Also Google did it over-time - they didn't suddenly become who they are today 10 years ago even.

oh absolutely, its been a progression though and search order rewriting was implemented very early on as part of ad integration. its common in search relevancy/tuning circles

your example with google isn't necessarily applicable now because they've shown a roadmap that can be done and squeezed down tightly between the "hey, we're good folks" to "you're our captive cattle, we can do whatever the fuck we want. there's nothing you can do, since all our competitors will be doing the exact same thing shortly"

Advertiser's on Google and Meta et al are not really paying for visibility - they are paying to achieve some objective (e.g. sales) that is directly tied to a campaign. That's why digital advertising is so much more powerful than non-digital.

The question is, will LLM's as an interface be worth the spend in relation to converting without throwing users of chatGPT off over-time, all whilst, doing it within the regulatory frameworks. That's difficult to say. OAI will face a lot of scrutiny in EU for sure.

There’s a misunderstanding. I’m not talking about AEO

It’s about how Meta and google provides good data about audiences but I need more detailed info about a person(they’re exact shopping habits)

As the person responsible for GTM, I would gladly pay $60CPM if I can say “I would like to target all people who said they love crunchy peanut butter and consistently ask ChatGPT for peanut butter ideas”

I have no idea what they’re trying to pitch with the “we’re at the last step of the transaction” idea-but I also understand the regulatory issues with what advertisers like me want

Too early to do it. You have to wait until people's behaviour is set in stone to the point they need to be compensated heavily to switch.

This isnt rocket science, its basic game-playing on the economic behaviour of humans.

I don’t think they’ve been successful enough at monopolizing to get away with this to an egregious extent like Google has. Anthropic and Google both have debatably better models with ad-free platforms (so far). And open models are not so far behind.

Theyre desperate to meet those lofty revenue objectives they put in their spreadsheet model.

Its kinda comical seeing this play out. I still laugh at the deluded fools who think something even close to AGI is here or coming in the future. If that were true, why haven't we seen genius plays from OAI and Anthropic, progressively over-time, if intelligence rises as compute scales up? If anything we are seeing the opposite.

The "A" in "AGI" doesn't stand for "Apocalypse", you know.

It made some sense as a goalpost when the frontier of "AI" was "a computer plays, specifically, Go really well", now that typical ones are quite general it's just a floating signifier people should probably stop using for anything.

I'm not sure that I'm more impressed with LLMs than I am with alpha go.

Alpha taught itself how to play go by playing over and over again. It learned a new strategy never seen before. I find that a lot more intelligent than an static state LLM regurgitating for loops.

If that\s true then those devs should not complain if people attack them verbally over it - that\s what they are getting paid for, right?

They said ads would never come awhile ago. Anyone who trusts their word is so delusional I can't even....

Its sad to see what the industry broadly has become.

I get firms need to make money but cmon. If you're an OAI employee you can't truly say you have a soul. The amount of times they gone back on their word.. comical.

They got greedy, wanted to raise a lot of money and promised big things. Well those big things arent ever coming, so they turn to whatever means in order to generate cash flows.

Pathetic and sad.