4 ms·
Bolting banner ads onto a technology that can organically weave any concept into a trusted conversation would be incredibly crude.
by lxgr 1y ago
Bolting banner ads onto a technology that can organically weave any concept into a trusted conversation would be incredibly crude.
- nacnud 1y agoTrue - but if you erode that trust then your users may go elsewhere. If you keep the ads visually separated, there's a respected boundary & users may accept it.
- calvinmorrison 1y agogoogle did it. LLms are the new google search. It'll happen sooner or later.
- ptero 1y agoYes, but for a while google was head and shoulders above the competition. It also poured a ton of money into building non-search functionality (email, maps, etc.). And had a highly visible and, for a while, internally respected "don't be evil" corporate motto. All of which made it much less likely that users would bolt in response to each real monetization step. This is very different to the current situation, where we have a shifting landscape with several AI companies, each with its strengths. Things can change, but it takes time for 1-2 leaders to consolidate and for the competition to die off. My 2c.
- SJC_Hacker 1y agoThere will be a respected boundary for a time, then as advertisers find its more effective the boundaries will start to disappear
- Analemma_ 1y agoLike that’s ever stopped the adtech industry before. It would be a hilarious outcome though, “we built machine gods, and the main thing we use them for is to make people click ads.” What a perfect Silicon Valley apotheosis.
- evilfred 1y agohow is it "trusted" when it just makes things up
- andrewflnr 1y agoThat's a great question to ask the people who seem to trust them implicitly.
- handfuloflight 1y agoThey aren't trusted in a vacuum. They're trusted when grounded in sources and their claims can be traced to sources. And more specifically, they're trusted to accurately represent the sources.
- andrewflnr 1y agoNope, lots of idiots just take them at face value. You're still describing what rational people do, not what all actual people do.
- handfuloflight 1y agoFair enough.
- sheiyei 1y ago> they're trusted to accurately represent the sources. Which is still too much trust
- PebblesRox 1y agoIf you believe this, people believe everything they read by default and have to apply a critical thinking filter on top of it to not believe the thing. I know I don't have as much of a filter as I ought to! https://www.lesswrong.com/s/pmHZDpak4NeRLLLCw/p/TiDGXt3WrQwtCdDj3 https://www.lesswrong.com/s/pmHZDpak4NeRLLLCw/p/TiDGXt3WrQwt...
- ModernMech 1y agoI imagine they would be more like product placements in film and TV than banner ads. Just casually dropping a recommendation and link to Brand (TM) in a query. Like those Cerveza Cristal ads in star wars. They'll make it seem completely seamless to the original query.
- thewebguyd 1y agoI just hope that if it comes to that (and I have no doubt that it will), regulation will catch up and mandate any ad/product placement is labeled as such and not just slipped in with no disclosure whatsoever. But, given that we've never regulated influencer marketing which does the same thing, nor are TV placements explicitly called out as "sponsored" I have my doubts but one can hope.
- lxgr 1y agoYup, and I wouldn't be willing to bet that any firewall between content and advertising would hold, long-term. For example, the more product placement opportunities there are, the more products can be placed, so sooner or later that'll become an OKR to the "content side" of the business as well.