[HN Gopher] OpenAI is building a social network?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       OpenAI is building a social network?
        
       Author : noleary
       Score  : 57 points
       Date   : 2025-04-15 16:08 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
        
       | jsnider3 wrote:
       | With all the other social networks trying to keep their data
       | private because they all want to try their own AIs, it makes
       | sense that OpenAI would want to have its own social network that
       | wouldn't charge them for the data. I still doubt they actually
       | launch it.
        
       | bhouston wrote:
       | I've always thought that the social networks like X and BlueSky
       | are sort of like the distributed consciousness of society. It is
       | what society, as a whole / in aggregate, is currently thinking
       | about and knowing its ebbs and flows and what it responds to are
       | important if you want to have up to date AI.
       | 
       | So yeah, AI integrated with a popular social network is valuable.
        
         | ahartmetz wrote:
         | Social networks tend to reflect the character of their
         | founders. Do you _really_ want to see what Sam Altman can do?
        
           | bhouston wrote:
           | > Social networks tend to reflect the character of their
           | founders.
           | 
           | I would say "owners" rather than "founders", but I agree with
           | you. I think Sam Altman's couldn't be worse than Elon Musk's
           | X, no?
        
             | daqhris wrote:
             | Both are founders of a so-called non-profit and are suing
             | each other. Their legal arguments are public at this point.
             | By reading them, one may understand that it's hard to
             | choose between 'yes' and 'no' as an answer. Maybe, we could
             | request and take into account the opinion of what they
             | 'created' that might outlast them and their conflict,
             | namely AI.
        
             | ahartmetz wrote:
             | I don't use X neither. Looks like it won't be around for
             | much longer anyway, except as American Pravda (even though
             | "Truth" Social already exists).
        
           | newaccountlol wrote:
           | Make sure to hide your little sisters from it.
        
       | beloch wrote:
       | >One idea behind the OpenAI social prototype, we've heard, is to
       | have AI help people share better content. "The Grok integration
       | with X has made everyone jealous," says someone working at
       | another big AI lab. "Especially how people create viral tweets by
       | getting it to say something stupid."
       | 
       | This would be a decent PR stunt, but would such a platform offer
       | anything of value?
       | 
       | It might be more valuable to set AI to the task of making the
       | most _human_ social platform out there. Right now, Facebook,
       | TikTok, Reddit, etc. are all rife with bots, spam, and generative
       | AI junk. Finding good content in this sea of noise is becoming
       | increasingly difficult. A social media platform that uses AI to
       | filter out spam, bots, and other AI with the goal of making human
       | content easy to access might really catch on. Set a thief to
       | catch thieves.
       | 
       | Who are we kidding. It's going to be Will Smith eating spaghetti
       | all the way down.
        
         | add-sub-mul-div wrote:
         | No, nothing of value. If you ever want to lose faith in the
         | future of humanity search "@grok" on Twitter and look at all
         | the interactions people have with it. Just total infantilism,
         | people needing tl;drs spoon-fed to them, needing summarization
         | and one-word answers because they don't want to read, arguing
         | with it or whining to Musk if they don't get the answer they
         | want to confirm what they already believe.
        
           | Centigonal wrote:
           | the worst is like a dozen people in the replies to a post
           | asking Grok the exact same obvious follow-up question.
           | Somehow, having access to an LLM has completely annihilated
           | these commenters' ability to scroll down 50 pixels.
        
           | rudedogg wrote:
           | I bookmarked this example where it is confidently incorrect
           | about a movie frame/screenshot:
           | 
           | https://x.com/Pee159604/status/1909445730697462080
        
       | numpad0 wrote:
       | A 4chan but images can be prompt generated? Makes sense.
       | Everything's going back to early 2000s, it seems.
        
       | kittikitti wrote:
       | I would try to make a platform like Deviantart or Tumblr except
       | OpenAI pays you to make good content that the AI is trained on.
        
         | malux85 wrote:
         | Nice in theory but don't know how practical it is to actually
         | do.
         | 
         | How do you define "good"? Theres obvious examples at the
         | extremes but a chasm of ambiguity between them.
         | 
         | How do you compute value? If an AI takes 200 million images to
         | train, wait let me write that out to get a better sense of the
         | number:
         | 
         | 200,000,000
         | 
         | Then what is the value of 1 image to it? Is it worth the 3
         | hours of human labour time put into creating it? Is it worth 1
         | hour of human labour time? Even at minimum wage? No, right?
        
       | blitzar wrote:
       | This is just part of the ongoing feud between Sama and Musk.
        
       | andrewstuart wrote:
       | They should use their resources to make OpenAI good at coding.
        
       | siva7 wrote:
       | Sam got a jawline lift, anyone noticed?
        
         | dlivingston wrote:
         | Did he? Flipping back and forth between old vs. new photos of
         | him, his facial structure seems roughly the same.
        
       | labrador wrote:
       | It'd be cool to see Google+ resurrected with OpenAI branding.
       | Google+ was actually a pretty well designed social network
        
         | WJW wrote:
         | Not well designed enough to live, though.
        
           | AlienRobot wrote:
           | Not well designed to live under Google*
           | 
           | Tumblr is still alive. LiveJournal is still alive. Newgrounds
           | is still alive and Flash doesn't even exist anymore.
        
         | bluetux01 wrote:
         | that would be cool, google+ was very unique and i was kinda sad
         | google killed it off
        
         | swyx wrote:
         | what did you like about it?
        
           | labrador wrote:
           | I liked the UX. I liked Circles. There were other nice
           | options that I can't remember but I thought Google+ was a big
           | improvement over Facebook.
        
         | piva00 wrote:
         | I don't believe it was well designed, it felt clunky to use,
         | concepts weren't intuitive enough to understand after a few
         | uses.
         | 
         | I tried to use it for a few months after release, always got
         | frustrated to the point I didn't feel like reaching out to
         | friends to be part of it.
         | 
         | The absurd annoyance of its marketing, pushing it into every
         | nook and cranny of Google's products was the nail in the
         | coffin. I'm starting to feel as annoyed by the push with
         | Gemini, it just keeps popping up at annoying times when I want
         | to do my work.
        
       | chazeon wrote:
       | I think a social network is not necessarily a timeline-based
       | product, but an LLM-native/enabled group chat can probably be a
       | very interesting product. Remember, ChatGPT itself is already a
       | chat.
        
         | sho_hn wrote:
         | What's a "LLM-native/enabled group chat"?
        
           | simple10 wrote:
           | Telegram and slack bots are probably the best example so far.
           | Bot gets added to a chat and can respond when mentioned in
           | the group chat.
        
             | sho_hn wrote:
             | Gotcha, the NLP-enabled version of the good old IRC
             | weatherbot.
             | 
             | For a moment I had a funnier mental image of a chat app
             | with an input field that treats every input as a prompt,
             | and everyone's chatting through the veil of an LLM
             | verbosity filter.
             | 
             | There might be something chat RPG-like there worth trying
             | though ...
        
         | simple10 wrote:
         | Yes, this. That's my bet if OpenAI follows through with social
         | features.
         | 
         | Extend ChatGPT to allow multiple people / friends to interact
         | with the bot and each other. Would be interesting UX challenge
         | if they're able to pull it off. I frequently share chats from
         | other platforms, but typically those platforms don't allow
         | actual collaboration and instead clone the chat for the people
         | I shared.
        
       | candiddevmike wrote:
       | What else are they going to spend billions on to turn a profit?
        
       | swyx wrote:
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20250415160251/https://www.theve...
        
       | outside1234 wrote:
       | Aren't they unprofitable enough already?
        
       | pedalpete wrote:
       | https://archive.is/qU4am
        
       | pontus wrote:
       | Is this just a data play? Need more data. Start a social network.
       | Own said data.
        
         | sva_ wrote:
         | I think its more likely that they're desperate to find a
         | profitable business model.
        
       | prvc wrote:
       | Is making yet another twitter clone really the way to build a
       | path towards super-intelligence? A worthy use of the
       | organization's talent?
        
         | arcatech wrote:
         | Collecting millions of people's thoughts and interactions with
         | each other IS probably on the path to better LLMs at least.
        
           | sho_hn wrote:
           | I'd love for my agents to be created in the image of
           | humanity's best side, its interactions on social media.
           | 
           | Perhaps then we can all let LLMs take care of tweeting
           | outrage for us, and go outside to find each other rolling
           | around on the grass.
        
       | philipov wrote:
       | Imagine that, a social network where _all_ of the participants
       | are bots.
        
       | tiffanyh wrote:
       | My guess ... it's probably less of a "social network" and more of
       | a "they are trying to build a destination (portal) where users go
       | to daily".
       | 
       | E.g. old days of Yahoo (portal)
        
         | sho_hn wrote:
         | They just want the next wave of Ghibli meme clicks to go to
         | them, really.
         | 
         | This will be built on the existing thread+share infra ChatGPT
         | already has, and just allow profiles to cross-post into
         | conversations, with UI and features more geared toward remixing
         | each other's images.
        
         | beepbopboopp wrote:
         | The answer seems more obvious to me. They dont even care if its
         | competitive or scales too much. xAI has a crazy data advantage
         | firehousing Twitter, llama FB/IG and CGPT just has, well, the
         | internet.
         | 
         | Id hope they have some clever scheme to acquire users, but
         | ultimately they want the data/
        
       | mushufasa wrote:
       | Sounds like they are thinking about instagram, which originated
       | as a phone app to apply filters to a camera and share with
       | friends (like texting or emailing them or sending them a link to
       | a hosted page), and evolved into a social network. Their new
       | image generation feature has enough people organically sharing
       | content that they probably are thinking about hosting that
       | content on pages, then adding permissions + follow features to
       | all of their existing users' accounts.
       | 
       | honestly it's not a terrible idea. it may be a distraction from
       | their core purpose, but it's probably something they can test and
       | learn from within a ~90 day cycle.
        
         | CharlieDigital wrote:
         | Sounds like some crossover with Civit.ai
        
       | clonedhuman wrote:
       | AI bots already make up a significant percentage of users on most
       | social networks. Might as well just take the mask off completely
       | --soon, we'll all be having conversations (arguments, most
       | likely) with 'users' with no real human anywhere near them.
        
         | api wrote:
         | I've been saying for a while that the next innovation beyond
         | TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube is to get rid of human creators
         | entirely. Just have a 100% AI-generated slop-feed tailor made
         | for the user.
         | 
         | There's already a ton of AI slop on those platforms, so we're
         | like half way there, but what I mean is eliminating the entire
         | idea of humans submitting content. Just never-ending hypnotic
         | slop guided by engagement maximizing algorithms.
        
       | janalsncm wrote:
       | An idea which sounds horrifying but would probably be pretty
       | popular: a Facebook like feed where all of your "friends" are
       | bots and give you instant gratification, praise, and support no
       | matter what you post. Solves the network effect because it scales
       | from zero.
        
         | samcgraw wrote:
         | I'm sorry to say this exists: https://socialai.co
        
       | einrealist wrote:
       | This is Altman increasing the mass of the investment black hole
       | that OpenAI is.
        
       | paulvnickerson wrote:
       | Sam Altman is retaliating against Musk for Grok and Musk's
       | lawsuit against OpenAI, trying to ride the wave of anti-Musk
       | political heat, and figure out a way to pull in more training
       | data due to copyright troubles.
       | 
       | If they launch, expect a big splash with many claiming it is the
       | X-killer (i.e. the same people that claimed the same of Mastadon,
       | Threads, and Bluesky), especially around here at HN, and then
       | nobody will talk about it anymore after a few months.
        
         | AlienRobot wrote:
         | Here's how to kill Twitter and Bluesky AND Mastodon:
         | 
         | 1: use an LLM to extract the text from memes and relatable
         | comics.
         | 
         | 2: use an LLM to extract the transcriptions of videos.
         | 
         | 3: use an LLM to censor all political speech.
         | 
         | OpenAI, I believe in you. You can do it. Save the Internet.
         | 
         | If you can clean my FYP of current events I'll join your social
         | media before you can ask a GPT how to get more users.
        
       | frabona wrote:
       | Feels like a natural next step, honestly. If they already have
       | users generating tons of content via ChatGPT, hosting it natively
       | and adding light social features might just be a way to keep
       | people engaged and coming back. Not sure if it's meant to compete
       | with Twitter/Instagram, or just quietly become another daily
       | habit for users
        
       | Nijikokun wrote:
       | ngl building a social network isn't hard, getting people to use a
       | social network is the hard part
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-04-15 23:01 UTC)