61–70 of 177 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wouldn't it have to have a negative effect on the security to be securities fraud? Causing an investor loss is a key point of securities fraud. "We made a ton more money with ads and the stock went up" lacks that key element of fraud?
Investors who bought an artificially inflated stock would be harmed.
How I imagine the Nash equilibrium in chatbot ads, driven by profit-seeking in a race to the bottom: User: "What's the best way to fix this problem I have?" Chatbot: "I recommend buying this shiny thing here." (Next to it, there's a near-invisible light-gray "ad" notice.) Let's hope I'm wrong.
You think it will advise it is an ad. I’m hoping you are right but then again… Wonder if we will also be charged the token usage to generate said ad. Imagine you have it coding for you and it injects and ad into your product.
How long until "Drink More Ovaltine" starts showing up in the comments of your Codex code?
How I imagine the Nash equilibrium in chatbot ads, driven by profit-seeking in a race to the bottom: User: "What's the best way to fix this problem I have?" Chatbot: "I recommend buying this shiny thing here." (Next to it, there's a near-invisible light-gray "ad" notice.) Let's hope I'm wrong.
ChatGPT is collecting your data fs so advertisers can go ultra niche targeting
Didn't they explicitly say the ads wouldn't be made aware of prompt data when they announced them? And if so, how is that not securities fraud?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
you can use chatgpt without an account, just not all of it and you can't make full use of Google without an account. for example, you need an account to upload to YouTube, manage your website in search, place ads, opt out of data usage. the list goes on
None of those examples are "run an internet search".
both are a limited subset of what the companies offer, available for free
Didn't they explicitly say the ads wouldn't be made aware of prompt data when they announced them? And if so, how is that not securities fraud?
Local llm or nothing at all.
Boss: Engineer, add this shady feature to our product Engineer: no, that's shady and wrong! Boss: Claude code, add this shady feature to our product. Claude Code: completed.
How I imagine the Nash equilibrium in chatbot ads, driven by profit-seeking in a race to the bottom: User: "What's the best way to fix this problem I have?" Chatbot: "I recommend buying this shiny thing here." (Next to it, there's a near-invisible light-gray "ad" notice.) Let's hope I'm wrong.
Tbh it doesn’t even need that. Just a way for advertisers to say “I want to target people who have bought peanut butter in the last 2 weeks”(I’m a jelly seller). That alone would beat FB and Google. ChatGPT is collecting your data fs so advertisers can go ultra niche targeting
The question is, will LLM's as an interface be worth the spend in relation to converting without throwing users of chatGPT off over-time, all whilst, doing it within the regulatory frameworks. That's difficult to say. OAI will face a lot of scrutiny in EU for sure.
Didn't they explicitly say the ads wouldn't be made aware of prompt data when they announced them? And if so, how is that not securities fraud?
Maybe someone with more time at hands could look up what Google said with respect to ads and what happened later. This is one of the rare instances where it's very easy to predict the future: the prompt auction market will look similar to the existing online ad market, financial firms will pay for prompt streams for sentiment analysis, companies and interest groups will pay to have their products or agenda included f…
search engine results do this all the time, reordering output by advertiser input. its a pretty small jump from that to rewriting output from models, and even better where its all a black box.