601–610 of 809 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Something like searchQuery+=“ reddit” should do the trick.
I’ve never understood this meme - Reddit only works for product reviews, and only if you ignore astroturfing. Who goes to Reddit for factual information? It’s definitely not Wikipedia, it’s more like an op-ed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
when did "vaporware" change meaning from "something that has been talked about repeatedly, for a long time, but never ended up releasing" to simply "something that is not out right now"? I've seen this word misused similarly a lot recently.
The meaning of "vaporware" has evolved over time. It originally referred to software or hardware products that were announced or promised to be released, but never actually materialized or were significantly delayed. However, as technology and the pace of innovation have accelerated, the definition of vaporware has broadened to encompass any product or service that is promised or rumored, but has not yet been release…
remember the Phantom? classic vaporware. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_Entertainment
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It reminds me of the Tiktok vs Youtube comparison. Ad revenue was way higher on long format content, but the success of Tiktok means that Youtube now has to pay more to creators, even if their margins are lower. AI as search is lower margin but Google will need to implement it just to stay relevant.
YouTube is heavily investing in shorts as well but a bit late.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. There is a ton of money to be made. Advertisements can be even more lucrative, we just have to rethink the whole idea of advertisement. Imagine the chat bot as a digital salesperson, but for literally everything. It can even be optimized in a manner that if a user asks for too much work that doesn't involve selling you products (eg. writing essays) it can go "I'm Sorry Dave, but you need a ChatGPT Premium…
Nobody is going to use a chat-bot if it is (a) constantly trying to sell you something or (b) going to give you biased results that are influenced by advertising spend. So OP is right that this model is going to be financially harmful to Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not a fumble, more like a fundamental limit of the public corporation. Google has an established cash flow that relies on search and people clicking through to websites full of more ads. Once Google perfected that revenue model, they were pretty much locked in. They could explore new revenue streams in new areas like cars or speakers, but investors would howl for blood if they tried to reinvent the search experi…
I don’t really understand this line of reasoning. >In the Bing demo, they asked for the best gaming TV and boom, there was the gaming TV I just bought after doing the research myself the long way. No clicks, no revenue. In this example “no clicks, no revenue” applies more to Google than it does Bing. Bing maybe didn’t make any money off that particular search but they did demonstrate that they have a better product,…
Google should continue to maximize dollars per click. They have an established revenue model and should not try to disrupt themselves. Short term profits over long term profits are favored by Wall Street.
Microsoft has a tiny portion of the search and ads market. They have no substantial revenue to protect. If they try to disrupt search and succeed, but kill the click through ratio and number of searches per user in the process, that’s no problem for them. They can steal away Google’s users first and worry about making money off it later. They might even make search less profitable in the long run and something that offered as a loss leader to get users into the rest of their ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>of course Edge is Chrome under the hood Embrace, Extend. That's the beauty of open source, right? If development and innovation slows, somebody can fork.
> Embrace, Extend. Wonder what comes next from Microsoft after Embrace and Extend ...
Are people here actually trying this out or is it vaporware as of yet? I ask because this seems ambiguous: The new Bing is live today “for desktop limited preview,” but it appears users are only able to “ask” one of a number of preset queries and receive the same results each time. There is also a waitlist to sign up for full access in the future. If it's just an announcement of an announcement*, we should downweight…
Get this, if you use Edge, with bing as search by default and join the waitlist, then another button appears "get access faster" or something, which then takes you to a page to make sure you've defaulted everything to Microsoft, and you've scanned a QR code to download a Bing mobile app. I can't be bothered _all_ of that. Mainly the addition of a new mobile app.
This is a potentially momentous occasion here. Microsoft is betting hard that they can mount a challenge to Google, and I think ChatGPT can credibly attempt that. The answer from Google so far is weak. The thought that Bing may actually overtake Google would be hilarious a few months ago, and now it looks... possible?
they'd have to get ChatGPT to stop spewing up made up bullshit and fake academic citations first, which I think is a bit of a bigger problem than many seem to be considering. the outcome will still be hilarious though, so it's win win for the onlookers I guess edit: all the responses here who think the garbage is "just fine, at least it's not SEO" are similarly hilarious. as though SEO would not be polluting the AI a…
> Unlike ChatGPT, the new Bing can also retrieve news about recent events. In The Verge’s demos, the search engine was even able to answer questions about its own launch, citing stories published by news sites in the last hour.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They didn't do anything with it because chatbots are unequivocally a worse business model than the current search paradigm. I'm not so sure. Imagine having a human assistant that's smart enough to pass the bar, get an MBA, pass medical exams, and knows how to work on your car, and is good at brainstorming, and and and... And having that person do searches for you. Are you sure that working with this assistant would…
Oh the chatbots absolutely have the potential to create tons of value. The question is if its creator can harvest it/how much will be left with the consumer vs the producer. I suspect that it will still be very difficult to get people to sign up for subscriptions and advertising will be less effective than current search advertising so the chatbot creator will have difficult harvesting the value they create.
Make a marketplace for targeted discounts to incentivize changed behavior.
Many companies that sell consumables are happy to give a first sample free in hopes of repeat purchasing.
If I ask AI for a good lavender scented hand soap refill, it should have a fiduciary duty to give me the best economic choice for me. HOWEVER, AI could solicit discounts from this marketplace platform at the point the AI is making the decision: a new layer above and around Amazon and Walmart and every other established player. Hand soap manufacturers can compete with deals like "people who order hand soap at least twice a year can get 60% off their first purchase" and pay a commission to the AI platform for facilitating the discount. Users can trust the AI with their data because of the fiduciary responsibility and so become willing participants in keeping it accurate because it increases the ability of the AI to serve them.