• edinbruh@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Wow, so unexpected. Who could have seen this coming? 🙄

    At least Google had the decency to write “sponsored” on the sponsored results, but with this it’s not even an option.

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I’ve been saying this for a while. It’s gonna be particularly difficult to get valuable insight. With sponsored search results you can keep scrolling. Sponsored content will “pollute” the context of the conversation even if only some responses push sponsors.

  • Onno (VK6FLAB)@lemmy.radio
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    So … now we have plausible gibberish … also known as Autocorrect on Steroids … that includes corporate sponsorship… seems like we’re moving closer to the true meaning of advertising with every iteration.

    Next we’ll be asked to pay for this feature … oh wait.

    I can’t wait until the Assumed Intelligence bubble finally bursts and takes with it some of the largest companies in the world … perhaps this is how we finally address climate change.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I’d post one of Facebook’s “Imagine” images as a joke but it sort of defeats the purpose. So imagine I did it. Feel free to leave the tap on while you do if you really wanna get the full experience.

  • Atherel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    20 hours ago

    The fact that ads will be injected in LLM was clear. I just thought Google would do it first in their AI responses.

  • Janx@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    21 hours ago

    “Hey, you know that chat bot that’s churning through billions in money and drinkable water every year to guess the answers to questions, lie, hallucinate, and gaslight false info? You know, the one that will never be profitable, but every giant company has a hard-on for, despite almost no one liking it…? What if we made it even more unreliable and inaccurate, by forcing in Corporate Answers™. And yeah, the customer still has to pay for it…”

  • miellaby@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    I accept my load of hallucinations and disguised approximations in exchange of relatively adfree neutral answers. That’s the only reason why I don’t go back on Google/DuckDuck for now. But as soon as I’ll see corporate bullshit forced into my chat, that’ll mark the end of my chat bot use

  • tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    If you were trying to link to an article, you just linked to an image.

  • Jtzl@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    24 hours ago

    That is straight-up nightmarish.

    Like, people, it predicts the next “token” — referring to that as intelligence is way overstating it. I, too, think “AI” is impressive, but to say companies are overstating its capabilities is putting it lightly.

    • Jtzl@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I think I heard about some dystopian story when I was a kid, and the premise was ads on the inside of your eyelids while you slept. Now, that’d be called “innovation.” 🤦‍♂️

  • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Then it starts hallucinating and gives an ad for a non existing product with a dead link. Advertisers get mad and threaten to sue.

  • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    21 hours ago

    As someone who is not anti-tool just because big companies and capitalism are misusing said tool (that’s a ‘big companies’ and ‘capitalism’ issue that applies to far more than LLMs), this seems like a non-starter for any business use of the platform.

    Enterprise tools definitely have an expectation of 1) not having ads placed in them, and 2) not having their users tracked for third-party data sale, not because they love their employees, but because they’re scared one could infer proprietary business information via user metadata correlation. No company wants their new product to be “blown” early because their devs’ internet activity was aggregated and the product inferred, or worse to have a competitor get the jump on them because of it. Most companies begrudgingly accept use of e.g. Google, but corporate policies will absolutely limit the kind of information you can put in a Google search. ChatGPT is just by its nature much more likely to end up getting proprietary data put in (because it’s a ‘conversation’).

    The “promise” that OpenAI will only use said data to target ads is laughable, even if OpenAI believes it.