3 ms·
This sounds exactly like what Google used to say about search results. Just a few ads, clearly separated from organic results, never detracting from the core mi
by wrs 9mo ago
This sounds exactly like what Google used to say about search results. Just a few ads, clearly separated from organic results, never detracting from the core mission of providing the most effective access to all the world’s information. (And certainly not driven by a secret profile of you based on pervasive surveillance of your internet activity.)
- EA-3167 9mo agoTo be fair the open with a big lie about how useful agents and AI in general are, which helps to set the tone for what comes next. Part of me wonders if it’s intentional, a way to weed out the non-marks before getting to the punchline that they’re rolling out the most predictable attempt at monetizing ever.
- imron 9mo agoThe first punchline > Our mission is to ensure AGI benefits all of humanity; our pursuit of advertising is always in support of that mission
- rpdillon 9mo agoCame here to mention this. > Ads are always separate and clearly labeled. Indeed. Let's look at Google's launch of Adwords in October 2000: > Google’s quick-loading AdWords text ads appear to the right of the Google search results and are highlighted as sponsored links, clearly separate from the search results. https://googlepress.blogspot.com/2000/10/google-launches-self-service.html https://googlepress.blogspot.com/2000/10/google-launches-sel... Things evolved from there, and that's likely here, as well, I think.
- jonplackett 9mo agoGoogle also famously intent Isla made their search engine _worse_ so you have to look through more results, and then see more ads. The enshitificstion begins. The only saving grace is the promise to have an ad-free tier. If something is valuable to you, paying for it to not have ads is very reasonable.
- johannesrexx 9mo agoThe [enshittification](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification) begins. Fixed that for you, and I agree fully with that assessment.
- rishabhaiover 9mo agoA plea to the wise members of this community, please stop using this word. Use degradation or decay but not this.
- qotgalaxy 9mo ago[dead]
- HWR_14 9mo agoWhat is wrong with "enshittification" as a word?
- rpdillon 9mo agoI think the word doesn't have a good analogue, so I support it. I wish it sounded a bit less sophomoric, but the concept is sound, because it's the intentional worsening of a product to extract more revenue, not just by charging more, but by being worse for the intended purpose. I don't think degradation or decay capture this...those are more associated with a process in nature, or due to the laws of physics, but especially something unintentional (like "bit rot"). I like Cory Doctorow, so I might be a bit biased here. Would be interested in alternatives that capture the intentional aspect.
- judahmeek 9mo agoThe neologism is purposefully crude
- thech6newshound 9mo agoI don't know, I like that it somehow implies it is caused by humans. Decay is a natural process, sometimes unavoidable. Degredation is often used in the same sense. But human and organisational decisions are driving this.
- QuantumGood 9mo agoIt often seems that beginning advertising is not the first step on a slipperly slope. Not having a plan to avoid advertising is the first slipperly step. This is due to having so many examples that not having advertising is the first step to having advertising, and that having advertising will be optimized for profit, and frustrate users.
- acdha 9mo agoI think the problem is that advertising is one of the few areas where you can scale revenue without the user’s permission. Once you start depending on it, there’s always pressure to beat last quarter’s numbers and it’s easy to tell yourself that users don’t care, and the heat if any arrives years later.
- personjerry 9mo ago(In)famously, Google's motto used to be "Don't be evil" Scary to think about, if moving away from "Don't be evil" is the precedent for an "AGI company"
- ASalazarMX 9mo agoIn a way, it's honest that they left it. Other companies wouldn't find issue in being blatantly evil while keeping the motto.
- timeon 9mo agoLike keeping "Open" in name?
- rendaw 9mo agoMaybe they had issues with people internally using it as justification to refuse to work on projects?
- tim333 9mo agoDon't be evil is still in The Google Code of Conduct. It ends: >And remember... don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! (https://abc.xyz/investor/board-and-governance/google-code-of-conduct/ https://abc.xyz/investor/board-and-governance/google-code-of...) It's just no longer the main motto. Apparently it was thought to be inspired by the Microsoft antitrust case which was going on at the time as in don't be like that.
- usef- 9mo agoAre you defining "evil" as "has an ad-supported product"? In every tech generation, for good or bad, mainstream consumers choose the ad-based product over the paid product. So every company that wants scale in the long-term ends up adopting an ad-based free tier to avoid becoming niche, it seems. Even the majority of HN users now appear to use gmail despite paid email hosts being incredibly cheap. Edit: Not sure why the downvotes. Would you prefer that OpenAI leaves Google (who is ad-supported) to win the general public? I'm saying the above as someone who does purchase the ad-free plan when available, and uses paid email.
- satvikpendem 9mo agoI mean, Google Ads are still clearly separated and are labeled as such (there's even a "hide sponsored results" button. Not sure why people even click on the ads when the actual result is right below but that's not usually me.
- wredcoll 9mo agoReally? At least half the time the real results are below "the fold" for me.
- satvikpendem 9mo agoDepends on your screen size. Regardless lots of people scroll down anyway since they've been trained to by ads. https://i.imgur.com/JvEsDpH.png https://i.imgur.com/JvEsDpH.png
- Kye 9mo agoDo they? I haven't seen any research. My non-scientific experience watching people use Google tells me they mostly cycle through the ads at the top until they get to the right thing, or forget what they were doing and follow the first advertiser's funnel.
- schmichael 9mo agoStep 1: Google made an excellent search engine where the top result is often the right choice for many common queries. Step 2: Sell the top result slot. Step 3: Profit.
- satvikpendem 9mo agoThat's why it makes a cool 100 billion in profit every year. It's one of the best money printers ever conceived, because it controls the distribution. We'll see how OpenAI does.
- qingcharles 9mo agoThis is not how most users perceive it. To us techies, sure. Whenever I watch any regular person using Google though they invariably always click whatever the top result is (usually sponsored) and don't see any distinction.
- joedevon 9mo agoGoogle is googley. Very different than any other company ever. You can trust us. With Search results. Your private emails. Your private documents. Remember our motto, do no evil. We will never change.
- TacticalCoder 9mo agoYup but I still trust Google way more than Microsoft (this company should just die an horrible death) and way, way, way more than OpenAI. Now you may say that sucking less than Microsoft and OpenAI really isn't an high bar at all. And I fully agree with that.
- LaundroMat 9mo agoThey even used to say ads were a bad idea [0]. [0] https://indieresearch.net/2014/03/30/advertising-and-mixed-motives/ https://indieresearch.net/2014/03/30/advertising-and-mixed-m...
- newppc 9mo agoAnd then Sam Altman famously said he wasn't sure how they would monetize, and they would ask ChatGPT how they should make money.