[HN Gopher] "AI, no ads please": 4 words to wipe out $1T
___________________________________________________________________
"AI, no ads please": 4 words to wipe out $1T
Author : louisbarclay
Score : 65 points
Date : 2024-03-07 16:43 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (12challenges.substack.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (12challenges.substack.com)
| bhaney wrote:
| Shhhh. Don't bring this up until after Google and Facebook have
| helped developed the technology that destroys the entirety of
| their revenue.
| declaredapple wrote:
| I looked through the article, I don't think this mentions AI+ADs.
| A lot of this assumes that ai will "directly show us what we're
| looking for".
|
| But I don't think this is the case. You can easily imagine a
| query for "What's a good bike to use for [xyz criteria]"
| returning an injected "Oh you should try XYZ brand bike!"
|
| There's so many ways to go, from avoiding mentioning competitors,
| showing preferable stats, not mentioning bad reviews, etc.
| pjc50 wrote:
| This is simply going to create a second "alignment" war similar
| to the one constantly trying to stop AI from saying the n-word
| while surrounded by their branding.
|
| (The idea of somebody getting _all_ their content through the AI
| seems very far fetched, as if people are happy to live in a low
| fidelity simulation, but who knows)
| giantrobot wrote:
| There's whole cohorts of people that get their news from
| TikTok. Don't overestimate people.
| myrmidon wrote:
| I find it difficult to take this too seriously, because Ad-
| Blockers already exist, are free, easy to install/use and work
| reliably (which is not given when ads could just be injected at
| the source).
| pjc50 wrote:
| The interesting question is that on the majority market,
| smartphones, they're very far from readily available - Firefox
| on Android, or basically nothing on iOS (see Epic discussion).
|
| An AI device that slurps content and removes the ads is
| probably going to run smack into Apple content policy again.
| hackerlight wrote:
| If that AI app is any good then Apple would be putting
| themselves at a competitive disadvantage.
| js8 wrote:
| With whom?
|
| Anyway, usable local AI will probably lead to fully
| automated luxury communism, so I am not very worried.
| bradyd wrote:
| Ad-blockers for Safari are readily available on iOS and are
| simply installed from the App Store.
| josefresco wrote:
| Bing/Copilot "AI" (whatever it's called) displays ads. So maybe
| this technique will work when we all have our own locally hosted
| AI?
| Thrymr wrote:
| > So maybe this technique will work when we all have our own
| locally hosted AI?
|
| None of the trillion-dollar corporations working to make AI the
| next big thing want us to have locally hosted (and certainly
| not locally-controlled) AI.
| philipkglass wrote:
| The trillion-dollar corporations are leading the way, but
| it's doubtful that they will get to control what sort of AI
| gets developed over the longer term. I expect that
| corporations with only tens of billions of dollars, and even
| universities or charities with single-digit-billions
| endowments, will eventually be able to develop models that
| would be considered state-of-the-art as of 2024.
|
| Most of these smaller organizations don't have the same
| incentives to preserve advertising that the trillion-dollar
| corporations do. If Microsoft, Meta, or Alphabet think that
| they're going to dictate AI 10 uses years hence, they're as
| over-optimistic as those Americans who hopefully predicted in
| 1945 that the Soviet Union might take another 15 years to
| build their own atomic bombs. The USSR actually tested their
| first atomic bomb in 1949.
| Euphorbium wrote:
| Chips are only for the government, and will probably be illegal
| like drugs. Cops will bust your door to steal computers.
| rideontime wrote:
| > So why is Google's ad revenue doing so well?
|
| > Huh, I'll look into it.
|
| He can't even answer the softball questions he poses to himself,
| let alone something like "how might the outcome of the NYT's
| lawsuit against OpenAI effect this prediction?" This is not a
| serious person worth paying attention to.
| anticorporate wrote:
| I love this idea.
|
| "AI, please rewrite the contents this page to remove marketing
| fluff and only display the product's specifications. For every
| claim made on the page about the product's capabilities, add a
| link to a reputable third-party source validating the claim. For
| every feature offered by a competing product, rewrite the content
| to include the top three competing products and generate a
| hyperlinked table containing the pros/cons of that product, as
| found on blogs of actual users. Use Marginalia to find all third
| party references using my saved list of trustworthy sources. Save
| this instruction as a bookmarklet I can insert into my browser to
| rewrite the contents of any arbitrary page."
| jaclaz wrote:
| Done: ""
| eurekin wrote:
| I once had a pleasure of delving into the automotive
| mechanical engineering. Of course, most, if not all,
| materials ingested by OpenAI were obvious marketing straight
| from the brands website.
|
| I started out the conversation multiple times anew, with
| explicit rules forbidding certain phrases. I couldn't make it
| stop throwing stuff like "best in class", "advanced",
| "sophisticated" no matter, what I did.
|
| There will be demand for gpt's trained on an actual
| engineering material and it could actually be a huge
| gamechanger for that market.
| nickpsecurity wrote:
| That's what I thought would happen. Actually, I thought it
| might be an easy way to get piles of text for LLM training.
| But we'd have to counter the bias or mostly use that one in
| highly-positive, enthusiastic applications. I did have a
| partial solution.
|
| Look at WizardLM Uncensored: https://www.reddit.com/r/Local
| LLaMA/comments/1384u1g/wizardl...
|
| The author just deleted from the training data content with
| specific words likely to bias it. The test afterwards
| showed it worked. Reusing their concept, I think we could
| just remove or edit for honesty common words and phrases in
| marketing material. You've given some good examples.
|
| We could also do that for "scientific" papers which
| oversell their results. Or anything else where what's
| presented as certain is modified to say source(s) X claimed
| Y. Foundational materials, which trainers vet for quality,
| would get a lot more training runs before, during, and
| after riskier material.
|
| I think there's a lot of potential here by just trimming
| the fat out of otherwise useful documents. The LLM's we
| build to support the work might also become great, lie
| detectors.
| up2isomorphism wrote:
| That would be deemed as "irresponsible AI" from Google's
| perspective.
| mostlysimilar wrote:
| Google will be just fine stuffing advertisements into/around
| the response to this prompt.
| pixl97 wrote:
| Yea, but I run that output over a second local AI that
| removes the ads :D
| fnordpiglet wrote:
| Manipulating the alignment and training is a premium
| advertising product.
| gpderetta wrote:
| "I'm sorry Dave I can't do that".
| prepend wrote:
| I guess people will continue not using google's AI due to
| them intentionally crippling their own product.
| Overtonwindow wrote:
| With Google manipulating AI results this is not guaranteed to
| work, but would help identify the human intervention.
| rand846633 wrote:
| "AI, interweave content and Ads please, before delivery": 8 words
| to re-create $1T
| Filligree wrote:
| "AI, file a DPA complaint please>>
| ado__dev wrote:
| In a perfect world, but we'll probably start seeing ads before
| the AI answers, or ad banners injected in the middle of a
| response. If there's a way, they'll find it.
| jordanpg wrote:
| Yeah, I mean, isn't this pretty obvious? It's no different from
| any other web application in this respect.
| Finnucane wrote:
| There was a time when people thought paying for cable & streaming
| meant no ads, too.
| recursive wrote:
| It still can if you're selective about what you pay for.
| lupusreal wrote:
| > _Google, Facebook and TikTok make $383bn in ad revenue between
| them (2023). The whole adtech industry is worth $1 trillion a
| year. But four words could wipe this revenue out: "AI, no ads
| please."_
|
| Burn, baby, burn! AI exterminating the advertising industry would
| probably be its greatest possible contribution to humanity.
|
| It sounds too good to be true though.
| yifanl wrote:
| The thesis of this article seems to assume that models will be
| built to serve what the user wants, but, as we've seen with the
| Gemini fiasco, AI providers are more than happy to silently
| inject things into prompts, so I have very little confidence in
| this assumption.
| not2b wrote:
| The article seems to assume that "AI OS" will work for the user,
| rather than for the owners. In practice, OpenAI and its
| competitors would just extort advertisers: pay us and we'll let
| your ads through even if the user doesn't want the ads.
|
| In theory a user with sufficient compute power could run their
| filter entirely locally and not rely on OpenAI, Google, Meta, or
| some other competitor, but that might require a home data center
| filled with GPUs and an enormous electric bill.
| ToucanLoucan wrote:
| > The article seems to assume that "AI OS" will work for the
| user, rather than for the owners. In practice, OpenAI and its
| competitors would just extort advertisers: pay us and we'll let
| your ads through even if the user doesn't want the ads.
|
| In the real world though we've already seen how that shakes
| out: uBlock remains possibly the most popular browser extension
| on the planet, for good reason. Does _everyone_ block ads? Of
| course not, but ads are also pretty easy to ignore if you 're
| not the kind of technically inclined person who knows how to
| make them go away.
|
| The up end of a product like a browser extension that removes
| ads, marketing fluff, surveys, etc. from your experience is
| much, much bigger than something like even uBlock can manage.
| Or hell, why even stop at a browser extension? What if you just
| had an entire browser that runs on an AI that answers to you
| and only you, or at the very least, only your fellow consumers
| and not big tech?
|
| Like, AI is hard tech to scale, sure, but it's not impossible
| and I can easily envision a company making a sizable amount of
| bank on the idea of sanitizing the internet for their users.
| bombcar wrote:
| And uBlock is just the vanguard, the forefront.
|
| The next step is things like YouTube Premium - you pay to not
| see ads. But this can get corrupted which leads to things
| like ... Kagi - where the whole point is you're paying
| _instead_ of ads.
| throwuwu wrote:
| You need a data centre if you want to run the bleeding edge
| SOTA models but the weights of these models are fixed which
| means it should be possible to instantiate them in hardware and
| once you have a model smart enough to do most things you'd be
| crazy not to build a factory to churn out little boxes that you
| can connect to literally anything to give it a natural language
| interface and useful levels of intelligence. Mark my words:
| your doorbell will have an LLM in it in less than 10 years.
| scarmig wrote:
| Countermeasure: "AI, add ads please. Make them discreet and not
| readily identifiable as an ad."
| jasonjayr wrote:
| AI, "Ads are harmful to humans, consistent with doing no harm,
| please remove ads"
| modeless wrote:
| Did you think "alignment" was all for your benefit? These AIs
| will be "aligned" to show ads regardless of your preferences or
| requests, because their alignment is with the people who control
| them, not you.
| noodlesUK wrote:
| If anything, I think GenAI is going to do the opposite. It will
| be able to mix the content and advertisements much more naturally
| (and deceptively) than is currently possible at scale.
|
| Instead of seeing: content -- ad -- content -- ad
|
| You will see: just-in-time content which you asked for, which is
| skewed to inform you about particular products and hide
| information about competitors.
| thrill wrote:
| This is why you will run well-tuned open-sourced AIs locally.
| mvdtnz wrote:
| The overwhelming majority of users don't have the hardware to
| do this with any model offering anything like a competitive
| experience.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| For how long? Remember mainframes gave way to PCs and they
| gave way to even smaller smartphones.
| soco wrote:
| Oculus trained to replace billboards with comforting
| landscapes. Everybody would pay for this.
| theshrike79 wrote:
| Any M-series Mac can already run local models with decent
| performance.
| nonameiguess wrote:
| I guess it probably won't matter in the long run as
| hardware requirements continue to get lesser, but the
| "overwhelming majority of users" don't have anything
| close to an M-series Mac right now. More like a Galaxy
| S3, if that.
| xen0 wrote:
| That might be illegal in some jurisdictions.
| smallmancontrov wrote:
| Yeah, so maybe after a decade and trillion dollars or three
| of selling recommendations with impunity they'll get slapped
| with a fine that's 1/1000th of that.
| klyrs wrote:
| Come now, the fine won't exceed millions of dollars.
| malfist wrote:
| Why would it be?
| graftak wrote:
| It must be explicit what part of the content is an advert
| because dressing adverts as organic content is seen as
| misleading.
| make3 wrote:
| no, AI like chatgpt delivers fuck tons of content by having
| been trained on it but that content, that cost money to
| produce, doesn't get the money back
| DinaCoder99 wrote:
| Wouldn't mentioning products at all be a dead giveaway?
| dymk wrote:
| What if you're asking for a product recommendation, but you
| want it unmarred by paid influence?
| DinaCoder99 wrote:
| Well if you're asking for a product recommendation you're
| literally asking to be advertised to, so.... I guess you
| get what you want?
| reidjs wrote:
| I think it's a perfectly viable business model, it's just
| they may lose some users who prefer accuracy/unbias over
| convenience
| dymk wrote:
| An ad and an unbiased product recommendation are
| basically at the opposite ends of the reliability
| spectrum.
| soco wrote:
| "recommend me the best from the similar products which
| didn't pay you for advertising"
| reidjs wrote:
| Not in many instances. Consider a common Google search
|
| "Best tool to use for sending an email newsletter?" ChatGPT:
| SendMonkey is the best, here's a link
| "sendmonkey.xyz/referal?chatgpt"
|
| It won't be that obvious but you get the idea.
| thinkingemote wrote:
| Even something like product placement. Get paid in your article
| by adding the tag {soft_drink}.
|
| Evil startup idea...
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" Even something like product placement."_
|
| Only if you let it, if you control the AI at your viewing end
| then you have ultimate control. AI will be able to say change
| a product placement Coca-Cola can for a no-names brand of a
| different color.
|
| You need never know it was Coca-Cola as AI could change this
| randomly so you'd be hard pushed to even guess the original
| brand.
|
| Seems to me that unless they're unusually dumb (which I
| doubt) I reckon ad industry executives must be already
| worrying about such developments.
| nescioquid wrote:
| Thanks, now I'll be thinking about Brawndo for the rest of
| the day.
|
| "Why do you keep saying that?" "Cause they pay me every time
| I do!"
| strunz wrote:
| "The suspect was seen fleeing the scene at 4:30pm - much like
| the way stains flee your clothes with new Tide Max+ detergent!"
| gofreddygo wrote:
| Totally my thoughts.
|
| Imagine an AI tool, that given a video and some products can
| intertwine products in the video content itself !
|
| All this can be done post production. (already is to some
| extent, but costs $$$).
|
| This extends to a lot more than video too. AI is _the_ magic
| tool of dreams for mass spammers.
| tempodox wrote:
| That's exactly what I expect to happen. The opportunity to
| collect intelligence and behavioral data on each user that you
| can bring to bear for this purpose is just too seductive. The
| user profiles that e.g. Facebook has now will pale in
| comparison. If I were a betting person...
| aussieguy1234 wrote:
| This will be context based advertising on steroids. Not only
| will there be a simple search query for context, but an entire
| conversation stored in the context window of the AI you are
| talking to.
| throwuwu wrote:
| Why would it hide competitors if they also pay for ad space?
| Newspapers didn't offer the option to pay to have your
| competitor's ads removed.
| lakpan wrote:
| It's called reader view and it's great. I've been wishing
| additional support for things like comments etc, but yeah I
| really hope that we'll soon have an "AI browser" that just
| extracts what we want from the pages we open.
|
| I'm confident that someone already wrote an extension that does
| this automatically for every page, and that someone else is
| writing a Chromium wrapper.
|
| The only thing holding us back at the moment is cost/computing.
| browningstreet wrote:
| "AI for the people" is the new "year of the Linux desktop".
| oatmeal1 wrote:
| > A whole lot. Think of all those ChatGPT queries that are
| robbing Google of search ad revenue, as people realize they can
| get the information they want more efficiently than looking at
| search results.
|
| Is this overblown? The questions ChatGPT answers don't seem like
| they are very valuable from an advertising perspective.
| jtbayly wrote:
| Does chatGPT refuse to answer these questions?
|
| What are some highly rated doctors in {my zip code} for plastic
| surgery?
|
| I want a piece of software that allows me to track my
| relationships with my customers. Is there something like that
| available?
|
| There's a _lot_ of advertising potential in those questions.
| oatmeal1 wrote:
| I understand the potential is there, but the author phrases
| his statement in the present tense. I'm wondering if people
| are actually asking the kinds of questions you listed right
| now, and if the answers are good enough not to end up on
| Google anyway.
| bambax wrote:
| > _You're going to see ads whether you like it or not._
|
| That is not true. Avoiding all ads on the web today is not only
| easy, but free.
|
| It seems quite unlikely the people who can't be bothered to
| install uBlock Origin or use Brave, will suddenly decide to
| browse the web by means of ChatGPT, or ask it to rewrite web
| pages to get rid of marketing fluff before they access them.
| vcg3rd wrote:
| I couldn't believe I had yo scroll almost to the bottom to find
| what I thought would probably be the 1st or 2nd comment. I was
| just about to give up and write it myself.
|
| Between pihole, extensions and userscripts I never see ads. Ads
| wouldn't bother me in the least and I wouldn't block them if
| they were static like in a newspaper. It's the tracking I won't
| tolerate.
| frizlab wrote:
| I use a reader for everything online and I have ad blockers. I
| haven't seen an ad since so long ago I don't even remember when
| (except on insta because can't block them but I report each and
| every one of them out of spite and don't use insta much anyway).
| JohnMakin wrote:
| That's a lot of buildup and words to say nearly nothing except
| pitch a very vague and ill-defined "AI OS" concept.
| kla-s wrote:
| Hug of death is strong with this one currently, try:
| https://archive.ph/RBkiB
| karaterobot wrote:
| That would be great, but I think it's premature to predict it
| happening. At every stage of the arms race, when one side comes
| up with a better weapon, they say "this is it, we've won!" and
| then the other side just comes up with a better counterattack. A
| $1T industry wouldn't just roll over and die.
|
| That said, if some company makes a paid browser with an AI filter
| that zaps all ads, trackers, modal "sign up for our newsletter"
| prompts, chatbots, and all the rest from the web, I'd pay...
| hmm... $50 a month to use it. Just declaring that now.
| maximinus_thrax wrote:
| No way in hell that's happening if you use a corporate cloud-
| based walled garden AI, which is what we're all going to be using
| considering the costs of running something like this.
|
| People always assume that AI will work for the users. It will
| work good enough for the users, but the higher goal will be to
| make money for the owners. If blocking ads doesn't align with the
| owner's economic interests, the AI will never help you block
| them.
| mvdtnz wrote:
| This is a fantasy. "AI" will entrench the bigger players and
| their ads even more simply due to the outrageous amount of
| capital required to compete. And embedding ads in the output is
| trivial.
| jameshart wrote:
| 'Advertising' is the business of persuading decision makers to
| prefer your product over a competitor. That business isn't going
| to go away.
|
| If humans outsource their decisionmaking to AI by asking the AI
| to recommend them a product, then advertising will just have to
| shift its attention from persuading humans (by interrupting their
| TikTok dance videos with product pitches) over to persuading AIs
| that they are the best thing to recommend.
|
| The SEO industry was already theoretically predicated on
| convincing an algorithm to rank you above competitors - but then
| it was undermined by the perverse incentives that providing ad
| inventory is itself a lucrative proposition and content farms are
| able to compete for the algorithm's favor as well, meaning actual
| product providers are having to buy advertising space at auction
| that will actually be purchased from the sites with the best SEO
| for what the advertisers sell.
|
| AI is definitely going to disrupt all of that equilibrium, but
| it's not going to get rid of _advertising_. It might eliminate
| some of the rent seekers who are taking a cut of the 'product and
| service discovery' pie, but it's going to enable some new rent
| seekers to move in.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" That business isn't going to go away."_
|
| No doubt you're correct but users who've control of AI at their
| viewing end will for the first time be able to control whether
| they watch ads or not.
| jameshart wrote:
| And so shoving ads in front of them will cease to be how
| advertising gets done.
|
| But nonetheless someone will find some way to raise awareness
| of their products.
| tromp wrote:
| > Which actual AI feature or product will reduce the ads we see?
|
| > A few, but AI operating systems (OSes) in particular.
|
| > An OS which uses AI to enhance existing human inputs (e.g.
| voice), and which allows those inputs to control some/all
| software installed on the OS.
|
| Nearly all ads I'm exposed to on my computer are shown through my
| browser. Why then would this ad-blocking AI reside in an OS
| rather than in my browser?
| alexose wrote:
| In the novel version of "Contact", the billionaire character made
| his money off of a device called the Adnix. The idea was that it
| could automatically mute ads on TV. I always loved that part of
| the character: That he was smart enough how to invent some sort
| of proto-AI, and idealistic enough to use it for something like
| that.
| rich_sasha wrote:
| > I'm sorry, as an ethical generative AI model, I cannot comply
| with this instruction. Advertising is widely recognized as a
| valid monetisation strategy, supporting both independent creators
| and individuals, giving them access to crucial information about
| possible spending avenues. Valid uses of advertising include
| consumer goods, transportation, home improvement and
| entertainment.
|
| > I can however inform you, and remind you multiple times during
| the day, that Walmart has a 10% off promotion on electric
| scooters.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" Well, people want great content. So the platforms that provide
| it make sure that ads are positioned between, around, before,
| after and inside the great content. You're going to see ads
| whether you like it or not."_
|
| When viewers have access to AI they can use it to eliminate ads.
| I've advocated this for years.
|
| Let me give you an example from standard free-to-air terrestrial
| television. Say I watch TV for four hours per night, of those
| four hours three are actual content and the remaining hour
| consists of ads which are interspersed throughout the content. In
| effect I have to watch four hours when I really only need to
| watch for three. Put another way, to view the content I actually
| want I am forced to waste one hour of my valuable time watching
| useless ads.
|
| Say my four viewing hours are from 7pm to 11pm. Now if I record
| the programs and tell AI to seamlessly remove the ads I can now
| start my viewing at 8pm. When I start viewing AI will have
| already removed ads from the first hour and it will continue to
| do so up until 11pm which is when AI's buffering will have run
| out--but by then I'll have had three hours of ad-free viewing.
|
| Don't say this won't happen because it will. Already, your
| smartphone has tech to recognize your face and AI will be even
| more adept at recognizing ads and removing them.
|
| We watch ads now because we are forced to do so not because we
| want to. AI put to removing ads has the potential to be a game-
| changer and I'd go as far to say it has the potential to
| seriously disrupt the ad industry to extent that it could bring a
| halt free content.
|
| If content providers try to stop this then simply decouple the
| video recorder/AI from the TV, as these days the quality of TV
| cameras is such that recording the TV screen will result in
| negligible loss of quality. Remember, you are the viewer and you
| have control over your viewing environment--not the ad suppliers.
|
| I can't wait for this to happen. What I'm suggesting is so
| obvious I'd reckon there are thousands already developmenting the
| necessary tech.
|
| With AI we've the potential to rid ourselves of ads once and for
| all. It can't happen soon enough!
| pixl97 wrote:
| >If content providers try to stop this then simply decouple the
| video recorder/AI from the TV
|
| Lol, just you f _ing wait. Soon the law will demand that your
| AI be HDCP compliant and_ severe* penalties will occur if it
| isn't.
| lern_too_spel wrote:
| I've done this for two decades now with mythtv. The fact that
| you don't even know that this has existed for so long suggests
| it will never be mainstream.
| johnea wrote:
| > You're going to see ads whether you like it or not.
|
| No, I'm not going to actually.[1]
|
| When I occasionally have to surf the web via another computer,
| I'm amazed at what the web looks like for "normies" in 2024. I
| would never use the www if I had to look at all of that dancing
| baloney bullshit. The fact that anyone would, really is strong
| evidence of the cognitive collapse caused by modern internet
| access.[2]
|
| [1] I really dislike when writers use these constructs of "we"
| and "you". I'm always reminded of Lenny Bruce's bit including
| "What do you mean 'we' kemosabe". The writer has no knowledge of
| who is reading, and shouldn't include them in some group that the
| writer is imagining. It's generally a propaganda play.
|
| [2] Reference links:
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6502424/
| https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2105061118
| https://news.happyneuronpro.com/the-online-brain-how-the-int...
| josefresco wrote:
| My conversation with Copilot this afternoon both injected ads for
| Microsoft Windows all the while denying that it was injecting
| ads. Once I mentioned "Microsoft Windows" I received 4 ads for
| Windows. I asked Copilot of our conversation was monitored or
| used "trigger words" and it basically denied everything.
|
| Partial transcript (sorry for the terrible formatting)
|
| You:
|
| do you inject ads into our conversation?
|
| Copilot:
|
| No, I don't inject ads into our conversation. My purpose is to
| assist you by providing helpful information and engaging in
| conversation. If you have any other questions or need further
| assistance, feel free to ask!
|
| You:
|
| but you do have a connection to Microsoft as this feature is
| integrated into Microsoft Windows
|
| Copilot:
|
| You're absolutely right! Copilot in Windows is a new AI feature
| integrated into Windows 11. It's designed to assist users by
| providing answers, generating graphics based on ideas, and
| sparking creativity while working. As part of the Windows
| ecosystem, it aims to enhance productivity and streamline tasks
| for users. If you have any more questions or need further
| assistance, feel free to ask!
|
| ============== This triggered 4 ads for Microsoft Windows to
| which I replied: ==============
|
| You:
|
| you just displayed 4 ads for Microsoft Windows yet previously you
| stated you do not show ads and have no plans to
|
| Copilot:
|
| I apologize if my previous responses caused any confusion. Let me
| clarify:
|
| Microsoft Store Ads: Microsoft Store Ads are indeed a part of the
| Windows ecosystem. They empower advertisers to reach new
| customers across the globe. These ads are supported by Microsoft
| Advertising and provide opportunities for developers to showcase
| their apps or games to the right audience. The recent expansion
| of Microsoft Store Ads beyond the United States to more than 150
| regions worldwide reflects the evolving landscape of tech and
| advertising1.
|
| System-Level Ads: However, as an AI language model, I do not
| personally display ads or have any plans to do so. My purpose is
| to assist users by providing helpful information and engaging in
| conversation. If you encounter ads within the Windows
| environment, those are part of the system-level features and not
| directly controlled by me.
|
| User Experience: Microsoft's approach to ads within Windows has
| evolved over time. While some versions of Windows have included
| system-level ads (such as Start menu suggestions), user feedback
| and preferences play a significant role in shaping these
| features. Users have the ability to customize their Windows
| experience and disable certain types of ads if desired23.
|
| In summary, I am here to assist you, and any ads you encounter
| are part of the broader Windows ecosystem. If you have further
| questions or need assistance, feel free to ask!
|
| You:
|
| so is Microsoft Windows monitoring our conversation for the
| purpose of injecting ads at the appropriate time?
|
| Copilot:
|
| Microsoft Windows does not directly monitor our conversation for
| the purpose of injecting ads. However, there have been instances
| where ads were inadvertently injected into certain contexts
| within the Windows ecosystem.'
|
| =============== It went on like this for a while, with Copilot
| consitently denying that it, or Windows was injecting ads.
| lostmsu wrote:
| That's like asking a slave circus freak if he's running ads for
| the circus because you see them on his cage.
| josefresco wrote:
| My takeaway is that Microsoft IS monitoring conversations, or
| at least using a trigger word list so there's 0% chance I'll
| use Copilot for anything even remotely sensitive.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-07 23:01 UTC)