4 ms·

Disagreed. If you've ever watched how non-technical people use google, you'll find that chatGPT already does a much better job. You're not seeing as much SEO bl

by NavinF 4y ago

Disagreed. If you've ever watched how non-technical people use google, you'll find that chatGPT already does a much better job. You're not seeing as much SEO blogspam as non-technical people do because you unconsciously avoid using words that are commonly found in spam.

dr_kiszonka 4y ago
What part do you disagree with? I am also wondering: 1) how resilient chat-to-search will be SEO spam in the future, 2) whether people will be less likely to publish content if chat is supposed to spit out its summaries and, potentially, reduce traffic to their sites.
- lukevp 4y ago
  What does it matter about SEO spam if it’s not linking to any sources and is seemingly generating original content? There’s no benefit to trying to optimize content for a generalized AI because there’s no way to know how it will be leveraged and the provenance of the data won’t be tied to the content creator anyway.
  - macNchz 4y ago
    Surely if this style of search becomes very popular there will be people dedicating tons of effort to gaming the system to ensure the chat bot is primed to answer questions like “what’s the best kind of mattress for a side sleeper?” in a way that helps them sell more mattresses, regardless of whether the bot actually links anywhere.
  - jazzyjackson 4y ago
    AI is not robust against targeted fuzzing https://www.tomshardware.com/news/artifical-intelligence-adversarial-image-recognition,35842.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/artifical-intelligence-adv...
- NavinF 4y ago
  I'm disagreeing with the idea that this will cause big issues. It's a known problem and it's hard to imagine SEO spam getting any worse than it already is. > whether people will be less likely to publish content if chat is supposed to spit out its summaries and, potentially, reduce traffic to their sites. Good. Today, kind humans summarize long winded articles in the comment section and often save me a click. Sometimes I'm that human.

by NavinF 4y ago

dr_kiszonka 4y ago

What part do you disagree with? I am also wondering: 1) how resilient chat-to-search will be SEO spam in the future, 2) whether people will be less likely to publish content if chat is supposed to spit out its summaries and, potentially, reduce traffic to their sites.

lukevp 4y ago
What does it matter about SEO spam if it’s not linking to any sources and is seemingly generating original content? There’s no benefit to trying to optimize content for a generalized AI because there’s no way to know how it will be leveraged and the provenance of the data won’t be tied to the content creator anyway.
- macNchz 4y ago
  Surely if this style of search becomes very popular there will be people dedicating tons of effort to gaming the system to ensure the chat bot is primed to answer questions like “what’s the best kind of mattress for a side sleeper?” in a way that helps them sell more mattresses, regardless of whether the bot actually links anywhere.
- jazzyjackson 4y ago
  AI is not robust against targeted fuzzing https://www.tomshardware.com/news/artifical-intelligence-adversarial-image-recognition,35842.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/artifical-intelligence-adv...
NavinF 4y ago
I'm disagreeing with the idea that this will cause big issues. It's a known problem and it's hard to imagine SEO spam getting any worse than it already is. > whether people will be less likely to publish content if chat is supposed to spit out its summaries and, potentially, reduce traffic to their sites. Good. Today, kind humans summarize long winded articles in the comment section and often save me a click. Sometimes I'm that human.