131–140 of 190 posts
Injecting ads into answers will be the next step for the search market. Reddit is doing it already. And unlike reddit post or comment ads, it may be very difficult to block.
It was a very short lunch.
As Tyler Cowen says, solve for the equilibrium. "Many widely used machine-learning models rely on copyrighted data. For instance, Google finds the most relevant web pages for a search term by relying on a machine learning model trained on copyrighted web data. But the use of copyrighted data by machine learning models that generate content (or give answers to search queries than link to sites with the answers) poses…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stuck overflow may not be the greatest example. I have switch to using GitHub discussions and Discord on the "where to get help for my projects" side of things. I ignore SO when it comes to support. Lots of other open source projects doing similar. This trend was happening before LLMs entered the arena.
Discord is just absolutely worthless for this. Any question that gets asked gets buried in days if not hours. It pretty much guarantees the same basic garbage gets repeated over and over and over forever. Basically the exact opposite of stack overflow.
Once, before I realized this, I recommended users of a forum use Discord. The impact was severe and fortunately brief. We all realized we would not be leaving the usual, often high value info for others, and ourselves to benefit from in the future.
We unwound that mess and now carry on in the usual way.
Discord has carved out a huge chunk of discussion people will wish was available in the future.
Injecting ads into answers will be the next step for the search market. Reddit is doing it already. And unlike reddit post or comment ads, it may be very difficult to block.
I had lunch with an entrepreneur with a "big idea" to convince major LLM platforms to feature ads in their answers, using businesses that they specify. It was a very short lunch.
We just need to go back at reading books in libraries
I've written a 125,000-word book a year before GPT-3 was a thing. If this book came out today, in 2025, how would you know that the 420 pages are actually worth your time and not just a bunch of hallucinated LLM slop? I've been wondering whether Wikipedia and libraries in 2030 will be in a better overall place quality-wise, or will just be overrun. The last few times I looked for information on YouTube (by typing a k…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Discord is just absolutely worthless for this. Any question that gets asked gets buried in days if not hours. It pretty much guarantees the same basic garbage gets repeated over and over and over forever. Basically the exact opposite of stack overflow.
I hate that about Discord. It is a fun comms application, but it is severely lacking as a community. Once, before I realized this, I recommended users of a forum use Discord. The impact was severe and fortunately brief. We all realized we would not be leaving the usual, often high value info for others, and ourselves to benefit from in the future. We unwound that mess and now carry on in the usual way. Discord has ca…
I haven't really tried one as a QA or knowledge sharing site, perhaps they're much less good at that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But AI is also going to kill some of your positive examples. Stack Overflow for example is in a steep decline, only a small fraction of questions are posted today compared to the peak. And the effects are more than financial, so even non-profit examples like forums would be hit. If new people don't discover your site with useful user-created content, they won't contribute to it. You're also cutting off the pipeline f…
Surely part of that is because most tech related questions have already been asked and answered on SO. I'd say a decline in new question is stack overflow working as designed. A large part of what makes SO so good is the searchability of old questions. There will always be new questions to ask, as new technologies confuse Devs in new ways, but to expect new questions to be asked at the same rate as peak is to misunde…
The argument seems flawed to me: by "killing the web", they refer to the example of a company adding SEO'd information to their website to lure in traffic from web searches. However, me personally, I don't want to be lured into some web store when I'm looking for some vaguely related information. Luckily, there's tons of information on the web provided not by commercial entities but by volunteers: wikipedia, forum us…
Another commonly ignored group are those that publish information because they want others to know about that information. Even in a worst-case situation where websites are only crawled by bots and get no human visitors at all anymore, government and company websites won't disappear. Any tourist board worth their salt will increase the amount of content they publish compared to current levels. The local conspiracy nu…
But unfortunately also sites that generate high quality information (eg independent research, reviews, journalism) will also struggle and be more reliant on paywalls and subscriptions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are a lot of artists and creators that create while they work in a job not related to what they create. Money is not the only motivation to create.
I might even prefer those that make content for love of the thing and not for profit. I am not against them making a living. But There is enough of examples that in long run jus ending up worse. Maybe with higher "production quality". But worse in other ways that matter.
I don't understand why all these companies want to replace links to human curated high quality information with slightly more convenient to access AI hallucinations. Whenever I have an important question, the AI generated answer is only useful to the extent that it provides links (i.e. search).