6 ms·
How long until advertisements are subtly introduced? I didn’t notice any specific brand of limoncello recommended in their demo.
by Xcelerate 2y ago
How long until advertisements are subtly introduced? I didn’t notice any specific brand of limoncello recommended in their demo.
- littlestymaar 2y agoNot long before it's forbidden by law with rules like “if you say the name of one brand, you must name at least two competitors” I suspect.
- KeplerBoy 2y agoThat'll be the European version.
- littlestymaar 2y agoDon't Americans also have rules about hidden advertising like that in regular media?
- tiahura 2y agoAmerican law generally favors freedom of expression.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- arcticbull 2y agoThere are several classes of restrictions on free speech in the US. These include: obscenity, fraud, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, false statements of fact, and —- most relevant here -— commercial speech such as advertising. Advertising has far less protection than is ordinarily afforded to the kind of speech you might do as a person.
- littlestymaar 2y agoYou're talking about the country that live-censor speech with beep when people curse on TV…
- bandrami 2y agoThe American model prefers "sponsored material should be identified as such" though that's only active for broadcasting currently
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- findthewords 2y agoI hope very quickly. The sooner they start competing with Google for ads the better.
- solfox 2y agoAre ads what people want?
- gk1 2y agoPeople want whatever they searched for. If the ads provide that, then sure. That's why Google and Meta are the size that they are...
- croes 2y agoMost of the time I don’t search for products so there is nothing I want to buy.
- sundaeofshock 2y agoGoogle is the size it is due to monopoly power.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- goatlover 2y agoI don't want ads when I search.
- boweruk 2y agoNo but once ChatGPT starts threatening Google's revenue model, maybe they will start putting effort into improving their drastically deteriorating search engine.
- riku_iki 2y agothey need to win search share to threaten Google's revenue model: take traffic from google.com, so google will sell ads. Going to ads busyness is not necessary for this.
- TZubiri 2y ago5 to 10 years
- BiteCode_dev 2y agoHonestly, if I can disable ads by paying them, then I'm ok with it. Google will suck all your data even if you pay, and link the entire earth of services to your identity. For now, chatgpt doesn't care, and I already pay for what they provide. May they kill Google. 20 years old me would freak out hearing me that, they used to be my heroes.
- entropicdrifter 2y agoYou either die a hero or mumble mumble
- zelphirkalt 2y agoYou are thinking you can pay them to not use your data? Think again. They will sneakily use your data anyway. If not yours, then the data of people who do not change setting xyz. Oops, the last update must have reset that option for some users.
- swatcoder 2y ago> Honestly, if I can disable ads by paying them, then I'm ok with it. The modern maxim is: any content platform large enough to host an ad sales department will sell ads Vanishingly few (valuable) consumers have zero tolerance for ads, so not selling ads means leaving huge sums of money on the table once you get to a certain scale. Large organizations have demonstrated that they can't resist that opportunity. The road out is to either convince everyone to have zero tolerance for ads (good luck), to just personally opt for disperse, smaller vendors that distinguish themselves in a niche by not indulging, or to just support and use adversarial ad blockers in order to take personal control. Hoping that the next behemoth that everybody wants to use will protect you from ads is a non-starter. Sooner or later, they're going to take your money and serve you ads, just like the others.
- croes 2y agoYou can pay to get fewer ads
- arcticbull 2y agoSo the issue is if you let people opt out by paying you’re left with a low intent, likely lower net worth group of people to advertise to. As a result those eyeballs are worth less. The advertisers will turn to other platforms if you only let the worst people see their ads. Unless enough people all pay, the whole thing stops working. But there aren’t enough people who will pay because most people don’t care. Tldr: the ad supported business model fundamentally doesn’t work if you let all your best products (you) opt out by paying. It requires them to pay an amount far in excess of what they would be willing to pay for the system to work.
- nuz 2y agoIt's already happened in a subtle way via who got to partner with them to be displayed in results vs not.
- schmidtleonard 2y ago2 years for ads, 6 years to remove the yellow background.
- M4v3R 2y agoI think you’re being very generous with these 2 years.
- schmidtleonard 2y agoYeah, I suppose OpenAI also speedran the "make noble promises to not become evil / become evil" pipeline too.
- xvector 2y agoI guess we're just calling any company that crosses some vague threshold of size/wealth "evil" these days.
- jsheard 2y agoProbably not long, some users already got A/B'ed into testing "sponsored results" https://i.imgur.com/UpAptFL.png https://i.imgur.com/UpAptFL.png
- FriedPickles 2y agoThe response on the left references specific products, but where's the evidence that it's sponsored?
- alwa 2y agoAside from the marketing-ish tone and specific deeplinks to product purchase pages, the prominent Amazon logo and product description headline implied some degree of affiliation to my eyes. It seems like the evidence is that it would be foolish not to take the money for presenting such an obvious referral of a motivated buyer. Frankly the example they posted seems like a fairly happy one, where the user is explicitly implying that they’re seeking a specific physical product to introduce to their life. We’ve all seen where those monetization incentives lead over time though. But you’re right—not even so much as a tiny word “Ad” like Google does…
- citizenpaul 2y agoIt could just be affiliate links? Wow billions of dollars poured into AI so it can serve up referral links. A boring dystopia indeed.
- vitorgrs 2y agoThis is not a sponsored result. If I search about my username that I use on my Mastodon account, it show a result like that... Basically, this means the answer is based on a main webpage. It shows the cute Mastodon logo and all :D
- josefritzishere 2y agoThey might wait a whole week.
- breck 2y agoWhy would they ever want to sell ads? They did not get addicted to selling ads, have billions in revenue from paying subscribers, and don't have to wean themselves off of ads (as Google and Meta would love to do).
- 23B1 2y agoBecause Sam Altman needs to buy another Greubel Forsey, of course.
- kredd 2y agoWhy make $1 when you can make $100?
- disgruntledphd2 2y agoBecause they are massively structurally unprofitable right now?
- axus 2y agoI'd be happy to have another Google clone, that doesn't have a login and is not a chat session. Go to https://search.ai https://search.ai , type my search query and look through the results, with ads on the side.
- tomjen3 2y agoIt is much more expensive to run a search query with AI. I don't think ads can pay for it.
- maeil 2y agoHow many human search queries does Google serve and how much do they make on SERP ads? I can see OpenAI's revenue per search ending up higher too since the ads will be impossible to distinguish, so even more valuable for advertisers.
- luckydata 2y agoIt's absolutely coming. I'm curious to see what their ad units will look like. IMHO ads in an LLM search world will look more like Facebook ads than Google ads. Brand advertising will stay focused on YouTube while click to buy and click to download are probably the best fit for the medium.