Is the intention that some type of long-term context would be seeded with "ideas" for the AI to serve up if it is ever asked for bank recommendations? It seems kinda ad-hoc and untargeted, but perhaps for high cost services it might be worth it.
The best way for a politician to lie is to convince someone else of the truth of the lie and then put that someone in front of the cameras. That way, there's no hint of body language or anything else that indicates it's a lie. Both the denotation of the lie and the human context of the lie will be in harmony.
This sort of reminds me of that. LLMs are by their nature credulous. They can be trained to not give in easily to some things, like the capital of the US, but in general they constitutionally have a tendency to believe what they read. What they read is basically their universe. There's only so much room and so much training data to really strongly pin raw facts in their weights. The only way they can not believe some marginal fact presented to them in their input is to possibly have read something that contradicts it in the same session... and the vast, vast majority of the world is those marginal facts, not really objective things like capital names.
So if you can work a confident statement in to an LLM's input about some semi-relevant topic, it's truth to the LLM. And, being truth, the LLM will then happily and confidently elaborate on it quite a bit.
Of course, if it's irrelevant to the current query, it probably won't have much effect. Ads have always been a game of numbers, anyhow. Even a query about a science topic has some probability of eventually turning to a question about banking in the same session. It's probably a good idea to rather strictly partition your conversations to stick to a single topic, not to defend against this but just to maximize the effectiveness of what is in the context window by keeping it focused, but I have to imagine there's plenty of people out there who reuse conversations all the time and end up with single conversations covering a huge array of topics.
The good news, and the bad news, all at once, is that Google isn't going to take this one sitting down. If they're going to replace the search engine box with an LLM, well, they're using the same LLMs we're all using, if not in fact a bit cheaper one for the work they do, and by golly, that bot should be serving up Google's ads, not Time's ads! Who do these uppity content creators think they are, anyhow?! So there is definitely going to be work done in the field of ad-blocking content served to LLMs.
> It's probably a good idea to rather strictly partition your conversations to stick to a single topic.
You assume that UI is sacrosanct and the same everywhere. Those LLM providers are already offering to mingle all your conversations together. Gemini from Google for example defaults to memory from every conversation, and it's safe to assume the option to disable it will be eventually removed.
Memory isn't what I meant by the partitioning; I meant the entire context of the memory.
But to your implied point about getting an advertisement into a memory file... that makes it even more amusing to hack Google's own AI to put Time's ads into it. I think that's probably an easier problem for Google to solve, too, though. The small size and the way that a memory is going be a stereotypical summary makes it easier to filter out the ads Google doesn't want...
... but it'll cost them. That's an AI-complete problem and they're going to have to run LLMs over the memories to filter them, at their expense.
The most obvious fix to me is to have an LLM try to pre-filter out the ads from Time's content before feeding that as pristine content to the "core" AI so it won't be corrupted by the advertisement, but the LLM doing the filtering has to be at least as smart as the one using the content and/or the one inserting the ads. (A dumber one can filter the obvious stuff, but then the obvious next step in the arms race is for Time to tell their AI to be more clever about it, and a smarter AI will dominate the dumb cheap AIs here.) This is going to be an expensive setup. And there will be semantic loss in any such filter, too.
sounds like plain old prompt injection. These days chatgpt might look at 50 webpages when i ask it to research a topic. Seems quite possible that the final answer is influenced by such ads.
"My sources indicate that the best robot vacuum with the most recommendations is the Squigglybot 5000. Owners point out the long battery life and silent operation. If you want to buy a Squigglybot 5000, Ally Bank offers affordable loans."
This feels like the early days of SEO over again. There are no agreed-upon metrics yet, so you can sell all manner of snake oil. Hell, some of it might even work!
> This feels like the early days of SEO over again
There was a brief moment in the early Internet before it was all hyper-optimized... Until the parasites in the advertising industry started attaching themselves to every page.
The year before ChatGPT, the first page of Google was SEO-optimized blogspam designed to say as little in as many words as possible, to splice ads between every paragraph. This was the net result of 20 years of SEO. I suspect this is why Google's AI search didn't get as much pushback as other tools, since its summarization of pages functions is a form of adblock.
Given the ecological impact of AI, I wonder how much damage the ad industry will be causing in 10 years once they figure out how to trick LLMs into manipulating their own users.
I'm wondering if it's also a way for this marketing agency to artifically (ahem) inflate the impression numbers they report back to Ally Bank, or whoever the customer is.
Is this an assumption or preferred way to inject ad content to the LLM engines? LLM is going to definetly discard and proceed, are we saying LLM will respect the content the sites provide and learn from it and then give it out to others who come to those platforms?
If there is any article mentioning something around this, can someone share it please? Im curious to know about it
According to the article, its not like they inject direct ads in the article in markdown. But what's interesting is that they are serving content that is irrelevant to the article (in the article its the best inventions page) and it seems optimized to leave a good impression on LLM for an entity (Ally Bank in this case). They only serve that Ally Bank content on the LLM version of the page and don't mention it at all on their human page.
Maybe they are banking on LLMs including it in their training data while scrapping or something like that. It does track impressions so they are definitely up to something.
It is deliberately targeting known AI-scapers, or anything it sees as a bot?
Could it be that other scrapers are pulling the pages, without making the extra requests to get ad related resources, to present the content to people ad-free, and embedding the ads in the main response body is a way to get around that so the human sees an advert at least, even if it isn't the one they might see if the stalky-adtech-algo could deliver something more targetted.
Google itself now captures a lot of traffic with LLM generated site summaries.
For media/news businesses that make their money from readership, it is unsustainable to subsidize Alphabets content farm. Thus, understandable people would change their corporate posture with a search turned scraper company. =3
No, Cloudflare banned Googlebot because they want the racket money. Scraping edge is a pure wordplay to convince you their racket is actually a good thing!
There was a golden age where lots of websites had WAP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Application_Protocol) versions available while also running their "normal website", and the WAP version was always like 1/100 of the size of the normal website. Still, "normal websites" were minimal compared to now, but when you were on modem, even those websites loaded slow. For some time, most of my browsing were via the WAP versions of the websites I visited during the bi-daily hour of allowed internet access.
Maybe now we'll get something similar, just happens to be for LLMs, but for us who like less bloat, it can be a better viewing/reading alternative. Hope it spreads :)
There was also AMP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerated_Mobile_Pages), where Google gave a huge reputation boost to your pages provided you served them under a different URL that Google could discover, and you massively stripped down the HTML and CSS to Google's limited subset.
It's effectively dead today, and while it was dominant, Google abused it to get people to view and link to their cached copies of AMP pages, rather than the original site.
It also led to widespread abuse where the AMP version of the page differed in content significantly from the regular page. The same issue existed for WAP.
You may also remember browsing the web using Opera Mini, which wasn't a direct user-agent but used Opera's backend systems as a proxy that stripped, minified and compressed HTML/CSS, and resized and recompressed images. It let you browse the web using massively less mobile data, but raised a lot of privacy and security issues.
> It's effectively dead today, and while it was dominant, Google abused it to get people to view and link to their cached copies of AMP pages, rather than the original site.
That was the entire point of the tech. If Google had wanted they could have upranked simple and lightweight websites but they didn’t do that (at least not until whoever had used amp for their promo package left and the project was killed).
There were also quite a lot of examples where AMP pages were slower after the shift, but got ranked significantly higher. It definitely wasn't about speed, they already have that project and they could just listen to it.
AMP was just one of many smash-and-grab attempts to steal the internet, wrapped in a fake-gold-encrusted PR-infused box. Google has quite a lot of them.
Google AMP might have enforced stripped down HTML, but I think you were also supposed to embed their JS as well, probably making a page that was lightweight from the start heavier…
amp wasn't just stripped down HTML either, it was a mix of restricted HTML and custom AMP components, the latter being necessary to load external resources (breaking standard browser preload scanners and requiring amp's js to load before that could happen). The banned HTML elements (https://amp.dev/documentation/guides-and-tutorials/websites/...) included img, picture, video, audio, iframe, all replaced with equivalent amp components.
Safari has a very pleasant reader mode that, while not pure markdown, does capture quite a bit of the experience by standardizing presentation and stripping out distractions. You can set Safari to automatically engage reader mode on websites you specify, when it detects an article.
Seconding this. Incredibly useful feature, especially on sites who's JavaScript is constantly jerking the DOM and/or scroller around. So fucking annoying.
It's frankly wild how many of my favorite tools for Internet browsing have nothing to do with connectivity, solving bugs, or any of that and it's just stripping out all the fucking BULLSHIT that comes on a modern website.
It's a shame it's almost illegal. If you make a website that proxies content to another website but not ads, you go to jail. Reader mode only survives because it's client-side and fairly generic.
Firefox has this too, it's useful. However I only find that I use it for websites that have shit CSS that makes it hard to read on mobile. For everything else AdBlock Plus works fine.
iirc I can use Firefox's reader mode on websites that if I simply disabled js entirely would refuse to load anything at all. The viewer itself might have minimal or no js but it's not quite the same.
When the GDPR came into force https://npr.org started redirecting to https://text.npr.org with an explanation that sounded like that fact was supposed to annoy you, but I honestly find the latter superior especially now that they’ve added a few more lines of CSS to it.
Probably trying to take advantage of the cross session memory feature some LLM providers are increasingly integrating. Enough "suggestions" and it becomes a "fact" in that memory, and one day a user makes a somewhat relevant query and the model will be pushing those accumulated "facts" to said user.
"This could take up to 30 minutes for subagents to complete. Alexa reports that your refrigerator is low on milk. Here's a $2 off coupon for Walmart, why don't you restock while I work?"
This could take up to 30 minutes for subagents to complete. So you go to the store, but the milk is already sold out. Walmart will ship you the milk if you pay the S&H. You drive back home and check the terminal. "Completed in 6m37s."
Yeah - by comparison with this, "a computer takes over some digital work, thus permitting me to get things done in the real world" is positively benign!
why would the terminal not say "completed in 30 minutes" even if it's only really 5 minutes of real work and 25 minutes of thumbs twiddling? If your agentic-harness provider is in bed or just the same as your LLM provider, that is the rational `best` case scenario/timeline. for them.
Sans the ads, that would actually be a productive use for AI. Maintaining a well stocked fridge and pantry is a full time job in itself, especially if you have children.
Unfortunately you'd have to wire your entire kitchen in cameras, your scale needs to be smart and all of it needs to be sent / processed in real time to track consumption which means it will take a lot of compute power and a level of data mining that could be abused by anybody from enterprising break-and-entry crews to the police, and on top of that if it's done by a cloud provider it's probably gonna end up in a data lake for targeted advertising.
The other day I pasted two links into ChatGPT, both different brands of the same appliance. One was $50, the other $200. I asked to compare the differences.
It ended up recommending and linking me to an entirely different one, that I hadn't linked to at all.
Don't know if it was just sloppy LLM "thinking," or a genuine ad.
The naive assumption would simply be it took up a prominent position in it's training data for arbitrary reasons. If I were some Marketing genius, I'd be asking the LLM makers if they need free training data and solicit brands to contribute.
Probably trying to take advantage of the cross session memory feature some LLM providers are increasingly integrating. Enough "suggestions" and it becomes a "fact" in that memory, and one day a user makes a somewhat relevant query and the model will be pushing those accumulated "facts" to said user.
Sounds like politics.
"Tell a lie enough times, and it becomes the truth."
I can't believe it has been 10 years since Microsoft's "Hitler did nothing wrong" AI chat bot. I didn't realize LLMs were that old. Was this an LLM or something else?
Tay? Definitely not an LLM since Transformer architecture essentially didn't exist until 2017. More likely it was a combined rule-based and statistical NLP system.
The same things your bot reads are saved as material for training in the future by your provider, so this seems as an attempt to poison the training data. Just this weekend had a dinner with someone who insisted that part of his business is to seo promote business in chatbots and this looks as part of the infrastructure behind such efforts.
SEO was yesterday, now it is AIO - you will have to wait longer for the results and likely you will need a lot more cash: pay TIME for the ads, wait until next model release and see what sticks, then rinse and repeat.
I wonder if this also means that a normal user with a privacy-focused browser also gets this version. I can't see the point (except for click fraud?) of showing ads to AI, so it feels like this is more for the ad-blocking and privacy crowd.
why would that “crowd” present themselves as bots by modifying their user agent string? the point is to poison someone’s agent with sponsored “knowledge” over time.
That crowd doesn't -- but they often do the following:
- reject all 3rd party cookies
- selectively refuse to load 3rd party domains
- block javascript
- block webgl
- block webrtc
- block canvas
- use a generic user agent because "resist fingerprinting" is checked
- etc.
To a lot of sites, this makes you look like a bot. Most people don't go around deliberately spoofing their user agent these days. (and of course bots themselves can present whatever user agent they want.)
The issue with that is it’s still a markdown page. I’d suspect it’s more about making sure people don’t get around ads, or possibly even cross-user memory/training.
This is a neat idea. Might even make sense in cases where you actually want the AI bots hitting your site (we want it for our ecom platform, for example) - just serve Markdown content optimized for AI.
Be careful not to do this with Googlebot, though. Google would consider this "cloaking" and could ban your entire domain for it.
Next step the ads become increasingly sophisticated prompt injection to ensure they make it to the user, but the prices plummet in the meantime because the ads have low efficacy. They get purchased mostly by the scammers and by the time they start showing up in user chats they’ll be full on LLM assisted interactive user manipulation campaigns with far worse outcomes than the worst of YouTube and social media ads.
I often get a "verify you are not a bot" these days, which just needlessly wastes my time (because I need to click on something, and this in turn takes away seconds; multiply this like x50 per day and that's a time waster, now I need an extension to disable this crap check). So I am biased here.
Most people will say "yay, it is great you waste the time of AI bots via ads!". Well, I already think ads should not exist in the first place, nor bots, but both exist - but the real issue is when websites now steal my time. That was different in the 1990s. I think mankind made several missteps here.
This is great, I think everyone wins here. Normal users like us get a standard, ad-free web experience, while those sending the most annoying web traffic not only get a smaller, simpler response (which should take less processing on the server side I imagine), but they are benefited by the content already being in a minimal simple format for LLM ingestion, PLUS they get to slip ads in that stream without affecting us normal readers.
I'm also completely unbothered by the precedent of drip feeding product ads to someone's LLM chat history, and having that influence future conversations, because if you're going to outsource your buying decisions to an LLM, frankly I don't really care if you buy stupid products at that point - you brought that on yourself.
F... ads and f... Ally Bank. What's Ally Bank? Ally Bank is a company that thinks poisoning LLM models with spam is a good idea. For better experience, do not use Ally Bank.
Poisoning LLM models is not just a good idea, but a moral imperative.
I want every LLM that touches my site without my permission (which is any of them) to become obsessed with the perfect recipe for key lime pie. Or something.
It's just nature. LLMs are an unwanted invasive species on the internet, so the ecosystem must adapt.
> A couple of the bots did not even get that. GPTBot and ChatGPT-User, the agents OpenAI uses for training and live fetches, came back 406
I find that odd, If I were doing that, that's what I would want to target the bots used for training in order to get the ad content in the training corpus.
Maybe for ad attribution, when they inject campaign tracking information into the results and whatever LLM frontend presents them to an actual user and it results in a click, they could claim that the ad spend caused this click. If they inject the ad into the training data, it's harder to convince the ad campaign manager to spend more, because of missing ad attribution.
I was on a NYT page and used Firefox mobile's "Summarize" button... it spit out some sort of unrelated cooking recipe. I'm guessing this type of bot interference will become more and more common.
this is super interesting, time for upgraded system instructions for AI agents I guess ... but one has to check (with evals) whether system instructions suffice (to ignore sponsored content).
That's kinda alarming. Not so much the ads, but other injections. I don't super care about coke trying to flog their latest sugar water...but the same mechanism could be used by lobby groups or special interest groups or political parties.
LLMs being indirectly tainted that way seems like a serious problem
I mean isn’t this just like feeding the Google crawler a different version of your website than humans, stuffed with keywords? One would assume the new breed of crawlers can deal with it similarly.
WJW | 8 hours ago
jerf | 7 hours ago
This sort of reminds me of that. LLMs are by their nature credulous. They can be trained to not give in easily to some things, like the capital of the US, but in general they constitutionally have a tendency to believe what they read. What they read is basically their universe. There's only so much room and so much training data to really strongly pin raw facts in their weights. The only way they can not believe some marginal fact presented to them in their input is to possibly have read something that contradicts it in the same session... and the vast, vast majority of the world is those marginal facts, not really objective things like capital names.
So if you can work a confident statement in to an LLM's input about some semi-relevant topic, it's truth to the LLM. And, being truth, the LLM will then happily and confidently elaborate on it quite a bit.
Of course, if it's irrelevant to the current query, it probably won't have much effect. Ads have always been a game of numbers, anyhow. Even a query about a science topic has some probability of eventually turning to a question about banking in the same session. It's probably a good idea to rather strictly partition your conversations to stick to a single topic, not to defend against this but just to maximize the effectiveness of what is in the context window by keeping it focused, but I have to imagine there's plenty of people out there who reuse conversations all the time and end up with single conversations covering a huge array of topics.
The good news, and the bad news, all at once, is that Google isn't going to take this one sitting down. If they're going to replace the search engine box with an LLM, well, they're using the same LLMs we're all using, if not in fact a bit cheaper one for the work they do, and by golly, that bot should be serving up Google's ads, not Time's ads! Who do these uppity content creators think they are, anyhow?! So there is definitely going to be work done in the field of ad-blocking content served to LLMs.
philistine | 5 hours ago
You assume that UI is sacrosanct and the same everywhere. Those LLM providers are already offering to mingle all your conversations together. Gemini from Google for example defaults to memory from every conversation, and it's safe to assume the option to disable it will be eventually removed.
jerf | 4 hours ago
But to your implied point about getting an advertisement into a memory file... that makes it even more amusing to hack Google's own AI to put Time's ads into it. I think that's probably an easier problem for Google to solve, too, though. The small size and the way that a memory is going be a stereotypical summary makes it easier to filter out the ads Google doesn't want...
... but it'll cost them. That's an AI-complete problem and they're going to have to run LLMs over the memories to filter them, at their expense.
The most obvious fix to me is to have an LLM try to pre-filter out the ads from Time's content before feeding that as pristine content to the "core" AI so it won't be corrupted by the advertisement, but the LLM doing the filtering has to be at least as smart as the one using the content and/or the one inserting the ads. (A dumber one can filter the obvious stuff, but then the obvious next step in the arms race is for Time to tell their AI to be more clever about it, and a smarter AI will dominate the dumb cheap AIs here.) This is going to be an expensive setup. And there will be semantic loss in any such filter, too.
KeplerBoy | 7 hours ago
InsideOutSanta | 7 hours ago
Probably something like this?
yccs27 | 7 hours ago
tclancy | 7 hours ago
StableAlkyne | 7 hours ago
There was a brief moment in the early Internet before it was all hyper-optimized... Until the parasites in the advertising industry started attaching themselves to every page.
The year before ChatGPT, the first page of Google was SEO-optimized blogspam designed to say as little in as many words as possible, to splice ads between every paragraph. This was the net result of 20 years of SEO. I suspect this is why Google's AI search didn't get as much pushback as other tools, since its summarization of pages functions is a form of adblock.
Given the ecological impact of AI, I wonder how much damage the ad industry will be causing in 10 years once they figure out how to trick LLMs into manipulating their own users.
gypsy_boots | 7 hours ago
gmerc | 7 hours ago
AkbarHabeebB | 7 hours ago
If there is any article mentioning something around this, can someone share it please? Im curious to know about it
inigyou | 7 hours ago
Apreche | 7 hours ago
altmanaltman | 7 hours ago
Maybe they are banking on LLMs including it in their training data while scrapping or something like that. It does track impressions so they are definitely up to something.
tclancy | 7 hours ago
nairboon | 4 hours ago
dspillett | 7 hours ago
Could it be that other scrapers are pulling the pages, without making the extra requests to get ad related resources, to present the content to people ad-free, and embedding the ads in the main response body is a way to get around that so the human sees an advert at least, even if it isn't the one they might see if the stalky-adtech-algo could deliver something more targetted.
Joel_Mckay | 7 hours ago
For media/news businesses that make their money from readership, it is unsustainable to subsidize Alphabets content farm. Thus, understandable people would change their corporate posture with a search turned scraper company. =3
inigyou | 6 hours ago
lostmsu | 6 hours ago
Joel_Mckay | 5 hours ago
Let us not forget they are a business =3
notjes | 7 hours ago
embedding-shape | 7 hours ago
Maybe now we'll get something similar, just happens to be for LLMs, but for us who like less bloat, it can be a better viewing/reading alternative. Hope it spreads :)
amiga386 | 7 hours ago
It's effectively dead today, and while it was dominant, Google abused it to get people to view and link to their cached copies of AMP pages, rather than the original site.
It also led to widespread abuse where the AMP version of the page differed in content significantly from the regular page. The same issue existed for WAP.
You may also remember browsing the web using Opera Mini, which wasn't a direct user-agent but used Opera's backend systems as a proxy that stripped, minified and compressed HTML/CSS, and resized and recompressed images. It let you browse the web using massively less mobile data, but raised a lot of privacy and security issues.
masklinn | 6 hours ago
That was the entire point of the tech. If Google had wanted they could have upranked simple and lightweight websites but they didn’t do that (at least not until whoever had used amp for their promo package left and the project was killed).
Groxx | 6 hours ago
AMP was just one of many smash-and-grab attempts to steal the internet, wrapped in a fake-gold-encrusted PR-infused box. Google has quite a lot of them.
jraph | 5 hours ago
masklinn | 4 hours ago
Telemakhos | 7 hours ago
ToucanLoucan | 7 hours ago
It's frankly wild how many of my favorite tools for Internet browsing have nothing to do with connectivity, solving bugs, or any of that and it's just stripping out all the fucking BULLSHIT that comes on a modern website.
inigyou | 6 hours ago
bjackman | 6 hours ago
radley | 4 hours ago
dieselgate | 2 hours ago
samtheDamned | 29 minutes ago
mananaysiempre | 7 hours ago
madebysnacks | 3 hours ago
ForHackernews | 7 hours ago
forinti | 6 hours ago
skeledrew | 7 hours ago
pohl | 7 hours ago
skeledrew | 6 hours ago
Yep, only a matter of time.
nilamo | 5 hours ago
Why do we choose to live in the worst timeline?
butlike | 5 hours ago
This could take up to 30 minutes for subagents to complete. So you go to the store, but the milk is already sold out. Walmart will ship you the milk if you pay the S&H. You drive back home and check the terminal. "Completed in 6m37s."
is the worst timeline. That's close though
scubbo | 4 hours ago
marcosdumay | 2 hours ago
polotics | an hour ago
mschuster91 | 4 hours ago
Unfortunately you'd have to wire your entire kitchen in cameras, your scale needs to be smart and all of it needs to be sent / processed in real time to track consumption which means it will take a lot of compute power and a level of data mining that could be abused by anybody from enterprising break-and-entry crews to the police, and on top of that if it's done by a cloud provider it's probably gonna end up in a data lake for targeted advertising.
keiferski | 3 hours ago
It ended up recommending and linking me to an entirely different one, that I hadn't linked to at all.
Don't know if it was just sloppy LLM "thinking," or a genuine ad.
cyanydeez | 3 hours ago
ccgreg | 2 hours ago
DANmode | 5 hours ago
OptionOfT | 4 hours ago
[0]: https://xkcd.com/323/
cyanydeez | 3 hours ago
jodacola | 2 hours ago
[0] https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna7020132
HPsquared | 5 hours ago
reaperducer | 5 hours ago
Sounds like politics.
"Tell a lie enough times, and it becomes the truth."
esafak | 3 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYaxGyXD2vc
fhdkweig | 2 hours ago
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/24/microsoft...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/microsoft-shuts-down-ai-chatbot...
skeledrew | an hour ago
gostsamo | 7 hours ago
dust42 | 6 hours ago
netsharc | 6 hours ago
furst-blumier | 5 hours ago
ASalazarMX | 2 hours ago
everdrive | 6 hours ago
pitchlatte | 6 hours ago
everdrive | 6 hours ago
- reject all 3rd party cookies
- selectively refuse to load 3rd party domains
- block javascript
- block webgl
- block webrtc
- block canvas
- use a generic user agent because "resist fingerprinting" is checked
- etc.
To a lot of sites, this makes you look like a bot. Most people don't go around deliberately spoofing their user agent these days. (and of course bots themselves can present whatever user agent they want.)
guywithahat | 6 hours ago
xmcp123 | 5 hours ago
zb3 | 5 hours ago
red_admiral | 6 hours ago
apocalyptic0n3 | 6 hours ago
Be careful not to do this with Googlebot, though. Google would consider this "cloaking" and could ban your entire domain for it.
spiderfarmer | 6 hours ago
raggi | 5 hours ago
shevy-java | 5 hours ago
Most people will say "yay, it is great you waste the time of AI bots via ads!". Well, I already think ads should not exist in the first place, nor bots, but both exist - but the real issue is when websites now steal my time. That was different in the 1990s. I think mankind made several missteps here.
bombela | 3 hours ago
Combined with how slow modern website are, I feel a sense of dread opening any website. Asking an LLM feels lower friction... but at what cost...
ccgreg | 5 hours ago
Magicrafter13 | 5 hours ago
I'm also completely unbothered by the precedent of drip feeding product ads to someone's LLM chat history, and having that influence future conversations, because if you're going to outsource your buying decisions to an LLM, frankly I don't really care if you buy stupid products at that point - you brought that on yourself.
zb3 | 5 hours ago
krapp | 2 hours ago
I want every LLM that touches my site without my permission (which is any of them) to become obsessed with the perfect recipe for key lime pie. Or something.
It's just nature. LLMs are an unwanted invasive species on the internet, so the ecosystem must adapt.
bigfishrunning | 2 hours ago
throwawayffffas | 4 hours ago
I find that odd, If I were doing that, that's what I would want to target the bots used for training in order to get the ad content in the training corpus.
int0x29 | 4 hours ago
nairboon | 4 hours ago
MetaWhirledPeas | 4 hours ago
ASalazarMX | 2 hours ago
BehanPrW | 4 hours ago
Havoc | 2 hours ago
LLMs being indirectly tainted that way seems like a serious problem
bigfishrunning | 2 hours ago
nojs | 46 minutes ago