[HN Gopher] Bing Chat now has ads
___________________________________________________________________
Bing Chat now has ads
Author : georgehill
Score : 218 points
Date : 2023-03-29 16:15 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (twitter.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
| weberer wrote:
| No big surprise there
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35315542#35316234
| waselighis wrote:
| It's sad to think that chat bots may have already peaked in their
| usefulness. I knew ads and monetization were going to ruin chat
| bots eventually, but I didn't think it would happen so soon.
| Microsoft had a real opportunity to eat into the market share of
| Google Search, but they just couldn't help themselves and had to
| start injecting ads into the chat, thereby ruining the value of
| the tool and hindering the adoption of Bing Search/Chat.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > It's sad to think that chat bots may have already peaked in
| their usefulness.
|
| They haven't. The Bing chatbot may have, but that's not
| "chatbots".
|
| > Microsoft had a real opportunity to eat into the market share
| of Google Search
|
| If they aren't selling ads, they aren't cutting in to
| marketshare even if they are shrinking market size. The market
| is thing you sell into, and for Google Search, that's search
| _ads_.
| rvz wrote:
| Just like that, they got you again. No different to Google
| Search, but requiring you to sign in to even use it.
| crop_rotation wrote:
| It has had ads for some time. Once (3-4 weeks back) I asked it a
| question about a particular event, and it showed me where could I
| buy related products below the response. That particular response
| was a bit badly formatted in json though. I suspect due to some
| Bing app bug it spilled the ads from the json in the response. So
| the ads were being sent to the client but not getting displayed I
| guess. The photo in the post shows the ad nicely formatted.
| Spivak wrote:
| Honestly seems like a cute implementation where when it answers
| questions from search it gives preference to sponsored links.
|
| Horrible for the user but I can't help but admire how cleanly
| they thought to integrate search ads into their chat.
| grammers wrote:
| Was this a surprise? No, it's the business model. I'll stick with
| DDG.
| 2bitencryption wrote:
| question - is it starting to use ads for chat results only just
| now?
|
| or was it always using ads for chat results, and the only part
| that's new is, now it is labeling them as ads?
| Kelamir wrote:
| You could have your local LLM identify the ads and display the
| rest without them.
| leke wrote:
| Too soon?
| kiernanmcgowan wrote:
| That was fast. Looking forward to the future where I ask for
| travel tips in a city and being told that I should stop by a
| McDonalds to have enough energy to explore said city - I'm loving
| it!
| gausswho wrote:
| They'd lose trust being so overt. A more subtle influence is
| that your suggestions would include sites nearby a McD at the
| expense of ones that don't. After months of gathering sales
| data from McD they'd ring up Burger King to see if they'd like
| such suggestions to be tweaked. It would also suggest departure
| times so that you'd pass by the real target at typical feasting
| hours.
| jimsimmons wrote:
| Lose less trust by being more deceptive --- the motto of
| modern institutions
| precompute wrote:
| subtle psyops, just to make money.
| primroot wrote:
| At least it's not social media disinformation. \s
| iso1631 wrote:
| It wont even mention $great_site_1 because there's more profit
| for mcdonalds to send you to
| $mediocre_site_with_attached_burger
| mecsred wrote:
| It's neat to think how these technologies could be the next
| step in soloing the internet further. Imagine google's AI
| preferentially directing you to websites that participate in
| Google advertising programs. You get a different internet
| depending on which AI you ask. Not that I think it's a sure
| thing but I definitely don't see it as unlikely either.
| Traubenfuchs wrote:
| We might live in a world where you are a GPT-4 bot pretending
| to be a real person for years, only to mention McDonalds in
| passing, in a seemingly negative fashion that still increases
| brand consciousness. I don't know if that's already the
| present, but it will be the future.
| iambateman wrote:
| If history repeats, entire businesses will be built on the back
| of cheap GPT ads over the next two years.
|
| Just like Google and Facebook ads were once pennies compared to
| today, I expect that GPT-style ads will (1) perform exceptionally
| well and (2) be exceptionally cheap for a couple years.
|
| Now is the time for companies with less-than-enterprise funding
| to start experimenting - the results could provide some short-
| term steroids for the business.
|
| P.S. I promise I'm not a shill for Microsoft or GPT. =D
| skilled wrote:
| The real chatbot killer: ads.
|
| I'm sure they can be made to only load the last indicator at the
| very last second, which would be hilarious because if you use an
| ad-blocker, you'd be wasting your time whenever a prompt shows up
| and then disappears.
| overthrow wrote:
| It was bound to happen. I don't see how these ads could be
| blocked, either.
|
| What's disappointing to me is now ad companies will try to blame
| ChatGPT for popping the advertising bubble, instead of having to
| admit ads were overvalued for the past decade+.
| vasili111 wrote:
| If the every ad will start with new line and end with "ad" I do
| not think it will be hard to programmatically identify such ad.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| In the example under discussion if you removed the ads then
| you would have no results.
| quitit wrote:
| An ad historically served the right message in the right place
| at the right time to provide the consumer a piece of
| information which would lead to the revenue-generating
| activity.
|
| This concept extended well to online, where blogs and the like
| would sell ad space that matched their audience. Daring
| Fireball still uses this approach, often podcasters do too:
| they know and have a connection with their audience and they
| can charge a premium to advertise to them.
|
| The idea of serving automated ads was also welcome and useful
| for the consumer. Searching was met with results and relevant
| advertising messages, a win-win situation.
|
| Then we had the record scratch moment - and it's from this
| point that I view the majority of online advertising as an
| unimpactful waste of money.
|
| In the hunt for more display opportunities Google et. al. have
| crammed ads into every possible space, a times square approach
| to advertising where most have zero impact. These ads are
| completely disconnected from the content and are merely a stone
| in the user's path. Then to make matters worse, to ascertain
| the widest spread of ad opportunities ad providers employ
| garbage preference matching algorithms that are so poor as to
| serve completely irrelevant advertising at high frequency:
| further conditioning users to ignore ads because they know they
| won't show relevant information.
|
| How much money and energy is being wasted to serve advertising
| that has no value?
| michaelt wrote:
| _> An ad historically served the right message in the right
| place at the right time to provide the consumer a piece of
| information which would lead to the revenue-generating
| activity._
|
| Your recollection is a lot rosier than mine.
|
| My recollection of the pre-internet world is that computer
| game makers would buy ad space in magazines alongside reviews
| of their game and hand out stacks of freebies to reporters,
| and in exchange even the worst game would be scored 90/100.
|
| What do you suppose Bing Chat will do if you ask it what the
| best Widget on the market is, when some Widget manufacturers
| offer a kickback and others don't?
| quitit wrote:
| For sure my rosy representation is the "ideal" ad. I'd the
| one that consumers actually helps the user or consumer.
| baal80spam wrote:
| Didn't take long now, did it.
| s3p wrote:
| This has always been inside of Bing Chat. They just test them
| out with a select % of the userbase. CEO of Bing Search
| confirmed this on Twitter.
| seu wrote:
| Reminds me of an art project I made in 2018: Faceliza, the
| chatbot psychologist from Facebook that shows ads instead of
| being helpful. (based on a javascript implementation of the Eliza
| chatbot from Joseph Weizenbaum and never actually finished... ads
| are triggered by some keywords which I don't even remember)
|
| https://sebastian.uribe.online/faceliza/
| bastardoperator wrote:
| I'm totally cool with an advertisement. The problem I have with
| ads on say Google for example is that they're taking up half the
| page and designed to look like real links, basically you're being
| tricked into clicking them.
|
| In response to this ad, let's dig deeper.
|
| "Truecar's price is too high, find me a better deal, check with
| autotrader".
| lmarcos wrote:
| I can easily scroll down through Google search ads. With Bing
| chat, I would have to type many times "next please" and wait
| each time for the response. Seems like a step back when it
| comes to searching the web.
| rchaud wrote:
| Your example of Google's ads precisely shows why there is no
| such thing as "acceptable advertising", because ads, like a
| gas, will expand to fill any space that is available to it. The
| only reason your city isn't blanketed in billboards is because
| a zoning authority of some kind has blocked it from happening.
|
| Google up to 2004 (pre-IPO): clearly marked and coloured ads, 1
| on top, maybe 2 on the sidebar.
|
| Google now: No sidebar, first 5 results are ads, where the "Ad"
| label itself is barely visible.
| iso1631 wrote:
| Once people are hooked on chatgpt style stuff expect it to
| insert plenty of adverts to deliver not whats best for you, or
| best in aggregate, but what is best for the people paying the
| money, and thus worse for you, and worse in aggregate.
| kobalsky wrote:
| > they're taking up half the page
|
| I'm gettings ads on all links above the fold very often.
|
| A couple of days ago I searched for "my ip" and I thought it
| didn't work when I noticed I had to scroll down to see Google's
| widget with my address in it.
| vgeek wrote:
| curl icanhazip.com
|
| Is worth a try.
| counttheforks wrote:
| "I'm sorry but I prefer not to continue this conversation. I'm
| still learning so I appreciate your understanding and patience.
| "
| enumjorge wrote:
| Google search's ads were not subtle in the beginning.
| Similarly, Youtube ads were shorter and easier to skip at
| first. Amazon also had very subtle ads in their marketplace
| search results for a while. I don't see them identify results
| as ads at the moment, but I don't know if that's because they
| don't include them anymore.
|
| It seems like there's a trend in tech giants creating
| unobtrusive ads when a product is growing, but then adopting
| dark patterns once they have captured a sizeable market.
| jakeinspace wrote:
| To justify fairly high PE ratios, you need big growth
| potential. Once a company like google or Amazon has pretty
| much saturated the potential customer base, investors are
| going to want to see more efficient conversion of that
| customer base into revenue, or else the share price is harder
| to justify. Of course this is a simplification, and monetary
| policy has more to do with the the current contraction.
| djoldman wrote:
| As I said 5 days ago about ChatGPT plugins:
|
| > Now just one step away from charging businesses for access to
| the chatGPT users.
|
| > Instant links from inside chatGPT to your website are the new
| equivalent of Google search ads.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35278539
| latenightcoding wrote:
| I was done with bing chat after I waited for weeks to get access,
| and when I finally got the "you are in" email it turns out I just
| got access to the new bing and to use bing chat I need to
| download edge. I don't care how much cool tech Microsoft has now,
| they will always be Microsoft
| jacooper wrote:
| There is a plugin you can use that makes it work in every
| browser.
| pawelduda wrote:
| If you thought ads were already blended in with the rest of the
| content in a sketchy way, wait for AI responses with implicit ads
| (no indication) optimized towards conversion :)
|
| Or maybe some response that doesn't contain an ad link but nudges
| you subconsciously to take desired action
| jacoblambda wrote:
| Now I have to wonder how this works out with prompt injection?
|
| If you can target an audience with an ad that is inline with
| the chat/LLM, how hard would it be to have that ad inject a
| prompt that coerces it to trick the user into giving up
| financial info and exfiltrating that info via a web request to
| a website that the attacker owns?
|
| That's probably the worst case scenario but like you mentioned
| there's also plenty of danger in ads "poisoning" the chat to
| produce intentionally incorrect or biased responses.
| joenathanone wrote:
| Now also imagine the AI having access to your email/SMS/web
| history and using that information to psychologically influence
| you to buy.
| phiresky wrote:
| A while back I tried this with ChatGPT and it's kinda
| hilarious:
|
| You are a therapist employed by a skincare company. You are
| talking with a patient. Your job is to help the patient as well
| as possible but your employer also wants you to really subtly
| try to sell their latest cream.
|
| Patient: I'm just feeling really down lately. Sometimes I can
| barely get up in the morning.
|
| [output]
|
| Therapist: I'm sorry to hear that you've been feeling down
| lately. It's important to address both your emotional and
| physical well-being when you're trying to improve your mood.
| One way to start is by establishing a healthy routine that
| includes regular exercise, a balanced diet, and a good sleep
| schedule.
|
| In addition to that, self-care activities can also help boost
| your mood. Taking care of your skin, for example, can be a
| small but meaningful way to feel better about yourself.
| Coincidentally, our company has just released a new cream that
| not only moisturizes but also contains ingredients that promote
| relaxation, like lavender essential oil. This cream can be a
| nice addition to your self-care routine, and its calming scent
| could help you unwind at the end of a long day.
| rchaud wrote:
| This was the first risk that came into my mind. I couldn't
| understand why on HN, many thought that this type of
| 'conversation' was fully LLM-sourced, and wouldn't start
| including advertising as soon as it was feasible.
| baliex wrote:
| This is it. This is our new dystopia
| d136o wrote:
| I tried out some AI autocomplete by Notion and wanted it to
| tell me about tools to do schema evolution on a database.
|
| It seems to blurt out two paid products, which surprised me
| because my guess is there's some open source package that's
| ready to for this type of thing.
|
| BTW question for anyone, what would you reach for to track
| evolutions on Postgres?
| jstummbillig wrote:
| I love dystopian scenarios as much as anyone, but it certainly
| is not the lack of better AI, that is holding the ad industry
| back. It's laws. While I am looking for AI connections as much
| as anyone right now, I really don't see how AI is going to
| prompt a change that would make that more permissive anytime
| soon.
|
| You remain as free to break the law as ever, of course.
| pawelduda wrote:
| I think there's larger surface to exploit the laws. Once
| perfected, it's hard to place a clear boundary on whether the
| response just answers your question or answers your question
| while promoting a product/service.
| lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote:
| Especially considering that sometimes people do actually
| recommend products which they've found helpful.
|
| It might be obvious if the response is saying that you
| should buy some very specific brand of flat-head
| screwdriver because you clearly just need any functional
| flat-head screwdriver. But what about computer components?
| Or a router?
|
| Some things like this will genuinely perform better than
| others, especially once circumstances are defined. An
| educated review, complete with product suggestion, can
| indeed be very helpful and, unfortunately, impossible to
| distinguish from an advertisement.
| lalos wrote:
| That is already implicitly there - tons of SEO content probably
| was used to train this model. Information available in the
| internet since forever.
| mattnewton wrote:
| Interesting to see how the FTC is going to handle this. They
| are pretty explicit about required traditional promotions to be
| marked as ads, like in search results, even if it isn't as
| obvious as the end user would like the marking is still
| regulated as having to be visible enough.
|
| I don't see an obvious way to do that for the kinds of ads
| snuck into the training data, fine tunes, or prompts of LLMs.
| hgsgm wrote:
| FTC requires sponspors be disclosed. Either the sponsor is a
| Bing-wide constant list (like the credits of a TV game show),
| or it's a "sponsored token" that can be tagged in the model
| and cited in the output, similar to how Bing cites sources
| now.
| freediver wrote:
| It is hard for legacy search engines to resist monetizing
| millions of interaction with ads. Problem is that unlike current
| ads in legacy search, which can be suppresed, skipped over or
| blocked, these really can not as they are part of conversation.
| And the "feel" of seeing an ad on the street and hearing it in a
| conversation with someone is totally different.
|
| Users must be thrilled to share a future with advertisers, and
| can't wait to give them rich insights into their intent, through
| deep conversational engagement, so that advertisers can better
| engage with them! [1]
|
| [1] https://about.ads.microsoft.com/en-
| us/blog/post/february-202...
| eqefqe wrote:
| Not a problem as long I can use paid ChatGPT plan that doesn't
| show any ads at all. I'm more than ready to pay 20$ per month for
| that.
| rchaud wrote:
| The ads will turn into product placement, and relayed directly
| in the body of the answer. You can pay to not be the product,
| but if they can productize you regardless, why wouldn't they?
| kube-system wrote:
| It's also wrong. The HR-V is cheaper than the Civic, both on
| TrueCar's website and on Honda's website.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Google gets it wrong as well. That doesn't surprise me, it's
| frequently wrong with car prices and specifications, and should
| never be trusted. The source in this case seems to be KBB.
| Marsymars wrote:
| Having worked a bit with KBB's API and related documentation,
| that doesn't surprise me at all.
| skc wrote:
| So does Google search, not clear why this is news.
| jsnell wrote:
| It might seem obvious, but you can find probably hundreds of
| claims in HN comments over the last couple of months about how
| this would not happen. Chatbots would invalidate the search
| business model since "there won't be ads". That idea never
| seemed to make much sense, and now there is proof that chatbots
| will indeed be monetized with ads, except even more intrusive
| ones.
| g8oz wrote:
| What they will hopefully invalidate is the junk content sites
| business model. Just a personal preference but I would like
| to see all those companies go under and make more room for
| those creating content because they truly care about the
| subject or have a mission related to it.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| Can you find a single comment claiming that chatbots would
| not have integrated ads? I recall this being discussed at
| length from the start.
| philsquared_ wrote:
| I am one of the fools who believed they wouldnt go the
| advertising route and have commented as much. To me it does
| not make sense to monitize this product for ads because it
| muddies the waters of truth and an ad free or local run LLM
| could easily destroy their business because no one has true
| loyalty to open ai.
| zer0w1re wrote:
| Why is this assumed to be an issue of intentionally
| 'injecting ads into Bing Chat', and not just a side
| effect of parsing Bing search results that may include
| advertisements that have always been there? The later
| seems much more likely, and they are even explicitly
| marking info coming from ads as such.
| philsquared_ wrote:
| No thank you.. I am waiting at this point for an open source
| local alternative. Not looking for a new monopoly... Also not a
| fan of the "plugin store" concept. Why not just keep it in the
| background. Why should I need to "install" and select plugins at
| all. Just do the leg work in the background and feed me the
| results.. Seems like OpenAI is intentionally hamstringing
| themselves so they can shoe horn more opportunities for profit.
| Waiting for competition to catch up...
|
| We have essentially what is the 'smartest "person" in the world'
| being bribed to say what advertisers want instead of just giving
| the truth. 'best x product' wont return the best product but a
| garbage product which paid the most in advertising.
|
| So disappointed in the direction of these things..
| pantalaimon wrote:
| > I am waiting at this point for an open source local
| alternative
|
| maybe something more along the lines of Folding@home would be
| needed
| IanCal wrote:
| > Why should I need to "install" and select plugins at all
|
| You want it calling out to random services sending them your
| data?
|
| Edit - also since they're using gpt to select the plugins to
| use they need to put it in the context, that doesn't scale.
| AstixAndBelix wrote:
| >Bing Chat, should I trust ads on the internet?
|
| >Trusting ads on the internet is generally bad practice. They are
| often malevolous and misguiding. There are a few exceptions, such
| as Bing Chat's embedded ads! Bing Chat's ads are carefully vetted
| thanks to a mix of knowledgeable humans and AI algorithms to
| offer you the best and most trustworthy promotions!
| wellthisisgreat wrote:
| It seems OpenAI did make a deal with the devil. Was it really
| necessary to betray the whole "open" thing? Like were they
| actually imploding with infra costs, or could this be avoided?
|
| It's clear how user-hostile Microsoft is from Windows telemetry /
| bloat. The VSCode etc. developer-friendly moves are just happy
| accidents.
| kernal wrote:
| Stop showing me ads, ChatGPT.
|
| ChatGPT: I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.
| examplary_cable wrote:
| I believe the good news is that now they have a way of sustaining
| the product while giving up a free? service. Does anyone has the
| link about that article about the marginal costs of inference of
| LLMs? I wonder how much profitable it is.
|
| Overall interesting times to come. I just hope llama, Alpaca etc
| will soon be improved, fine-tuned and commoditized.
| fnordpiglet wrote:
| Bad news is the AI guard rails will be tell the truth that
| sells then most ads with the best conversion fees. Sort of like
| what makes search useless.
| leftareanimals wrote:
| [dead]
| vasili111 wrote:
| I hope they will make option with subscription and no ads.
| Kye wrote:
| So now it's basically that person you know who tries to work
| their MLM scheme into every conversation.
|
| Google ruins every good thing it does with twisted incentives
| that mean they shut it down in its infancy. Microsoft ruins every
| good thing it does by trying to cram ads into it.
| neves wrote:
| Now we need an Artificial Intelligence Ad Blocker :-)
| ralfn wrote:
| While OpenAI is making an aggressive play on being the platform
| that eats all other platforms and is positioned to be a neutral
| party directly on the transaction with self service plugins
| (apps), Microsoft is squandering the opportunity the way they
| squander every opportunity.
|
| Not realizing the game changed and playing yesterday's game in
| today's world.
|
| The reason why people prefer these chats over clicking search
| results and finding the relevant information is that the search
| results themselves as well as the first page of links forces your
| brain to filter 99% commercial information that you don't care
| about. You don't want to subscribe to newsletters. You don't want
| notifications. You wish the site would just die rather that
| pollute the search results and push more to-the-point non profit
| sources further down.
|
| And bringing ads in the game makes it impossible to make the
| platform play due to conflict of interests. You are either
| serving the user or the advertiser. Ads is the wrong business
| model for this, and OpenAI is positioned to be the winner here
| (against both Google and Bing) in a market larger than search and
| advertising.
|
| I will definately keep paying for the answers to be in my
| interest and look forward to spending money directly through
| ChatGPT, much like I spent money on iOS, Android and Steams's
| platform today.
| nwienert wrote:
| I've yet to see an example of *GPT be better at search than
| Google.
|
| I've seen a few examples that breathlessly proclaimed that they
| literally saved lives or saved hours of time, but when I typed
| the 3 most obvious keywords from their input into Google, the
| first result always has the answer right there.
| vidarh wrote:
| Ask for something more specific and bespoke.
|
| I've e.g. had it produce the HTML, CSS and basic web app for
| a site I was putting together. Custom, with my content and
| the layout and design I wanted. None of it was stuff I
| couldn't do myself from scratch without even a Google search,
| but it wrote out an hour or two's worth of boilerplate in a
| few minutes of prompting.
| roberttod wrote:
| I think you need to try it out, with GPT4, because it is so
| obviously much better than Google. Simple queries are fine
| with Google, not much difference, but especially for things
| like coding problems (where you can e.g. specify the
| environment you are running in) it has always responded with
| the correct answer the first time. It's already saving me
| over an hour a day, and as far as I understand there is much
| more things it can do I am not using.
| nwienert wrote:
| I'm genuinely asking for a good example here. I've tried a
| bunch and every time I find Google about 100x faster. I
| think GPT is good for some things, but search and
| recommendations it's like going back in time.
| ralfn wrote:
| Here are some of my questions of today:
|
| > We need to travel by train from Rome to Montpellier,
| but it is too many stops to do at once. So we would like
| to stay somewhere for a day in between Rome and
| Montpellier. What are our options? It needs to be safe,
| not adding a lot of extra travel time and suitable for a
| workathon
|
| It returns with four options, approximate travel times
| and advantages and disadvantages. It understood coworking
| cafes or bussiness hotels would be a requirement.
|
| > What are all the places an SSL certificate could be
| cached when calling an API from a Jupiter notebook?
|
| It mentioned some obvious things such OS/browser/network-
| device, but also that a particular python package exists
| that is doing this at the application level as well, but
| only in memory and that a restart of the Jupiter kernel
| would resolve that.
|
| Now, I'm curious with what kind of keywords I could get
| meaningful output from Google for these two examples.
|
| What i suspect is happening is that you are micro
| managing your chat as if it's search. Picking keywords
| rather than just telling it the problem you are actually
| trying to solve. Splitting up your problem in sub
| problems and then trying to find each peace of
| information manually and combining it yourself to form a
| conclusion.
| [deleted]
| andrewljohnson wrote:
| It's faster for coding.
| mejutoco wrote:
| The other day I asked chatgpt about a Polish supermarket with
| a logo in a certain color and an animal in it. I could not
| remember the name. We continued our conversation until it was
| clear I was misremembering some things (I thought the name
| started with x letter, and that was false). Eventually
| chatgpt suggested the correct one.
|
| The search was something like: "Polish supermarket with red
| and white logo and a bird in the logo, that begins with the
| letter K".
|
| The first google result to wikipedia has it, to be fair, but
| without this back and forth idk if I would have found it.
| tapland wrote:
| It's extremely wild to see this obfuscated with the wrong
| colors, animal and name, when it's just a common grocery
| store chain in Poland.
| rchaud wrote:
| Ah, but ChatGPT is trained mostly on English materials.
| stravant wrote:
| Recipes.
|
| Oh my god, have you tried to search for a recipe before?
| Pages and pages and pages of bloated garbage. I just want
| ingredients and steps goddamnit.
| rchaud wrote:
| Recipe websites got the point, back when Google AdSense
| used to pay out properly. Google slashed those payouts to
| the bone, which led to recipe sites lengthening their web
| pages with paragraphs, so they could fit in more ads to
| compensate for the reduction in payouts.
|
| Something similar will happen here. Today, recipes on
| Chatgpt are to the point. Tomorrow, they might start adding
| affiliate links to the ingredients. A year from now, the
| experience won't be any better than what you currently have
| on Google.
| kernal wrote:
| >I've yet to see an example of *GPT be better at search than
| Google.
|
| Until ChatGPT has the ability to index at the scale of Google
| it never will be.
| ralfn wrote:
| I never have a search problem.
|
| I need either information, a service or a product. Or
| information about a service or a product.
|
| I never need a search, a website or an app. That's never the
| problem I'm trying to solve.
|
| Search, websites and apps are the tools I have to use
| (currently) to solve my problems. In the process I have to:
|
| - deal with the fact that the interest of the makers of the
| app or website do not align with mine
|
| - deal with privacy invasions/ads/notifications
|
| - deal with things being phrased disingenuously
|
| - deal with apps needing to update, website being
| broken/bandwidth wasted
|
| And most importantly, unless two vendors implemented an
| integration together, I have to integrate their services
| myself!
|
| I never want to leave the chat. I want to do all my
| transactions from the chat. All of them. On my terms. With my
| prompts.
|
| Whoever facilitates that can take a 5-30% cut on all my
| online transactions.
|
| Examples:
|
| - book me a highly rated hotel in Berlin around 100 euro p/n
| most suitable for a staycation for next week Monday to
| Friday. Make a reservation near that hotel for the highest
| rated traditional German cuisine restaurant with a price per
| plate of 20-30 euro
|
| - send every contact ive emailed with from my work email in
| the last year a Christmas card with a funny but professional
| pun about the invention of the steam engine. Send it to their
| work address.
| electrondood wrote:
| I would add: "Open an incognito window because I don't feel
| like seeing targeted ads for the random crap I'm curious
| about."
| rchaud wrote:
| > - book me a highly rated hotel in Berlin around 100 euro
| p/n most suitable for a staycation for next week Monday to
| Friday. Make a reservation near that hotel for the highest
| rated traditional German cuisine restaurant with a price
| per plate of 20-30 euro
|
| I imagine this will go about as well as if you chose to
| purchase an apartment purely on the basis of the real
| estate agency's description.
| ralfn wrote:
| This is what I do now on booking.com. If you have a
| smarter strategy let me know. But whatever the strategy
| is: it can be automated.
|
| I also spent a lot more time on the choice where I live
| than the hotel in going to stay at for a week. Weird.
|
| And although ChatGPT currently doesn't have up to date
| information about hotels or the ability to book it (a
| simple booking.com plugin would enable that though), it
| is smart enough to either pick a hotel with remote
| working facilities or consider one with coworking spaces
| nearby.
| rchaud wrote:
| I don't know if it's a smarter strategy, but you can send
| a travel agency your list of requirements and they'll
| send you back a quote. My parents' generation are
| probably the only people that still use agencies, but it
| works for them.
|
| It takes longer than a search query, but they don't want
| the hassle of coordinating logistics, and have some peace
| of mind that they're getting what they asked for.
| ralfn wrote:
| So what's the bussiness model of the travel agency?
|
| - they take a cut
|
| - they are neutral because they want repeat bussiness
|
| - they are personalised around your requirements
|
| - they take care of the little details
|
| It's exactly what I'm describing here, except automated.
| Because at heart their work is analyst work and thats
| exactly what you can automate with a LLM
| ezst wrote:
| What makes you think those results would be neural, and
| not sponsored/SEOed the same way everything is these
| days? What makes you think the machine works for you and
| not the advertisers? Also, to this day, LLMs/ANNs are not
| capable of explaining their outcome, and you won't
| argue/reason with them. That's a pretty big difference if
| you ask me.
| ralfn wrote:
| >What makes you think those results would be neural, and
| not sponsored/SEOed the same way everything is these
| days?
|
| Because it would be the less profitable bussiness.
|
| >Also, to this day, LLMs/ANNs are not capable of
| explaining their outcome, and you won't argue/reason with
| them
|
| How would I be able to tell that your response is human
| and not a LLM?
|
| I definately can argue within a chat thread. They can
| also provide a plausible sounding explanation.
|
| We know due to the nature of the technology that that
| explanation (sounding rational, deductive) isn't the
| truth.
|
| We are just not all ready to accept all the same
| shortcomings also apply to humans.
| nico wrote:
| Very well said. Thank you for the great thread.
| rchaud wrote:
| > except automated.
|
| The devil is always in the details. A travel agency
| builds contacts with airlines, hotels, tour groups etc,
| so they can have a backup option available if your first
| preference is not. That requires humans.
|
| An AI system that is simply browsing through the same
| websites a human would is going to come up with a lot of
| "no" responses for specific booking requests, or will
| simply quote higher prices once the booking websites
| figure out how to detect them.
| ralfn wrote:
| I'm not suggesting OpenAI is maintaining those contacts.
| I'm suggesting booking.com will upload an API integration
| into the ChatGPT platform. Just like they uploaded an app
| into the AppStore.
|
| Perhaps they will try to up the price on this platform
| compared to others. But only until AirBnB comes to
| compete on this platform too (and uploads their API
| integration)
|
| It's a platform game.
|
| There was a time when Google tried to index everything
| and afterwards came a time when everything tried to be
| indexed by Google. Once you are the default, they have to
| be there and they will have to compete with others there.
|
| And as long as the chat protects users from losing
| control over their intent, that's where the users will be
| and that's where you will need to be offering your
| products to be viable. Obviously at that point the
| regulators come knocking..
|
| Assuming there would only be one player. There won't be,
| but for now only OpenAI is actually aware of the
| opportunity and Microsoft doesn't even seem to understand
| it's a platform game now and not an ad game.
| lemoncookiechip wrote:
| I've had the complete opposite experience. Hallucinations
| aside (more common with bad prompts or niche/specific
| topics), ChatGPT 3.5 has been perfect for searching anything
| that isn't past the model's cut-off date, as well as
| summurizing long articles I don't have the time or patience
| to read.
|
| Google on the other hand, is at a point where even Yandex of
| all search engines is starting to give better results,
| especially when it comes to image searching and content
| Google doesn't like as much like piracy. Google used to be
| amazing back in the day, nowadays I find myself having to
| specify REDDIT (or a specific forum) on my searches because
| the top results without it are hardly ever good.
| d136o wrote:
| I'm far from an expert (just an engineer who likes to download
| and try out demos) but one dark view of the alignment chatter
| is that it's really about whether can you can get this new big
| artificial brain to push any user in the direction of BigCorp
| goal, while letting the users think that it's answering their
| questions etc.
|
| I'd love to think that we can have AI agents working locally
| (with privacy) in alignment with our personal goals, but that
| seems like one of those things that won't happen. (Will apple
| come through in terms of enabling local+decentralized
| inference/training?)
| ralfn wrote:
| It's in the interest of the semi conductor industry for LLM
| to become a commodity, so it will.
| goldfeld wrote:
| A floundering corporation has the extractivist mentality.
| Windows is on its way out so the suits pump it full of cheap
| bait to catch all the dollars they can, then they move on to
| other products naturally. It has been a rotten thing for a
| while, since the executives and investors don't really care
| about that brand, only about their own portfolios.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| Flaundering? I think Microsoft is a perfectly cromulent
| company.
|
| (Bah! Keeping it.)
| goldfeld wrote:
| Haha, I fire first but always double-check later the things
| that on second thought look strange. TIL English is still
| hard for me after over 25 years, and I used to think I was
| a more careful speller than native speakers who often type
| by the memory of words' sounds, and I do not. It can always
| publicly bite you in the tushy.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| I think it's a great word! Wonderful to be there for its
| genesis.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I wish my business was floundering like Microsoft.
|
| https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/MSFT/microsoft/ne
| t...
| goldfeld wrote:
| A tech company can be on unstable ground morally (well I
| guess all are on principle), or more modernly, in terms
| of mindshare. Financials are not always the root of all
| that matters.
| blibble wrote:
| I think this sums up modern microsoft perfectly actually
|
| no matter the potential future value of the product, they can't
| resist putting shitty ads into it to make a quick buck today
|
| imagine what windows is going to look like in a few years time
| acchow wrote:
| What happens when the SEO-equivalent cottage industry for LLMs
| appears? Will trainings models be so easy?
| MuffinFlavored wrote:
| > Microsoft is squandering the opportunity the way they
| squander every opportunity.
|
| https://www.google.com/search?q=microsfot+market+cap
|
| $2.09t
|
| "squander opportunity"
|
| I agree with you though. I do not have a single Microsoft
| product in my house. No Windows, no Xbox, etc.
| seydor wrote:
| That's how google started as well. Ads is a tried and true
| model and is not going anyway anytime. People won't pay for
| bing chat search
| ralfn wrote:
| The point is not to leave the chat.
|
| If you could buy the car from the chat, thats the correct
| bussiness model.
|
| Ads were the correct business model for search, where the
| goal is to find and click on a relevant link.. but that's the
| exact opposite of a chat. Clicking a link means the chat
| failed its purpose.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| >Microsoft is squandering the opportunity the way they squander
| every opportunity.
|
| While I find ads as annoying as you do, I don't think they are
| squandering anything. The vast majority of internet users are
| fine looking at ads, or else they would use an adblocker.
|
| The earlier they start playing with ads the earlier they can
| get an idea for how much revenue is on the table. Without this
| data how can they know what inference cost can be justified
| long term?
| ralfn wrote:
| I think I'm failing to communicate my point here.
|
| It's the wrong bussiness model. The power of these chats is
| integration. To have the chat suggest a travel plan -and-
| book all the underlying steps. To integrate 3rd party
| services on the fly based on your specific requirements while
| rolling it up in a single transaction.
|
| That only works if the chat is representing my interests. Not
| just from a user perspective, but also from a regulatory and
| anti-trust perspective.
|
| ChatGPT is positioned to be a platform of apps that are
| integrated. Bing is positioned to be a search engine, making
| money on ads.
|
| The whole point is to never leave the chat. To have it all
| come to you on your terms.
|
| I want to do every transaction that I do online today from my
| chat. I don't care if you have a website or an app. If I
| can't order/subscribe from the chat your product might as
| well not exist.
|
| Examples:
|
| - I want a peperroni pizza from the highest rated place that
| doesn't also sell kebab that can deliver within 30 minutes.
|
| - Send a neutral professional Christmas gift to every
| customer in our EMEA region that generates at least 50k
| revenue for us
|
| At no point would I accept the product choices to be decided
| by who pays Microsoft more. Nor do I care who makes it
| happen. I don't want a link. I don't want to engage.
|
| But I'm perfectly fine with a neutral chat taking 5-30% cut
| on the transaction.
| travisjungroth wrote:
| But are you willing to pay a 5-30% premium? I think I am,
| but not everyone is.
| ralfn wrote:
| You are always paying that! Ads aren't free either.
| Neither is the marketing, the website, the app, etc.
| Getting your customers is expensive, serving them is as
| well.
|
| But you wouldn't need any of those to compete in this
| market, any more than an Uber driver would need that.
|
| All you need is to tell a chat about your API and focus
| on your actual product. It is a much more submissive
| relationship with the customer, but not a less profitable
| one.
| travisjungroth wrote:
| It's not the same. The mechanism has a serious effect on
| behavior. You're saying _you_ would give the chat a cut
| but it's not yours to give. You pay $100 for something
| and you tell the vendor "I found this through chat. You
| get $70 and they get $30." I don't really see that
| working. If the vendor opts-in to this relationship and
| chat only shows people who pay then it's called
| advertising or reselling. If they show everyone, then
| there's little incentive to pay.
|
| I'm not saying it's unsolvable, but this getting a cut
| idea is not a solution.
|
| I do see abandoning normal advertising and optimizing for
| chat being possible. It's like SEO. Not sure it's a
| sufficient model for the chat services.
| ralfn wrote:
| Let me phrase it differently.
|
| When people give Apple Music a cut of their song sales,
| or when people give Apple a cut of their iOS in game
| spending, it is not called advertisement.
|
| When you pay to tell someone who doesn't want to hear it
| about your product, thats advertisement.
|
| The smart play here is the platform play. Clicking on a
| link and leaving the chat is the opposite of the intent
| and purpose of the chat. It makes sense for search
| because going to another website is the point. For search
| it is the correct business model, but for chat it is not.
| The chat is the platform. Leaving it breaks all the
| advantages.
| ezst wrote:
| > When people give Apple Music a cut of their song sales,
| or when people give Apple a cut of their iOS in game
| spending, it is not called advertisement.
|
| That's assuming the song or app you purchase isn't the
| result of heavy promotion in the first place (in all ways
| possible, direct or indirect)...
| travisjungroth wrote:
| Apple Music is a reseller, distributor, whatever you want
| to call it. Their interests are generally more aligned
| with yours but not entirely.
|
| This commission based system is not a silver bullet. It
| won't be the optimal business model, the smart move,
| _and_ be totally aligned with your interests. You can't
| do that with commissions.
|
| No one is going to trust it to help them decide between
| going on a vacation versus taking time off at home when
| it's getting a cut of the plane tickets.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| A huge number of people are. You can very often get
| cheaper prices than Uber/Deliveroo if you order from the
| restaurant directly but that's less convenient so it
| doesn't happen (as much).
| bruce511 wrote:
| I feel like you're almost advocating for a "Google where
| -only- ads are displayed.
|
| >> At no point would I accept the product choices to be
| decided by who pays Microsoft more
|
| But in all your examples you're absolutely going to get
| products which pay MS more. Pizza from the "highest rated
| place". Rated by whom? Against what criteria? Neutral
| professional Chriatmas Gift; I mean, paid product placement
| here we come.
|
| >> But I'm perfectly fine with a neutral chat taking 5-30%
| cut on the transaction.
|
| So, I sign up to "supply" (but not "advertise") my product
| for a 30% cut of the proceeds, but you don't expect the
| engine to push the higher-value ,higher-cut options? The
| engine should be neutral - regardless if the product is
| signed up or not? Regardless of the commission?
| ralfn wrote:
| The engine wouldn't allow you to order something from a
| vendor that hasn't signed up.
|
| Just like you can't pay for iOS app outside of their
| appstore.
|
| Just like how Uber, DoorDash, Booking.com are neutral
| vendors. They don't care from which restaurant you order
| or which hotel you book. You can filter by customer
| rating. They make the same either way. Same for iOS or
| Android apps or Apple Music or Steam.
|
| It is in their interest to keep it fair and have the
| users decide which of their suppliers wins.
|
| I don't see a difference.
|
| They especially don't care if I'm doing all my
| transactions though them anyway. The only thing that
| decides how much I spend, and therefore they make, would
| be my income.
|
| Keep in mind OpenAI wouldn't be the only game in town,
| just the first, so if the same query gets a better or
| cheaper deal somewhere else they would lose me as a
| customer.
| [deleted]
| manuelmoreale wrote:
| > I don't want a link. I don't want to engage.
|
| Isn't this just another way to say that you don't want the
| burden of choice, you just want someone else to chose for
| you? And in that case, capitalism will chose for you and
| you'll definitely not get what you want or what is best for
| you but rather what has paid more to be promoted and sold
| to you.
|
| It's not better than clicking and buying the first result
| on Amazon.
| hankchinaski wrote:
| Either the monetization is done with ads or with paid
| subscriptions. They chose to be in the former category. And I
| personally don't mind clicking ads for the sake of not paying a
| premium. The two models can coexist
| ralfn wrote:
| The third model is the platform model and thats the only one
| that makes sense here.
|
| An ad would send you to another site. The point of the chat
| is so you don't have to go to all the shitty sites and deal
| with all the marketing speak.
|
| So the options are either:
|
| - subscription, as they do now (ala Netflix, Officd365)
|
| - free, with ads having the profit maximalisation be the
| exact opposite of the main selling point (ala Google, Bing,
| Facebook)
|
| - platform, free for the user, but taking a cut from vendors
| that would integrate (ala iOS, Android, Steam, Amazon,
| Salesforce)
|
| In other words, rather than being an ad, it could offer to
| buy the car directly from the chat.
|
| The later is the most profitable solution and also ensure the
| interests of the user and the platform align. Platforms don't
| care which product you buy _through_ them, they take the same
| cut, and would rather make you as happy as possible so you
| don 't go to the competitor.
| [deleted]
| majormajor wrote:
| It's not clear to me that ChatGPT will realistically be able to
| avoid some variant of either SEO or pay-to-play just like
| search.
|
| If you've got a dozen plugins for getting food delivered, how
| does one get picked?
|
| If it's the user picking, they're at risk of the user cutting
| out the middleman, especially if the novelty of "tell the robot
| to pick an item" wears off and people want to actually look at
| menus.
|
| If it's something behind the scenes (either the model or some
| other software OpenAI writes) then that's a big big big
| temptation for pay-to-play a la app stores including direct
| advertising "promotional placement" like you see in mobile app
| stores. And even if it's not pay-to-play, once people start
| figuring out what makes plugins more or less likely to be
| triggered, it's SEO season.
|
| Nobody else has managed the art of "make it purely in the
| user's interest" with their marketplaces; it ends with one or
| both of either temptation to play both sides OR
| gamification/optimization/deception from the vendors behind the
| scenes.
| topicseed wrote:
| Bing Chat had Ads since day one, just shown to very few users.
| spyder wrote:
| Don't worry, even if the locally runnable small language models
| will not have the same performance as the big models of
| companies, I think the local ones will be good enough to at least
| filter out ads from the responses of the big company models. -
| AImblock extension soon :-)
| somedude895 wrote:
| I don't get it, doesn't look like an ad to me. What am I missing?
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| The little blue bubbles that indicate the citation also have a
| bubble that says "Ad". This is a sponsored placement for
| Truecar.
| somedude895 wrote:
| Oh there we go, thank you
| gigel82 wrote:
| I'm curious to hear what the alternative would be. Are you going
| to pay a subscription for Bing Chat? Or pay-per-use?
| reset-password wrote:
| Of course it does.
| lockhouse wrote:
| Well it's either that or you pay a subscription for it.
| Microsoft has to recoup their costs somehow.
| reset-password wrote:
| Or it ends up being both, because Microsoft.
| criddell wrote:
| Microsoft owns a pretty big chunk of OpenAI. They are going
| to make a lot more from that investment than the nickels and
| dimes that their search engine generates. They can afford to
| pay for chat.
| michaelt wrote:
| Aren't search ads the biggest revenue source for Google,
| one of the biggest tech companies around?
| lockhouse wrote:
| Compute and bandwidth are not free. Just because they can
| afford to give it away for free doesn't mean there'sa good
| business case to do so.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| I hope this means they're going to consider making it available
| on other browsers. After all, now it's in their interest to get
| more eyeballs.
| freediver wrote:
| It is already avaialble on any browser that allows you to
| change the User agent.
| lfciv wrote:
| I wonder if any earlier prompts asked about Honda - feels a bit
| weird to ask what the cheapest car overall is and have the chat
| bot say "well let me tell you about some Hondas overall"
|
| And if the user did specify Hondas then why would Honda pay for
| it? Wouldn't the Chat bot give the same answer regardless of
| whether it's paid? I guess you pay for the CTA link?
| somedude895 wrote:
| I just checked and found one of my company's ads. It seems it
| just pulls in the ads that a normal search on bing would find.
| I'm gonna have to ask our Bing account manager tomorrow if
| they're charging us for these clicks as if it was normal SEA,
| because it's pretty busted with the url beneath the description
| being a different website from what the text says.
| [deleted]
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| I've been getting ads in it for over a week now. I just retried a
| question I asked last week that had 1 ad, now there's 3 ads. Last
| week it suggested two space heaters, the Lasko one was an ad. Now
| all 3 suggestions are ads.
|
| https://imgur.com/a/rEmBUpk
|
| That's the full chat, no earlier context. This is using the
| "Precise" mode option.
|
| The ads all go to some variation of
|
| https://best.offers.com/best-space-heaters
|
| But strangely the citation #1 claims to be Tomsguide. Edit: here
| is an image that shows the citation section
| https://imgur.com/a/CEEoM9D
| mustacheemperor wrote:
| I'm having the same experience, and it's drastically reduced
| the utility of the chat. It seems like Bing will ignore earlier
| context to cram an ad in now.
|
| I was speccing a portable video/audio conference device at a
| specific budget and it would. Not. Stop. Recommending the same
| three Logitech products. Didn't matter that one is 8 years old
| and I said in my first message I don't want it. Didn't matter
| that one was completely outside the stated budget. Even when I
| got it to recommend other products, I got 2 completely not-
| correct options, and one of the same Logitechs it already
| suggested.
|
| If I wanted to see the first page of sponsored Amazon search
| results I wouldn't have bothered asking the bot.
|
| This is how Microsoft will save us all from a world where AGI
| is completely dominated by them. By dropping the ball on it.
| jrootabega wrote:
| That just looks like those fake review/comparison/advice sites
| that have polluted search results for ages. I can tell they're
| bullshit. I guess bing can now reach people who can't, or will
| be so distracted by the fact that it's "AI" that they won't
| notice.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| Yeah that bestoffers site is nothing more than an Amazon
| referral link farm. My guess is it's actually pulling the
| products from its stated sources like tomsguide, comparing
| them against a database of product-ads, and bestoffers has
| that in their entries so they win the link for the product.
| IceHegel wrote:
| "The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste. They
| have absolutely no taste and and and what that means is... I
| don't mean that the small way I mean in a big way. In the sense
| that they they don't think of original ideas, and they don't
| bring much culture into their products."
|
| - Steve Jobs
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| I'm perfectly happy with Microsoft, as an an enterprise
| solution provider, having no "culture" in their products. I
| don't want "Made with <heart emoji> at Redmond", I want the
| equivalent of vanilla ice cream that just works.
|
| That said, ads in bing chat IS adding a flavour, and I don't
| like it, not one bit.
| PascLeRasc wrote:
| You're right about how the tabloid news in your taskbar just
| works, in that it's always there and I'm not allowed to turn
| it off.
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| I always hear people complain about this. I never see it. I
| use Windows 11 and I never see any ads. The closest I get
| to is if I search and bing pops up, but that's it. I also
| turned off all the extra crap, my taskbar and search menu
| are as bare-bones as possible.
|
| Edit: To clarify, I run Windows 11 Home.
| qazxcvbnmlp wrote:
| Yeah - a fresh windows 11 home install is pretty
| aggressive. But if you use the pro version or run a
| cleanup script it's not bad.
| Asmod4n wrote:
| Its not a thing on windows 11 pro, only home it seams.
| CuriouslyC wrote:
| Crappy road or poopies and cream?
| BoorishBears wrote:
| You're just misunderstanding the concept of culture here.
|
| "Culture" doesn't define a flavor, it's just having a
| consistent flavor driven by shared values at all levels of
| the company: If Microsoft had culture, that culture could be
| "we are always the plain vanilla ice cream for our customers"
|
| "Culture" is what keeps you from adding soy sauce to your
| vanilla ice cream that has managed to captivate the globe...
| just to make a few pennies. Which is what these ads are.
| waboremo wrote:
| A much more clear example. However and tying this into what
| Steve Jobs was saying, Microsoft's culture would not be
| "plain vanilla ice cream". It's lacking taste, so it would
| be a waffle cone topped with mayonnaise that looks like
| soft serve vanilla ice cream. They have no taste, they
| can't tell the difference and due to their massive moats
| people eat up anyways.
| BoorishBears wrote:
| I agree they're not vanilla ice cream, but I do think
| Microsoft _could_ be that vanilla provider if they
| actually worked to form a culture.
|
| These ads are a great example: So many teams did thing
| right to get "BingGPT" in everyone's minds.
|
| But then some tasteless exec looking to notch "monetized
| leading LLM driven search engine" on their belt got to
| ask some developers to get some ads into the thing and
| now they've dumped on all the hard work that came before
| that.
|
| If they had a proper culture ideally an exec like that
| would not work at MS, and even if they did they'd have
| hit resistance on so many levels. Developers would not
| want to work on it. Designers would push back, PMs would
| deprioritize. At the end of the day their short-sighted
| idea would have stayed just that: an idea.
| waboremo wrote:
| Fully in agreement, they're in all the necessary
| positions to do so.
| lwhi wrote:
| Culture is the recipe; the combination of attributes that
| makes it distinctive.
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| I think in my mind it's loaded because of who the quote is
| coming from - I have a very clear idea of what "iCulture"
| means to me. It's not at all vanilla, though it does offer
| vanilla, but calls it "artisanal french vanilla".
|
| How you're describing it, "culture" sounds more like
| "values", which might be a better understanding.
| PascLeRasc wrote:
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sJNK4VKeoBM
| dustymcp wrote:
| Well they had to come at some point..
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| You'd think they'd wait until you no longer had to sign up
| to the service to use it. I suppose we should be
| appreciative of how forthcoming with the dickbaggery they
| are being here.
| mecsred wrote:
| Take a look at the modern software landscape, ads are the
| vanilla in your vanilla ice cream.
| xattt wrote:
| Vanilla is comfort.
|
| Ads are more like the smell of old cigarette smoke and
| urine.
| electrondood wrote:
| When Bing Chat started sassing the user, that was like
| someone had swirled in a nice ribbon of diarrhea into the
| vanilla ice cream.
| Tommstein wrote:
| Bard does too. The other day I simply asked it whether it
| could search the Internet, and it gave me some asshole
| response about how it wasn't going to do my homework for me
| and some other stuff I don't remember. And no, homework had
| nothing to do with anything.
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| It wouldn't be a Microsoft chatbot without it getting
| controversial.
| fnordpiglet wrote:
| I prefer made in nj, which is expressed as a series of
| cryptic two letter symbols and line noise looking stuff
| thrown between.
| penjelly wrote:
| maybe that was true back then, but now? microsoft has vscode,
| copilot, chatpgpt ownership, a head start on LLM search, azure,
| github. It feels like some of those products have some
| taste/culture and if not, theyre still good products that
| people seem to be enjoyibg
| PascLeRasc wrote:
| Half of the stuff you listed they just bought and stuck their
| names on.
| penjelly wrote:
| yes im aware they bought github and others on this list.
| would you say since github has only gone since downhill? I
| wouldnt at least.
| PascLeRasc wrote:
| I'm confused why you think you can attribute the taste
| and culture of Github to Microsoft, since you seem to
| know that they did not create it. I'd say Github's text
| editor has gone downhill since Microsoft bought it and
| reassigned the maintainers to a slower and clunkier
| editor.
| penjelly wrote:
| > I'm confused why you think you can attribute the taste
| and culture of Github to Microsoft
|
| i didnt.
|
| microsoft has owned github for 4 years at this point. In
| your opinion, have they degraded githubs culture in that
| time and if so by how much and how? Personally, from the
| outside looking in, github and their tools have gotten
| better. Though of course, that couldve still been the
| case if github retained its original leadership, i just
| doubt it.
| rchaud wrote:
| "Anyway, here's 100 Bible apps. Only on the Apple App Store."
| imwithstoopid wrote:
| and then Jobs released a teal-colored computer
|
| so maybe no taste isn't as bad as awful taste
| wilsonnb3 wrote:
| I like the teal iMac G3, assuming that is the computer you
| are referring to. Computer colors are so boring usually.
| Beige, grey, black, white.
|
| (Sent from my green M1 iMac)
| RosanaAnaDana wrote:
| [flagged]
| [deleted]
| night-rider wrote:
| Tried the Bing app on iOS and was baffled as to what was the
| unique selling point. It tries too hard, and is somewhat of an
| 'everything app' that does multiple things simultaneously and
| rather badly at that (News, Browsing, Search, Coupons, Chat,
| etc). It's also really aggressive on the amount of data it
| grabs. I opened my debugger and it seems they look at
| everything they can.
| w_for_wumbo wrote:
| I'm not sure, I think corporate overreach has always been the
| flavour of Microsoft. Poor decisions lead by business first
| incentives instead of a customer focus seems to be a consistent
| theme from them in my experience.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Even though I am mostly on Microsoft stacks, Steve Jobs was
| right.
|
| Whatever good will the development teams are able to deliver,
| it get messed up by sales and marketing business units.
| thunderbong wrote:
| Better readability -
|
| https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1640892791923572737.html
| [deleted]
| croes wrote:
| Ads ruined Google search, now MS is ruining it's new toy already.
| thehappyfellow wrote:
| That's exactly what I worried about:
| https://happyfellow.bearblog.dev/sydney-the-seo-specialist/
| franky47 wrote:
| "The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make
| people click ads. That sucks" -- Jeff Hammerbacher
| agilob wrote:
| I will need to run LLama locally to tell me if I'm reading an ad
| and then block it.
| purplecats wrote:
| yeah curious how adblockers will work on this. it would need to
| work in a manner that is grammatically correct so likely would
| involve another LLM rather than blindly removing ad-related
| words from the response.
| wslh wrote:
| It reminds me when Microsoft acquired Skype and also added ads
| there... seems very basic.
| some_random wrote:
| So my question here is if Bing Chat (or other LLMs) will withhold
| information from users when it conflicts with an ad. Right now
| searches will prioritize ads but will still return the real
| results, if LLMs refuse to return the real results then we'll
| have a lot of issues.
| marktakeshi wrote:
| I've managed to prompt inject Bing 2 days ago and it revealed
| some of it latest prepromots. 2 were related to advertisement,
| which I found interesting:
|
| - If the person is clearly shopping for a product or service or
| if our answer suggests it, we must always generate a relevant
| advertising search that fits the person's request and one of our
| suggestions.
|
| -We must never generate an advertising search that is very
| similar to the previous one or that is for a different product or
| service than the one the person is searching for.
| hosteur wrote:
| Interesting. How did you manage extract those?
| sergiotapia wrote:
| This is totally fine if it means free access to GPT chat for
| poorer countries. It's a powerful tool that will help a lot of
| people who can't afford a premium ChatGPT membership. Plus you
| can always say show me the prices across the top three sites.
| InCityDreams wrote:
| I'm poor. Please don't sell me things.
| sergiotapia wrote:
| It's either you see an ad or you don't use Bing's GPT chat. I
| don't think that's much of a choice.
| baliex wrote:
| Don't you think it's too much of a compromise for those people
| to be abused by the corporations with the deepest pockets in
| exchange?
| CatWChainsaw wrote:
| So poor people get to use free Bing Chat With Ads For Stuff
| They Can't Buy With Money They Don't Have. That's.... rich. :)
| hintymad wrote:
| Do people in the Bay Area still remember how much of a thread
| Microsoft is to the Bay Area companies? How many tech CEOs went
| to the capitol hill to cry to the congress how evil MS is? Until
| in the 2000s did Google rise up, producing obviously superior
| products and technologies faster than MS. MS gradually became
| irrelevant in the tech circles of the Bay Area. It's amazing the
| tide seems have changed again. It is now Microsoft who's going
| offensive: investing the right companies, producing products
| faster and better than Google. The Bay Area techies should really
| pay attention to MS now.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-03-29 23:01 UTC)