Just think about how much more effective advertisements are going to be when LLMs start to tell you what to buy based on which advertiser gave the most money to the company.
Optimistic view: maybe product quality becomes an actually good metric again as the LLM will care about giving good products.
Yea, I know, I said it's an optimistic view.
Optimistic view #2: there is no moat, and AI is "P=NP". Everything can be disrupted.
How would that matter against the operator selling advertisers the right to instruct it about what the relevant facts are?
It's maybe not really "caring" but they are harder to cajole than just "advertise this for us."
Once that is resolved then guiding the model to only recommend or mention specific brands will flow right in.
Given that the people and companies funding the current AI hype so heavily overlap with the same people who created the current crop of unpleasant money printing machines I have zero faith this time will be different.
1 trillion dollars is justified because people use chatGPT instead of google sometimes?
GPT is more valuable than search because GPT has more control over the content than Search has.
This has been the selling point of ML based recommendation systems as well. This story from 2012: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-targ...
But can we really say that advertisements are more effective today?
From what little I know about SEO it seems nowadays high intent keywords are more important than ever. LLMs might not do any better than Google because without the intent to purchase pushing ads are just going to rack up impression costs.
How? OpenAI are LOSING money on every query. Beating Google by losing money isn't really beating Google.
And TPUs are like 5x cheaper then GPUs, per token
Inference is very much profitable
We can't pinpoint the exact dollar amount OpenAI categorically spends but we can make a lot of reasonable and safe guesses, and all signs points to inference hosting being a profitable venture by itself, with training profitability being less certain or being a pursuit of a winner-takes-all strategy.
isn't that quite difficult to do consistently? I'd imagine it would be relatively easy to take the same LLM and get it to shit talk the product whose owners had paid the AI corp to shill. That doesn't seem particularly ideal.