Google hasn't seen its legacy ad revenue start to dent until products with built-in agents start to see mass adoption.
Writing is on the wall that orders of magnitude fewer people will be going to google.com or using an interactive Google search in the next 5 years though.
LLMs are pretty mediocre for a lot of money queries like searching to buy shoes, looking at flights etc due to them not being up to date. So sure you can use them as a wrapper on top of Google but I assume a huge chunk of people will just go to Google to do that or use Google agents. Chrome will prove a very valuable asset for that - the whole experience can become agentic and Google is very well positioend to convert billions of users into their AI.
Power of habit and also Google will deliver a very high quality experience at scale that only OpenAI can currently compete with.
I'm not saying their search / ads revenue is never gonna drop - it might. But it will be a slow process (as we can see. it's actually still freaking growing in the high tens) and Google is well positioned to recover the lost revenue with its A.I offerings.
LLMs can execute searches? You can absolutely send ChatGPT to look for a cheap flight and it will do pretty well. And because I am paying for ChatGPT rather than the advertiser's, I am the customer and not the product.
You may pay to ChatGPT, but sooner or later you will become their product too. All the conversations you had or will have will be turned into signals to match you with products from advertisers, maybe not directly in the conversation with them, but anywhere else. It's not a mater of if, but looking at the pace things are going, and how financially pressured openai is, it's only a matter of time that their conversations with them will be turned into profit in some way or another, they basically have no choice financially.
I think there is a pattern it will always be nerfed the few weeks before launching a new model. Probably because they are throwing a bunch of compute at the new model.
Yeah maybe that but atleast let us know about this Or have dynamic limits? Nerfing breaks trust.
Though I am not sure if they actually nerf it intentionally. Haven't heard from any credible source. I did experience in my workflow though.
You mean the US, right? Especially with the part 2?
I know this may sound like a shock because you are privileged but 7% yoy return on capital is NOT the norm for the rest of the world. Just look at any other index not called the S&P or the Dow. Look up US exceptionalism.
The US policy for retirement savings shackles the younger generation with a ticking time bomb. Forcing your own citizens to save money for themselves is a lot better than forcing your own citizens to pay for others. Which one is more morally cruel?
HK has a similar forced savings, but that ROI is like 1 or 2% and the options to invest are paltry.
Some perspective is necessary. Yes it’s not great but compared to the rest of the world it’s stellar.
> I know this may sound like a shock because you are privileged but 7% yoy return on capital is NOT the norm for the rest of the world. Just look at any other index not called the S&P or the Dow. Look up US exceptionalism.
I have sympathy for your general position, but this particular one is a bit silly: I live outside the US (in Singapore, in fact), and I can invest in US equity just fine.
> Anthropic was the first to spam reddit with fake users and posts, flooding and controlling their subreddit to be a giant sycophant.
Is the Claude subreddit less authentic than the ChatGPT one?
I remember for a while the Claude subreddit was filled with people saying "I asked Claude if it was conscious and the answer was soooo fascinating you guys."
I think the ChatGPT one was filled with posts like "I had ChatGPT write my resume and now I'm rolling in cash!"
I actually agree with you, but I have no idea how one can compete in this playing field. The second there are a couple of bad actors in spammarketing, your hands are tied. You really can’t win without playing dirty.
I really hate this, not justifying their behaviour, but have no clue how one can do without the other.
Its just law of the jungle all over again. Might makes right. Outcomes over means.
Game theory wise there is no solution except to declare (and enforce) spaces where leeching / degrading the environment is punished, and sharing, building, and giving back to the environment is rewarded.
Not financially, because it doesn't work that way, usually through social cred or mutual values.
But yeah the internet can no longer be that space where people mutually agree to be nice to each other. Rather utility extraction dominates—influencers, hype traders, social thought manipulators-and the rest of the world quietly leaves if they know what's good for them.
All those you mentioned are somewhat physical and not that simple across the borders. Practically speaking you will never get universal laws across all nations, otherwise financial havens wouldn’t exist either.
My finance people care about the cents, a ROI of 7% is average but at 8.5% and now you are a world class asset of that inventory type. That’s sometimes the difference of a few hundred k out of 20m but they would not take the deal if it is slightly over due to their risk appetite.
The 3b external either matters a ton to fit their risk models OR they are doing a favor to an outside party. Probably a bit of both.
Well, given that it is an equity sale, split still feels like it is the prorated amount so that alphabet continues to own its percentage - not more not less.
Obviously you're entitled to your view, but I don't think it's that kind of finance model right now - it's far too speculative and the upside too unknown to be adjusting for small amounts on risk models.
Given the pace of current ai, in 2 months dark factories will peak hype and then in another 6 months it will be fully identified in its cost/benefit drawbacks, and the wisdom of the crowds will have a relatively accurate understanding of its general usefulness, and the internet will move on to other things.
The next generation of ai coding will make dark factories legit due to their ability to architect decently. Then generation after will make dark factories obsolete due to their ability to make it right the first time. That's about 8 months out for SOTA, and 14 months out for Sonnet/Flash/Pro users.
No need for them to come out of stealth, just imagine 1000s of junior/mid engineers crammed into an office given vague instructions to build an app and spit out code. Imagine a cctv in the room overlooking the hundreds of desks, and then press fast forward 100x speed.
That's literally what they built, because that's what's possible with Opus.
The funny thing is that the rest of the software industry is dying, except for the trillions of venture capital being invested into these AI coding whatevers. But given the slow death of software, once these AI coding whatevers are finished, there's going to be nothing of value left for them to code.
But I'm sure the investors will still come out just fine.
This is irrelevant and misleading. Just because many people cannot tell flavors apart doesn’t mean that the products are parity and are marketing differentiated.
Sure the majority of people cannot tell flavor notes apart but there exists a certain % of the population that can very reliably distinguish different tastes. Wine sommeliers, fine dining, food science are all professions which require a sensitive palate and smell and it is an over simplification to talk about sodas tasting the same for the majority of people as if it implies there is no difference or speciality in crafting taste.
reply