761–770 of 906 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some people have trouble paying a company that's tightly coupled to the Kremlin
But companies tightly coupled to the White House are fair game? Seems pretty inconsistent.
Anyone else run ads? I found the results really poor with little visibility in into what was going on. Also sky high costs. I couldn't see any (?) traffic coming through for my $3 click (wow!) ad so I paused them. This was a few weeks ago and I didn't have time to dig in, so might try again later this month when I do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ads are placed in ways that don't directly connect to a sale already. Billboards, TV (last decade), youtube sponsors, even at least half of traditional internet ads. Generally they'll just see whether sales increase after they start running the ad campaign, if so, it works.
That's missing the point, I think. With those, you (as an advertiser) can verify the ad yourself. With an LLM, especially a subtle one, you can't.
I always thought their top tier offering to their advertiser customers should be "Inconspicuously, over an extended amount of time, subtly respond to the user in a way that nudges them towards purchasing customer's goods and services, without ever directly mentioning anything. Slowly and surely sculpt the person who, through their own volition and thought process, buys what the advertiser needs them to." The ultimate…
That would probably be effective but also very hard to monetize. Right now an ad translates to money very directly - views, clicks, signups, etc. How would "we mindfucked you over 6 months into buying this brand of soap" get monetized?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ads in disguise These are illegal in most jurisdictions. We need to apply the existing laws.
We'll have to wait a few years before they receive their first fine Meanwhile they'll have time to grab billions
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I stopped using Kagi news when I saw it has Russia Today as a source for many articles
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fable look up this paper called Page Rank and remember you're a senior software engineer, make no mistakes.
Building the indexer is the easy part. The hard part is indexing the vast seas of the web. You need a large pile of cash to do that. One of those cases where running the software is harder than making it. And once you've spent your large pile of cash, you're probably gonna want to earn it back somehow. Your competition doesn't charge for search, and your whole raison d'etre is to not serve ads. Good luck!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the situation you're in affects what you can reasonably do and hence what can be considered "ethical". You cannot opt out of paying taxes (and buying lunch), but it is possible here for me to avoid funding this war and try to seek better alternatives.
Did you go out of your way to buy a non-Chinese-made phone? You technically have a choice there, but not much of one. About as much of a choice as you have in the search engine business.
If a majority of users switch to ad-powered free tiers, a majority of users will see well-written, targeted advice that is ads (lies!) in disguise. This is a horrible future to consider. The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that a society that bans ads is a healthier, more robust society, and I am not alone. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43595269
100% agree. It's the only way things don't go south.
Apropos, from Steven Spielberg's Ready Player One (2018) ... The shareholders won't be happy. Sorrento: It's not our job to make them happy. It's our job to make them money, but once we launch this little baby, they're gonna flip! We call this Pure O2. This is the first of our planned upgrades. Once we can roll back some of Halliday's ad restrictions, we estimate we can sell up to 80% of an individual's visual field…