| ▲ | cdf 7 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
On paper, Google should never have allowed the ChatGPT moment to happen ; how did a then non-profit create what was basically a better search engine than Google? Google suffers from classic Innovator's Dilemma and need competition to refocus on what ought to be basic survival instincts. What is worse is the search users are not the customers. The customers of Google Search are the advertisers and they will always prioritise the needs of the customers and squander their moats as soon as the threat is gone. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | miohtama 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Google allowed this to happen because they listened to their compliance department and were afraid of a backslash if LLM says something that could anger people. Sergey Brin interview: https://x.com/slow_developer/status/1999876970562166968?s=20 This attitude also partially explains the black vikings incident. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | hattmall 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Exactly, Google's business isn't search, it's ads. Is ChatGPT a more profitable system for delivering ads? That doesn't appear so, which means there's really no reason for Google to have created it first. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | razodactyl 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Think about it in terms of the research they put out into the ether though. The research grows into something viable, they sit back and watch the response and move when it makes sense. It's like that old concept of saying something wrong in a forum on purpose to have everyone flame you for being wrong and needing to prove themselves better by each writing more elaborate answers. You catch more fish with bait. | |||||||||||||||||||||||