We all know the pattern: something useful launches → it becomes popular → it needs to make money → ads everywhere.

AI chat is heading the same way. So I built a fully interactive demo that shows what an ad-supported AI chatbot could actually look like: https://99helpers.com/tools/ad-supported-chat

It includes every monetization pattern you can think of:

- Pre-chat interstitials (like YouTube pre-rolls, but for chat) - Sponsored AI responses (the AI casually recommends products mid-answer) - Freemium gates (5 free messages, then watch an ad to continue) - Banner ads, sidebar ads, retargeting ads - Sponsored suggestion chips ("Ask about BrainBoost Pro! ")

The darkest monetization is biased output from the bot.

Tech question? Steer you to its cloud. Medical question? Steer you towards a sponsored treatment. Or maybe the mechanism of injury needs this lawyer to compensate?

Oh and I infer from your chat history you're about to expect a child. That house is probably too small now, so our realtor in that neighborhood can help!

It isn't yet realistic enough. For instance, when I asked it to choose between Linux and windows it tried to be neutral and chose Linux, instead of trying to subtly convince me that windows is superior. Since Microsoft would surely pay ad space, it would be expected for the chatbot to lean towards windows.

With AI I think we're about to see much more sinister monetization models, beyond simple user facing ads. We're already seeing the tech and the data being sold to governments. The general population will be much easier to sway if you control the output of AI. It's social media propaganda on steroids.

Dark patterns degrade our computing experience and are worth illustrating, but there's a larger discussion to be had about keeping individual control over our own devices.

Technically, that means being able to install Linux, run local models, and use open-source software as we see fit.

Legally, it's opposing compliance guises that erode those rights, like backdoors or restrictions on what can run so that we no longer really in control of the hardware we own but need to adjust to the whims of the controller/operator, which could, at a moments notice, default to these dark patterns for "pragmatic reasons" of their own which don't align with your interests.

We know enough bad stories for the "internet of things" devices. Anyone interested in FOSS and control should probably invest in this angle.

Wow, #1 post on HN right now... First time ever for me.

Are you selling insights from chat logs too? Until you're monetizing my health, sex life and snitching to any government agency with a shiny nickel, you're playing in the shallows.

I SEEM TO HAVE HIT THE RATE LIMITS FOR THE DAY

Now file the patents.

Maybe people will start running local models on their phones to avoid this, i've seen a couple of apps for android that do just that.

Is a future of what it could look like or what it will look like?

> We all know the pattern: something useful launches → it becomes popular → it needs to make money → [ Surveillance → Psychological Manipulation/Addiction → "Personalized" ] ads everywhere.

The incentives will be:

1. Get people psychologically dependent in any way possible.

2. Incentivize any "creators" that help with #1. Pose as "content neutral", while actually funding and pumping any content that creates "engagement" regardless of harm.

3. Collate as much information from external sources on each user as possible.

4. User every interaction with a user to improve information leverage being accumulated by #3.

5. Feed ads to users based on surveillance-informed predicted vulnerabilities, in order to maximize ad valuations. Special shout out to scams that work, because they work, they pay.

6. Once the user experience is thoroughly enshittified, start enshittifying the ad customer market by raising prices, minimizing the margins left for product and service advertisers.

7. Present company as evidence of US strength in tech, as apposed to a scaled up, centralized, multi-directed economic parasite.

TLDR: Surveillance leveraged ads are many times worse than just ads. With AI magnifying surveillance intake and leverage to unprecedented highs.

Privacy needs to start being treated like every other security risk. Because every vulnerability will be increasingly exploited, and exploited increasingly well.

As long as it is legal to scale up conflicts of interest, such as surveillance informed manipulation, paying for and pumping up harmful "creator" content, selling ads to scammers, harms will keep scaling up.

Sites should not have any safe harbor for content they pay for, and for content they are paid to deliver.

Is this avoidable? These things cost money to run. Who pays if not with ads?

There will I’m sure be the ability to pay and not have ads just like there is on streaming platforms, podcasts, etc.

Or should there be tax supported free AI?

welcome to carl's jr