21–30 of 88 posts
Google is useless the day ChatGPT include the links to website.
it already does tell people to go to sites, but it also lies about what's there. https://blog.opencagedata.com/post/dont-believe-chatgpt ChatGPT is a convincing fiction generator. Any facts it produces are purely coincidental. It's just really good at mansplaining and gaslighting people about things it knows nothing about.
> We will (barely) survive That a single company, in an unrelated market (ads), merely refusing to do business with you, can almost bankrupt you, means it's time for trust-busting. No single company should have such power.
In this particular case, it seems easier said than done? OP did put eggs in different basquet ( social medias ) but Google will be Google right? What would be the alternative.
Not something needed in a functioning market but if a company decides and manages to dominate a certain market, the rules change one way or another.
PS: I'm deliberately avoiding the word "monopoly". It's not required in most jurisdictions.
OP seems like he'll hopefully be fine, but there's probably been many people like this who aren't fine. I'm sure many people lose their jobs when an advertiser is banned for some dumb and false reason. I'm sure some people fall into depression and commit suicide when their life's work is destroyed. Can't the allegedly smartest company on Earth figure out some solution to help people in these extreme cases? Especially…
I was in a different but comparable situation with Google. I closed my paid account, they claimed I owe them money, and the only way of replying is to log in with said non-existent account.
It's a trivially foreseeable situation, and trivially detected. I bet it's quite common too. If a reasonably intelligent person sat down for five minutes to think about the cancellation process they would identify this branch.
Either those expensive product and software people are incompetent, or they genuinely, deliberately, don't care about edge cases. I can only conclude that it's the second option.
The popular hypothesis is that they couldn't operate at scale without keeping customers away from humans at all costs. But I'm not sure it's true.
Interesting
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it already does tell people to go to sites, but it also lies about what's there. https://blog.opencagedata.com/post/dont-believe-chatgpt ChatGPT is a convincing fiction generator. Any facts it produces are purely coincidental. It's just really good at mansplaining and gaslighting people about things it knows nothing about.
Is "mansplain" just being used to mean "explain in a condescending way" in this context?
So can I create a Google Ad about a competitors domain which will flag Google thinking that they have two accounts running two ad campaigns for the same website? Interesting
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks. It wasn't as concise as I'd hoped for (I wanted about the same number of words as the parent comment) but it's a good summary.
Hmm. It misses the ironic 'thanks to HN advice' point, and more importantly it mixes up suspensions (if I understand correctly): the main ads account was not suspended again *. First the secondary ads account was suspended and only then the main ads account. * This proves ChatGPT has no world model. If it had one, it would have been aware that undoing a Google suspension is impossible, therefore no account can be sus…