3 ms·

> The big missing thing between both the metaphor in the OP's link and yours is that I just can't fathom any of these companies being able to raise a paying sub

> The big missing thing between both the metaphor in the OP's link and yours is that I just can't fathom any of these companies being able to raise a paying subscriber base that can actually cover the outrageous costs of this tech. It feels like a pipe dream. I suspect these companies will introduce ads at some point similar to Google and Facebook for similar reasons, and it will be highly profitable.

ToucanLoucan 2y ago
I mean that's quite an assertion given how the value of existing digital ad space is already cratering and users are more than ever in open rebellion against ad supported services. And besides which, isn't the whole selling point of AI to be an agent that accesses the internet and filters out the bullshit? So what, you're going to do that, then add your own bullshit to the output?
- WhyOhWhyQ 2y ago
  I agree with everything you said in your previous post. The LLM as a search engine might basically eat Google's lunch in the same way the internet ate cable tv's lunch. Cable tv was a terrible product due to the advertising, and you could escape the BS by watching stuff online. Now look where we are.
  - ToucanLoucan 2y ago
    Fun fact: Cable itself was originally the ad-free "premium" version of over-the-air television! And it eventually added some ads and then more ads and now we're at present day, where you get roughly 8 minutes of ads per 22 minutes of content. I noticed visiting a hotel recently (like fuck I pay for cable!) that their cable service had sped up the intro of Law and Order SVU, presumably to make room for more advertisements.
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      >I noticed visiting a hotel recently (like fuck I pay for cable!) that their cable service had sped up the intro of Law and Order SVU, presumably to make room for more advertisements. That's pretty smart of them! It makes sense to try to increase the time for ads, and decrease the time for the TV show; maybe next they can just cut the credits, or cut out parts of each act in the show. There's no reason not to. After all, the only people still paying for cable TV subscriptions are elderly people who absolutely refuse to give up their reruns of decades-old shows and also refuse to learn how to use Hulu, so they'll happily pay $150/month so they can watch 70s shows with even worse video quality than TVs in the 70s had.
    - vel0city 2y ago
      > Cable itself was originally the ad-free "premium" version of over-the-air television Often repeated but not true. Cable was originally just all the ad-supported OTA stations delivered over a wire. It had ads on day 1. It would be over a decade before the first premium cable channels would launch, and even then most of the first channels also had ads.

ToucanLoucan 2y ago

I mean that's quite an assertion given how the value of existing digital ad space is already cratering and users are more than ever in open rebellion against ad supported services. And besides which, isn't the whole selling point of AI to be an agent that accesses the internet and filters out the bullshit? So what, you're going to do that, then add your own bullshit to the output?

WhyOhWhyQ 2y ago
I agree with everything you said in your previous post. The LLM as a search engine might basically eat Google's lunch in the same way the internet ate cable tv's lunch. Cable tv was a terrible product due to the advertising, and you could escape the BS by watching stuff online. Now look where we are.
- ToucanLoucan 2y ago
  Fun fact: Cable itself was originally the ad-free "premium" version of over-the-air television! And it eventually added some ads and then more ads and now we're at present day, where you get roughly 8 minutes of ads per 22 minutes of content. I noticed visiting a hotel recently (like fuck I pay for cable!) that their cable service had sped up the intro of Law and Order SVU, presumably to make room for more advertisements.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    >I noticed visiting a hotel recently (like fuck I pay for cable!) that their cable service had sped up the intro of Law and Order SVU, presumably to make room for more advertisements. That's pretty smart of them! It makes sense to try to increase the time for ads, and decrease the time for the TV show; maybe next they can just cut the credits, or cut out parts of each act in the show. There's no reason not to. After all, the only people still paying for cable TV subscriptions are elderly people who absolutely refuse to give up their reruns of decades-old shows and also refuse to learn how to use Hulu, so they'll happily pay $150/month so they can watch 70s shows with even worse video quality than TVs in the 70s had.
  - vel0city 2y ago
    > Cable itself was originally the ad-free "premium" version of over-the-air television Often repeated but not true. Cable was originally just all the ad-supported OTA stations delivered over a wire. It had ads on day 1. It would be over a decade before the first premium cable channels would launch, and even then most of the first channels also had ads.