headings, photos, length: the writer chose them. |
| What you see | A slab of content. | The article itself — the graphs, tables, depictions and illustrations the writer put together over time. |
| The soul | Missing. | It lies in the opinions and in the experiences. |
| When it was written | Usually not shown. | Shown with every article. |
| What the writer gets | Nothing. Their work goes into the answer without their name. | A reader. The link goes to their page. |
| If there is no good source | It answers anyway. | It says so. |
| Good at | Writing, coding, making things for you. | Finding people worth reading. |
| Signing up | An account, then a free tier, then a nudge to pay more, tuned to how you use it. | No email, no sign-up. |
| Privacy | Your conversations are kept under your name. | Nothing is kept under a name. |
| What it is | The food. | The one who serves it. We bring the plate and step back. |
| Made by | OpenAI. Anthropic. | Some guy. |
The information about a writer — the name, the picture, the links — has been taken from the metadata of the article they posted.
The same questions, answered by ChatGPT and by Mokapot →
Mokapot vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Perplexity →
For writers
If Mokapot has introduced you and something is wrong — the picture, the links, the quotation — write to someguy@mokapot.co and it will be corrected.
In the world of instant coffee, try the Moka.