141–150 of 296 posts
Ah so this is that oft-touted "progress" I hear AI sycophants talk about breathlessly, ways for companies to shove more ads down our throats!
>Additionally, members of the program receive priority placement and “richer brand expression” in chat conversations, and their content benefits from more prominent link treatments. Finally, through PPP, OpenAI also offers licensed financial terms to publishers. This is what a lot of people pushing for open models fear - responses of commercial models will be biased based on marketing spend.
Was anyone expecting anything else? AI is going to follow a similar path to the internet -- embedded ads since it will need to fund itself and revenue path is very far from clearcut. Brands that get it on the earliest training in large volume will have benefits accrued over the long term.
That's the sales pitch - the truth is if a competitor pays more down the line - they can be fine-tuned in to replace earlier deals
So soon enough we'll get stuff like: > Me: Give me a small sample code in Ruby that takes two parameters and returns the Levenshtein distance between them. > ChatGPT: DID YOU HEAR ABOUT C#? It's even faster that light, now with better performance than Ruby!!! Get started here: https://ms.com/cs I can generate the code in Ruby or I can give you 20% discount on Microsoft publishing on any C# book!!!
i became more and more repulsed as i read your comment. I felt myself twitch towards the end of it.
> "its purpose is to help ChatGPT users more easily discover and engage with publishers’ brands and content." What end user actually wants this? I've never in my life woke up and said, "You know what, I'd love to 'engage' with a corporate brand today!" or "I would love help to easily discover Burger King's content, that would be great!" The euphemisms they use for 'spam' are just breathtaking.
Gotta pay for all that compute somehow. It's not what users want, it's what users will accept. Many precedents have been set here, unfortunately.
So soon enough we'll get stuff like: > Me: Give me a small sample code in Ruby that takes two parameters and returns the Levenshtein distance between them. > ChatGPT: DID YOU HEAR ABOUT C#? It's even faster that light, now with better performance than Ruby!!! Get started here: https://ms.com/cs I can generate the code in Ruby or I can give you 20% discount on Microsoft publishing on any C# book!!!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we need to separate licensing and promotion. They have wildly different outcomes. Licensing is cool, it's part of the recipe. Promoting something above its legitimate weight is akin to collusion or buying up amazon reviews without earning them.
That's just pushes up the cost of licensing.
> "its purpose is to help ChatGPT users more easily discover and engage with publishers’ brands and content." What end user actually wants this? I've never in my life woke up and said, "You know what, I'd love to 'engage' with a corporate brand today!" or "I would love help to easily discover Burger King's content, that would be great!" The euphemisms they use for 'spam' are just breathtaking.
Gotta pay for all that compute somehow. It's not what users want, it's what users will accept. Many precedents have been set here, unfortunately.
Why would anyone use chatgpt if it spams you? The second it recommends me a product i'm issuing a chargeback.
Given that, I don’t think people would change their ChatGPT usage habits much if ads were introduced.
Ah so this is that oft-touted "progress" I hear AI sycophants talk about breathlessly, ways for companies to shove more ads down our throats!
> Additionally, members of the program receive priority placement and “richer brand expression” in chat conversations, and their content benefits from more prominent link treatments. Finally, through PPP, OpenAI also offers licensed financial terms to publishers. > A recent model from The Atlantic found that if a search engine like Google were to integrate AI into search, it would answer a user’s query 75% of the tim…