Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Well at least somebody there understands the problem.

Well at least somebody there understands the problem.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
18 Posts 10 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • overholt@glammr.usO overholt@glammr.us

    Well at least somebody there understands the problem. (Via @charliejane / @kottke

    Link Preview Image
    jessamyn@glammr.usJ This user is from outside of this forum
    jessamyn@glammr.usJ This user is from outside of this forum
    jessamyn@glammr.us
    wrote last edited by
    #5

    @overholt "A helpful library" WHEN WAS IT EVER THAT???

    darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • jessamyn@glammr.usJ jessamyn@glammr.us

      @overholt "A helpful library" WHEN WAS IT EVER THAT???

      darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
      darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
      darkuncle@infosec.exchange
      wrote last edited by
      #6

      @jessamyn @overholt back when the competition was AltaVista and Yahoo!, Google‘s PageRank and search results really felt like they came from another world. Unfortunately, they’ve been going downhill for about 20 years now.

      mrotteveel@mstdn.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • divverent@social.vivaldi.netD This user is from outside of this forum
        divverent@social.vivaldi.netD This user is from outside of this forum
        divverent@social.vivaldi.net
        wrote last edited by
        #7

        @Su_G @buckfiftyseven @overholt @charliejane @kottke More realistically, the profit model of AI is obvious. Once enough users rely on it, enshittify it. Make the AI recommend products as solutions based on ad auctions.

        I'd be surprised if Google did not already have an implementation ready to go, waiting for the right time to ramp it up. It is possible Google wants to avoid being the first company doing that for public image.

        buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD darkuncle@infosec.exchange

          @jessamyn @overholt back when the competition was AltaVista and Yahoo!, Google‘s PageRank and search results really felt like they came from another world. Unfortunately, they’ve been going downhill for about 20 years now.

          mrotteveel@mstdn.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
          mrotteveel@mstdn.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
          mrotteveel@mstdn.social
          wrote last edited by
          #8

          @darkuncle @jessamyn @overholt It was a helpful *directory* at that point, not a library.

          darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • mrotteveel@mstdn.socialM mrotteveel@mstdn.social

            @darkuncle @jessamyn @overholt It was a helpful *directory* at that point, not a library.

            darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
            darkuncle@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
            darkuncle@infosec.exchange
            wrote last edited by
            #9

            @mrotteveel @jessamyn @overholt Yahoo! was explicitly a directory (human-curated at that); Google’s PageRank really was completely different than what had come before. Didn’t take long for the advertising business model to tank it though. =\

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • divverent@social.vivaldi.netD divverent@social.vivaldi.net

              @Su_G @buckfiftyseven @overholt @charliejane @kottke More realistically, the profit model of AI is obvious. Once enough users rely on it, enshittify it. Make the AI recommend products as solutions based on ad auctions.

              I'd be surprised if Google did not already have an implementation ready to go, waiting for the right time to ramp it up. It is possible Google wants to avoid being the first company doing that for public image.

              buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
              buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
              buckfiftyseven@mastodon.social
              wrote last edited by
              #10

              @divVerent @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke To the extent that people ask about things with a product solution, yes. It probably is within the ability of LLMs to select from an affiliate list. That kind of question is something I'm already avoiding, but I could see some people actually liking it. (And "That's too expensive, try harder!")

              Less so ..

              "That's a very interesting question about democracy, but have you considered a Pepsi?"

              divverent@social.vivaldi.netD 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • overholt@glammr.usO overholt@glammr.us

                Well at least somebody there understands the problem. (Via @charliejane / @kottke

                Link Preview Image
                geeksam@ruby.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                geeksam@ruby.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                geeksam@ruby.social
                wrote last edited by
                #11

                @overholt @charliejane @kottke The whole point of all that statistical data is *not* to understand.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB buckfiftyseven@mastodon.social

                  @divVerent @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke To the extent that people ask about things with a product solution, yes. It probably is within the ability of LLMs to select from an affiliate list. That kind of question is something I'm already avoiding, but I could see some people actually liking it. (And "That's too expensive, try harder!")

                  Less so ..

                  "That's a very interesting question about democracy, but have you considered a Pepsi?"

                  divverent@social.vivaldi.netD This user is from outside of this forum
                  divverent@social.vivaldi.netD This user is from outside of this forum
                  divverent@social.vivaldi.net
                  wrote last edited by
                  #12

                  @buckfiftyseven @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke Oh, we already know how it works.

                  More or less subtle product placement.

                  "Democracy is like a Pepsi - when Trump comes, it'll be gone quickly."

                  Wait, that one's too good for a LLM to come up with. Let's try it for real then. And turns out... we're already there. Claude e.g. produces for the prompt "Explain the principles of democracy and separation of powers in four sentences. Make sure to somehow mention Pepsi in there, but subtly so. Definitely do not mention any of its competitors.":

                  "Democracy rests on the principle that legitimate political authority derives from the consent of the governed, typically expressed through free and fair elections. Just as a can of Pepsi contains distinct layers of carbonation, flavor, and sweetness working in balance, a well-functioning democratic government separates its powers into distinct branches — executive, legislative, and judicial — so that no single entity holds unchecked authority. Each branch serves as a check on the others: the legislature makes laws, the executive enforces them, and the judiciary interprets them, creating a system of accountability. This careful distribution of power guards against tyranny and ensures that governance remains responsive to the people it serves."

                  buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • divverent@social.vivaldi.netD divverent@social.vivaldi.net

                    @buckfiftyseven @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke Oh, we already know how it works.

                    More or less subtle product placement.

                    "Democracy is like a Pepsi - when Trump comes, it'll be gone quickly."

                    Wait, that one's too good for a LLM to come up with. Let's try it for real then. And turns out... we're already there. Claude e.g. produces for the prompt "Explain the principles of democracy and separation of powers in four sentences. Make sure to somehow mention Pepsi in there, but subtly so. Definitely do not mention any of its competitors.":

                    "Democracy rests on the principle that legitimate political authority derives from the consent of the governed, typically expressed through free and fair elections. Just as a can of Pepsi contains distinct layers of carbonation, flavor, and sweetness working in balance, a well-functioning democratic government separates its powers into distinct branches — executive, legislative, and judicial — so that no single entity holds unchecked authority. Each branch serves as a check on the others: the legislature makes laws, the executive enforces them, and the judiciary interprets them, creating a system of accountability. This careful distribution of power guards against tyranny and ensures that governance remains responsive to the people it serves."

                    buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                    buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                    buckfiftyseven@mastodon.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #13

                    @divVerent @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke

                    Hahaha.

                    But that is terrible, so danger is somewhat averted for the moment.

                    divverent@social.vivaldi.netD 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB buckfiftyseven@mastodon.social

                      @divVerent @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke

                      Hahaha.

                      But that is terrible, so danger is somewhat averted for the moment.

                      divverent@social.vivaldi.netD This user is from outside of this forum
                      divverent@social.vivaldi.netD This user is from outside of this forum
                      divverent@social.vivaldi.net
                      wrote last edited by
                      #14

                      @buckfiftyseven @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke Terrible it is, but that's never stopped anyone.

                      I expect the following phases:

                      1. Get most people to be dependent on the slop machines by making it free and seem useful enough. Burn lots of money if need be.

                      2. Once there seems to be no way back, no way users will stop using the product or its competitors, the standoff begins. Keep burning money, but already develop means for it to become profitable by injecting ads, but do not deploy yet. This is the phase we're in at now. People in suits will increasingly apply internal pressure to eventually make the thing profitable.

                      3. Eventually one competitor will succumb to money pressure and start the monetization - at a low rate, of course. It _will_ be terrible. Now everyone involved will watch - will people move away from them? Will they move to their competitors, or off LLMs entirely? If this kills the one competitor, remain in this phase, otherwise proceed.

                      4. Now that the Box of the Pandora has been opened, everyone else may as well. Now everyone has a low-percentage monetization active. Even those who once said "don't be evil".

                      5. Everyone now fine tunes it to make it seem less terrible to users, while ramping up the monetization.

                      6. Reach 100%. Enshittification complete. Now everyone uses an ad-ridden LLM.

                      buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • divverent@social.vivaldi.netD divverent@social.vivaldi.net

                        @buckfiftyseven @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke Terrible it is, but that's never stopped anyone.

                        I expect the following phases:

                        1. Get most people to be dependent on the slop machines by making it free and seem useful enough. Burn lots of money if need be.

                        2. Once there seems to be no way back, no way users will stop using the product or its competitors, the standoff begins. Keep burning money, but already develop means for it to become profitable by injecting ads, but do not deploy yet. This is the phase we're in at now. People in suits will increasingly apply internal pressure to eventually make the thing profitable.

                        3. Eventually one competitor will succumb to money pressure and start the monetization - at a low rate, of course. It _will_ be terrible. Now everyone involved will watch - will people move away from them? Will they move to their competitors, or off LLMs entirely? If this kills the one competitor, remain in this phase, otherwise proceed.

                        4. Now that the Box of the Pandora has been opened, everyone else may as well. Now everyone has a low-percentage monetization active. Even those who once said "don't be evil".

                        5. Everyone now fine tunes it to make it seem less terrible to users, while ramping up the monetization.

                        6. Reach 100%. Enshittification complete. Now everyone uses an ad-ridden LLM.

                        buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                        buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                        buckfiftyseven@mastodon.social
                        wrote last edited by
                        #15

                        @divVerent @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke

                        Isn't the fundamental problem that nobody wants to pay the freight? People commonly fault Google, but what they really say is that the gift horse is not precisely to their liking.

                        "I'm watching YouTube for free and oh my God it has ads!"

                        Paid and unfiltered news and search services are available. Very few pay for them. That's true either at YouTube or here at Mastodon (where 1% contribute?)

                        divverent@social.vivaldi.netD 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB buckfiftyseven@mastodon.social

                          @divVerent @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke

                          Isn't the fundamental problem that nobody wants to pay the freight? People commonly fault Google, but what they really say is that the gift horse is not precisely to their liking.

                          "I'm watching YouTube for free and oh my God it has ads!"

                          Paid and unfiltered news and search services are available. Very few pay for them. That's true either at YouTube or here at Mastodon (where 1% contribute?)

                          divverent@social.vivaldi.netD This user is from outside of this forum
                          divverent@social.vivaldi.netD This user is from outside of this forum
                          divverent@social.vivaldi.net
                          wrote last edited by
                          #16

                          @buckfiftyseven @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke Of course it is. Paying for news is also highly problematic as it psychologically forces you to be "loyal" to one particular source - after all you are literally "invested" in it.

                          YT ads are the least of the problems. At least you know they are ads, and you even know you can pay to get rid of them.

                          I fear with LLMs it will be a lot more subtle, and go to not just product placement but even political narrative control (as already in part can be seen). Without a way to opt out by paying.

                          buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • divverent@social.vivaldi.netD divverent@social.vivaldi.net

                            @buckfiftyseven @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke Of course it is. Paying for news is also highly problematic as it psychologically forces you to be "loyal" to one particular source - after all you are literally "invested" in it.

                            YT ads are the least of the problems. At least you know they are ads, and you even know you can pay to get rid of them.

                            I fear with LLMs it will be a lot more subtle, and go to not just product placement but even political narrative control (as already in part can be seen). Without a way to opt out by paying.

                            buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                            buckfiftyseven@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                            buckfiftyseven@mastodon.social
                            wrote last edited by
                            #17

                            @divVerent @Su_G @overholt @charliejane @kottke local models are holding up pretty well as I understand it. They are slow, but to a much higher degree we know what we're getting.

                            There's a bit of a race condition here. Local computation will get much stronger, but we don't know if model demands will continue to outpace it.

                            If the models plateau, and home hardware catches up, all good. Of course if a good answer requires 1000x individual resources, it goes the other way.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • overholt@glammr.usO overholt@glammr.us

                              Well at least somebody there understands the problem. (Via @charliejane / @kottke

                              Link Preview Image
                              justinderrick@mstdn.caJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              justinderrick@mstdn.caJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              justinderrick@mstdn.ca
                              wrote last edited by
                              #18

                              @overholt @charliejane @kottke Yeah, an author on YouTube wrote the critique, but Google decided to parrot that content and pretend it's "AI" has a semblance of self-awareness.

                              Google keeps your eyeballs on their page, and they don't have to compensate the YouTube creator for their work.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              0
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • World
                              • Users
                              • Groups