621–630 of 763 posts
It was unavoidable and inevitable. Still it saddens me that we will be sitting here in a years time and discuss our experiences of being fed ads served as "objective information". Today if I ask: "should I buy a store product or just use raw material X?" , gpt and others will gladly say you might as well just use the raw product. Pretty sure that will change very quickly.
The metered APIs aren't going anywhere... one hopes
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be illegal. I understand that there are a lot of strong opinions and open questions about OpenAI behavior – the amount of vigilantism is quite staggering – but if what they do is found to be clearly illegal by courts around the world, they will have to pay very hefty fines. Disguising ads is one such move. That's just not a winning business.
How much can you bias training to favor certain products before it becomes illegal? That seems like a similar question to "how much linear algebra do you have to do to copyrighted works before copyright doesn't apply anymore".
Just deleted ChatGPT. Using Claude until ads show up there after which I'll start hosting locally at a major performance loss
Where do we move from here when we actually want to find good/fair information?
Something like private/paid search engines like DuckDuckGo/kagi as last hold-outs?
All of these "farewell ChatGPT then!" and "they have no moat anyway" comments here are very strange. Does anyway even remember when Google used to not have ads? The introduction of ads was seen as crazy, yet nobody stopped using Google. People who say there's no moat should spend 5 minutes on social media. A big meme going around is "sure, show my wife or even the general public my most personal and intimate chats an…
I can drop in replace LLMs in my everyday usage. If OpenAI introduces ads, I will switch and never look back. They have no Moat, and right now the Chinese companies catch up shortly after the models are released… All these arguments about average people not knowing about other LLM companies can be fixed with a simple internet search or information sharing. No big deal.
> I will switch and never look back You are at the extreme tail end. For most average users, that includes your average mothers, fathers, uncles, aunts, cousins etc, chatGPT is a magical all knowing tool that mostly spits out good answers to their mundane questions. Just like Google does. But better. Instead of more clicking action and more load and more brain actions required in google, chatGPT simply gives you the…
> Where did you find us?
> ChatGPT
> Right, we're getting a lot of that, we do very well on there
For whatever reason, ChatGPT tends to recommend this one barber over all others in the town.
It's a decent barber, but the economic effect of being the barber that ChatGPT recommends is obviously significant.
Now I'm sure at first, any ads will be very clearly marked and separate from chat, just as google's first adverts were.
But over time that will degrade until they're seemlessly integrated into the chat experience.
- ~1 billion users in just 3 years - Extremely personal data on users - Novel way of introducing and learning more about sponsored products - Strong branding for non-techie people (most normal people don't know what Claude or Gemini are) - An app that is getting more and more addictive/indispensable I think OpenAI is going to kill it in ads eventually. This is why Meta and Google went all in on AI. Their lucrative di…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much can you bias training to favor certain products before it becomes illegal? That seems like a similar question to "how much linear algebra do you have to do to copyrighted works before copyright doesn't apply anymore".
I don't get why we try to make the story so convoluted. They will just declare the ads, as all big platforms do. It's legal and it works. Why would they open themselves up to lawsuits over this? It's just not reasonable.