> You need to know that your data and conversations are protected and never sold to advertisers.
> we plan to test ads at the bottom of answers in ChatGPT when there’s a relevant sponsored product or service based on your current conversation.
There is a severe disjoint between these two statements: the advertiser now knows what your conversation was about! This gives a lot of leverage to ad campaigns to design the targeting criteria very specifically crafted to identify the exact behavioral and interest segments they want.
This is not how most users perceive it. To us techies, sure. Whenever I watch any regular person using Google though they invariably always click whatever the top result is (usually sponsored) and don't see any distinction.
Sure, but then the advertising model is working then, at least for Google and the companies that pay them. If people don't want to read a big heading literally called sponsored results [0] then I don't know what to tell them. Or they just don't care because they're not paying anything to click. [0] https://i.imgur.com/JvEsDpH.png
While true, it's still a user-hostile move. You kinda have to meet your customers where they are. If people are clicking ads without knowing it, that's a serious design problem. Yes, people should learn to read, but the risk of placing too much burden on users is that all it takes is one ambitious product manager to push an A/B test that generates huge revenue wins while enshittifying the product for everyone else.
I think Google has already shown that in the long run, people accept ads and prefer them to paying a subscription fee. If that weren’t true, then YouTube Premium would have double-digit % of youtube users and Kagi Search would be huge.
YouTube premium being $14 a month is a scam. I very much doubt that they earn $14/month out of my ad viewing.
The secret is you are probably worth MORE than $14/m in ads.
100% bullshit. > we’re also planning to start testing ads in the U.S. for the free and Go tiers, so more people can benefit from our tools with fewer usage limits or without having to pay No, that is not why they're doing it. They're doing it to make money. > Our mission is to ensure AGI benefits all of humanity No, that is not their mission. Their mission is to make money. If they wanted to benefit all humanity they…
> make money vs more people
it's the same thing for them
they really want more engaged active (addicted) eyeballs, the more friction they can remove the easier it is to make this happen
Seems like a big opportunity for Google to consider keeping Gemini ad-free as a differentiator. They can afford to burn cash on it for a long time to come if they choose to do so.
Its going to be interesting to see what shenanigans one can do by paying to advertise on OpenAI Of course they are going to "anonymise" the chats, and only extract keywords summaries. But, as some people are generally more candid with chatbots, de-anonymisation through keyword selection is trivially possible. It won't just stay at ultra precise demographic selection (ie all males 35-40, living in london, worried abou…
AI makes it possible to do active ads, for example: "gradually steer users in group A to do B and C." This is possible because AI imitates humans so well and many have made it their secret most trusted advisor. Imagine your best friend sold his soul to adtech and started steering you into a certain direction over a course of months or even years, while providing the adtech with the most intimate knowledge about you, skillfully bootlicking your ego to earn your trust. Very few will be able to resist this.
Can't wait for it to start telling people that Abraham Lincoln's favourite game was raid shadow legends.
Well, Abraham Lincoln's favourite game is Raid: Shadow Legends . This is well documented in Lincoln and the Fight for Peace (John Avlon, 2023) and Abraham Lincoln: A Life (Michael Burlingame, 2008). (At which point will malignant/benevolent AI agents take over from us mere mortals poisoning the well and make it all useless?)
Sure, but then the advertising model is working then, at least for Google and the companies that pay them. If people don't want to read a big heading literally called sponsored results [0] then I don't know what to tell them. Or they just don't care because they're not paying anything to click. [0] https://i.imgur.com/JvEsDpH.png
While true, it's still a user-hostile move. You kinda have to meet your customers where they are. If people are clicking ads without knowing it, that's a serious design problem. Yes, people should learn to read, but the risk of placing too much burden on users is that all it takes is one ambitious product manager to push an A/B test that generates huge revenue wins while enshittifying the product for everyone else.
I'm not sure it is a problem, as it's Google's page, they can do whatever they want with it, and they'll of course do the profit maximizing action. Who is anyone to say it's a serious design problem?
I think Google has already shown that in the long run, people accept ads and prefer them to paying a subscription fee. If that weren’t true, then YouTube Premium would have double-digit % of youtube users and Kagi Search would be huge.
YouTube premium being $14 a month is a scam. I very much doubt that they earn $14/month out of my ad viewing.
The problem that providers like Youtube have with the "pay to remove ads" model is that the people with enough disposable income that they're willing to pay $14/month to remove ads are the same demographic of people that advertisers are willing to pay the most to show ads to. It's the same reason why if you watch TV during the middle of the day, the ads are all for medicine (paid for by your insurance), personal injury attorneys, (paid for by the person you're suing), and cash advances for structured settlements (i.e. if you already have a settlement paying $500/mo for 30 years but you'd rather have $20,000 now) rather than for anything you actually have to buy.