Yeah, I remember Google had good intentions too. They had a moto “don’t be evil”. Good old days. Enjoy chatGPT while you can I guess.
Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
171–180 of 552 posts
Re: Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go plans at $8 are getting ads too. Netflix introduced a paid plan with ads, and it is more profitable.
sure but if Netflix keeps up its transition to cable then more people will return to the high seas.
There’s an entire generation (Gen Z) that can’t navigate a file system, so I doubt piracy is a true threat in the long term.
Re: Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ding ding ding. Look at all the brands mentioned in just this thread. From a cursory look, I see: * WSJ * Bloomberg * Financial Times * Cartier * Kagi * Protonmail * Coca-Cola * HBO * Windex * Netflix * Azure * AWS We are all ourselves advertisers, we just don't realize it. It is inevitable that chatbots will be RLHF-trained in our footsteps.
That is a weird definition of advertising. It's not an ad if I mention (or even recommend) a product in a post, without going off-topic and without getting any financial benefit.
The New American Oxford Dictionary defines "advertisement" as "a notice or announcement in a public medium promoting a product, service, or event." By that definition, anything that mentions a product in a neutral light (thereby building brand awareness) or positive light (explicitly promotional) is an ad. The fact that it may not be paid for is irrelevant.
A chatbot tuned to casually drop product references like in this thread would build a huge amount of brand awareness and be worth an incredible amount. A chatbot tuned to be insidiously promotional in a surgically targeted way would be worth even more.
I took a quick look at your comment history. If OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. were paid by JuliaHub/Dan Simmons' publisher/Humble Bundle to make these comments in their chatbots, we would unambiguously call them ads:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46279782:
Precisely; today Julia already solves many of those problems.
It also removes many of Matlab's footguns like `[1,2,3] + [4;5;6]`, or also `diag(rand(m,n))` doing two different things depending on whether m or n are 1.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46067423:
I wasn't expecting to read a Hyperion reference in this thread, such a great book.
> Name a game distribution platform that respects its customers
Humble Bundle.
Re: Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
#174I think ads will inevitably roll out across all tiers, even the expensive paid ones. Ad revenue isn't uniformly distributed across users, but rather heavily skewed towards the wealthiest users, exactly the users most able to purchase an ad-free experience. The users paying $20 or $200/month for premium tiers of ChatGPT are precisely the ones you don't want to exclude from generating ad revenue. Google realized this a…
>Google realized this a long time ago; there is no ad-free paid version of Google Search. Google actually experimented with this about a decade ago (I know, I was one of the suckers who paid), but it got canned because why the fuck would you pay google when u-bloc is free? Companies absolutely will offer ad-free experiences. Google has youtube premium, which even compensates creators with half your sub as well. Evenl…
> Companies absolutely will offer ad-free experiences. Google has youtube premium, which even compensates creators with half your sub as well. Evenly distributed too.
Youtube premium is not ad-free, you still gets whatever ads are embedded in the actual content.
Re: Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd go further, with a ban on possession of the data, with a provision for statutory damages.
We could just start to enforce the laws as they're written. If I was to follow a stranger as closely as an entitty like Facebook or Google does and compiled a dossier on that stranger in many countries that would be considered stalking and would be illegal. Incorporating and doing the same thing to society en masse doesn't somehow make it legal despite it somehow makes people disinclined to prosecute.
I think people are disinclined to prosecute because the odds are stacked against them.
I'm thinking of an analogy, and I've mentioned this before in other threads. The concept of statutory damages, as I'm thinking of it, is that a certain level of damages are automatically awarded. For instance this is used for figuring out damages when songs are copied illegally. It eliminates the need to construct a unique legal theory and case for each and every instance. In this case it benefits the record companies, which is of course controversial, but something like it could also benefit consumers.
If a company is found to possess your data, they automatically pay you X dollars, enough to make it a deterrent. You sign up with a law form that specializes in these cases, and they get a share of the damages.
Re: Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
#176I think ads will inevitably roll out across all tiers, even the expensive paid ones. Ad revenue isn't uniformly distributed across users, but rather heavily skewed towards the wealthiest users, exactly the users most able to purchase an ad-free experience. The users paying $20 or $200/month for premium tiers of ChatGPT are precisely the ones you don't want to exclude from generating ad revenue. Google realized this a…
> Google realized this a long time ago; there is no ad-free paid version of Google Search. Ad-free YouTube costs $14 a month (and the creators get a higher payout from premium user views than they do from the free, ad-viewing users).
Youtube premium is not ad-free.
Re: Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The users paying $20 or $200/month for premium tiers of ChatGPT are precisely the ones you don't want to exclude from generating ad revenue. but they're already paying you. While I appreciate the greed can be there, surely they'd be shooting themselves in the foot. There's many people who would pay who find advertising toxic and they have such huge volumes at free level that they'd be able to make a lot off a low i…
The progression of the cable TV industry shows many people are more than happy, or apathetic enough, to allow the industry to double-dip.
Cable TV is a bad analogy because it was a natural monopoly. Even the disruption route (satellite TV) was another natural monopoly.
Netflix doesn't have the moat of "built a physical wire connection to every persons home" that cable TV enjoyed.
Re: Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
#178Even if they raise 10B in ad revenue (an order of magnitude higher than the author suggests) that would still imply a 100x valuation which is insane. There's still an AI bubble.
We should assume that at least a portion of the ads spending currently being channeled towards search would be redirected towards AI, but even then I question if the ad market is large enough to fund all the tech and media companies that rely on it. The ever increasing question to generate more value for the shareholders is in large part being funded by consumerism, gambling, borderline, or outright scams, and I question how much more value can be extracted by that route. We've certainly already crossed a lot of people ethical barriers.
Re: Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
Counter example: Kagi.
Kagi has recently moved to new offices in Belgrade. While I like their product we should not forget that serbia is not a free country, there has been massive corruption and russian influence. Even though there are massive protests from time to time, no leadership change has happened. I don't think the Kagi team has any bad intentions, and most likely they have attended the anti-Vucic protests as well. Moving back to…
> But Switzerland is a totally different country than serbia to operate it.
CIA vs Putin. Not that different imho.
Re: Predicting OpenAI's ad strategy
#180[deleted]