Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

adweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 296 posts

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#271

Post by TheCoelacanth »

dylan604 wrote: post #214
swader999 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Canada, the LLM will mention our MAID program promoted through provincial government cost control programs to reduce health care expenses.

Only if the health care program paid more than Slim Jim is the problem.

I'm doubtful. I don't think advertisers generally will want to pay for their results to come up in conversations about suicide and I don't think OpenAI will want the negative publicity for handling suicide so crassly for the pittance they would get on such a tiny portion of their overall queries.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#272

Post by TheCoelacanth »

mempko wrote: post #48
add-sub-mul-div wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there was much reason to believe the endgame was ever going to be anything but this.

I mean for a split second I thought "Wow, they were charging for their service, this is nice". I guess that isn't enough anymore. You pay them and then they also get paid by selling you. What a world we live in.

Unfortunately, the more willing you are to pay, the more desirable you are as a target for advertisers, so there is always a push to inject ads even into paid products.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#273

Post by Latty »

hitpointdrew wrote: post #253
Latty wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you also refuse to call music albums "albums"? The etymology is the exact same thing. Terms stick as formats change, that's the English language as it is used and it's not new or wrong.

>The etymology is the exact same thing. Terms stick as formats change What etymology? In the overhead projector days they were called transparencies (not cards), and you would have said "a stack of transparencies", not a deck. Deck is a new made-up business jargon.

Naming things by analogy. "This wallet of records is similar to a photo album." is no different to "These slides are similar to a deck of cards." All words are made-up.

You can not like the word if you don't like it, but pretending it's somehow wrong is absurd and just you trying to claim some kind of authority for your opinion.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#274

Post by wildrhythms »

elorant wrote: post #138
shoggouth wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you see the marketing point of ChatGPT to be conversational ads?

The ads don't need to be conversational, they could be just references at the end of the answer.

"The above 5 paragraph essay contains an ad. Good luck!"

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#275

Post by vtns »

icepat wrote: post #192
ryandrake wrote: post #49

> "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.

I only ever see this speak from people on the sending end of marketing campaigns. I can't think of the last time I saw someone say anything positive about corporate content. Personally, I go out of my way to not buy anything that I see marketed towards me.

> I can't think of the last time I saw someone say anything positive about corporate content.

A few obvious ones would be: Apple events, anything related to OpenAI or SpaceX.

When I look at influencers, especially those who are selling supplements (Jones, Rogan, Huberman et al.), I see that much of their overall content is purely business-driven, yet people engage with the content and recommend it to others quite willingly.

'Earned' content partnerships (and access journalism) might not be as obvious, but on the sending end it sometimes does get treated as part of corporate content marketing. An example off the top of my head here could be a rather old but influential megapost about Neuralink on Wait But Why – something I'd read start to finish and enjoyed.

All of that said, I think these proposals to have content partnerships and 'brand exposure' without full transparency (as OpenAI is anything but open and transparent about its algorithms) is just another creeping tentacle of sighs the tragedy of the commons.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#276

Post by drawkward »

mvkel wrote: post #261
drawkward wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who are reacting with > ugh I hate ads. Bye ChatGPT subscription! are merely two years ahead of you in the product lifecycle. All advertising is spam. It is a cancer that gobbles up all host environments until nothing but ad content is left.

The web you enjoy today would simply not exist without advertising.

I don't enjoy the web today; I curse the way it has been enshittified. I accept that, because I live in a society, much of what is necessary is currently most frictionlessly accomplished in this psychologically manipulative hellscape.

I enjoyed the web of 3 decades ago, prior to advertising.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#277

Post by mvkel »

drawkward wrote: post #276
mvkel wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The web you enjoy today would simply not exist without advertising.

I don't enjoy the web today; I curse the way it has been enshittified. I accept that, because I live in a society, much of what is necessary is currently most frictionlessly accomplished in this psychologically manipulative hellscape. I enjoyed the web of 3 decades ago, prior to advertising.

The web of 3 decades ago, so 1994, when the entire web was 3,000 websites?

I feel like the world has collectively forgotten that the web has virtually always been ad-supported. The entire dot com boom and bust was all about ads, and -that- started in 1995.

If you want that 1994 web feeling again, BBSs are alive and well

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#278

Post by 39896880 »

glitchc wrote: post #59
39896880 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s amazing how fast OpenAI succumbed to the siren’s song of surveillance capitalism.

One could argue that was by design. After all, Sam's other company is built around a form of global surveillance.

Yes, it makes me wonder if the “Open” part of “OpenAI” was just a play for time while they ingested as much of the world’s knowledge. It sure seems that way.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#279

Post by acka »

samfriedman wrote: post #29

>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.

This is why I hope open-source model fine-tuners will try and make models 'ad averse', to make them as resistant to being influenced by marketing as possible. Maybe the knowledge gained while doing this can be used to minimize other biases that models may acquire from content in their training data as well.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#280

Post by drawkward »

mvkel wrote: post #277
drawkward wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't enjoy the web today; I curse the way it has been enshittified. I accept that, because I live in a society, much of what is necessary is currently most frictionlessly accomplished in this psychologically manipulative hellscape. I enjoyed the web of 3 decades ago, prior to advertising.

The web of 3 decades ago, so 1994, when the entire web was 3,000 websites? I feel like the world has collectively forgotten that the web has virtually always been ad-supported. The entire dot com boom and bust was all about ads, and -that- started in 1995. If you want that 1994 web feeling again, BBSs are alive and well

Yes, the web of 3 decades ago. The pre-advertising web. When there were barriers to entry. When there weren't bots, driven by profit motives.

I don't know why you continue to debate my lived experiences and personal preferences.

Post reply on HN