If Big G allowed sites to spam AI content they would destroy their business model.
The benefit of searching on Google for the user is getting unlimited perspectives on different topics. If everyone just spams ChatGPT then there's only one perspective.
If all the information on the internet is generated by chatGPT then there's no incentive for anyone to use Google instead of going directly to the source.
Google has the smartest people in the world working for them. They won't let that happen.
This will end terribly for everyone using chat gpt on their site
1) Google is not the "place where the smartest people in the world work". It's Silicon Valley tech company like any other - pay well, hire a lot of woke capital, run some really exciting projects, mishandle investments badly into bad ideas and pull the plug late.
Fundamentally their success in the last 10 years revolves around google.com, reasonably good play into the market with the GSuite for Work and half-hearted performance for GCP. All of these have some glaring holes which have allowed for other players to push them hard:
- Google is becoming less and less useful for practical searches, with several different information venues attracting interest in recent years (whether alternative search engines, the "tik tok as search" teen crowd or now chat gtp). The real dominance is serving web traffic via SEO, but thats only one angle of the story (if very $ valuable).
- GSuite for Work was one of the big winners of the pandemic, with a lot of adoption in the tech scene, together with other SaaS work tools like Zoom and Slack. That has mostly cooled off now due to the revamp of Teams, which is slowly going back to the "default" choice. MS's dominance on work tools is extremely difficult to overcome and they've invested smartly into improving the quality of the apps and rolling it out on any platform.
- GCP and the GCP Marketplace is an also-ran in the cloud space. AWS is the default choice, with Azure going hard at it as well. GCP is competitive and arguably has an interesting set of native tools on the platform but they continue to be very slow at integration of external apps. They try to cover it with rather approachable GTM initiatives with external partners but so do the rest of the players. To give you an idea of how silly some of their decision making can be - if you want to onboard new resellers for private offers between you and the end customer (i.e. big ticket business), if they were registered until 1/1/2022 they can't allocate margin to them since they stopped onboarding the new resellers. They stopped onboarding them since they were keeping the margin allowances per reseller and sub customer on a manual spreadsheet and the process completely grinded to a halt. They were supposed to fix it 6 months ago, it's still not fixed. They launched a full new private offer platform and STILL didn't fix it.
2) Most of you are looking at the topic from an end user perspective and e-Commerce/twitter creatives hustling for crap. The actual big money topic is related to the infrastructure required to run this and how do you scale it across applications. MS is making a very aggressive bet here of utilising Azure capacity (which atm is very valuable) on running this at an affordable scale and baking it in into native apps.
Bing getting Chat GPT integrated is one thing, adding it to Office 365 is an exponential power bet for both customer retention and new subs (both private and corporate), putting it as advanced ML tool you can implement within your apps natively and run them on Azure is another upside for going with a MAC committed spend (1M+ annual cloud commit to MS). Adding integrations further into LinkedIn, GitHub, etc further changes the info value of those products.
Ultimately the outcome will be that if you are a user and you want to find information, you can go on google and get ads and dubious results, or you can use a search bar integrated in most platforms that MS servers and get low ms usable result on the spot (powered by Azure infrastructure). One way or another this will divert significant traffic away from google.com as a platform and a lot of websites relying on that traffic.
As other players start to make their own plays into it (AWS will not sit on the sidelines), who is willing to reserve capacity and take a margin hit to gain market share will become a big topic of deploying this type of ML into applications with significant downstream effects. There is not enough hardware long term to cover all of the computational needs of the economy, and that was based on existing usage. Big play into AI powered search will eat a lot of cloud capacity, both due to the ML jobs as well as the expectation for fast search results (several miliseconds at best). That means hot machines, which means the most expensive hardware to keep the service running AND do relevant ML jobs on additional hardware.
3) Google is dominant in search - it's dominant in one subset of search which is indexing the web and moving traffic around for money. The majority of day-to-day applications doing search and running in the backend are powered by Apache Lucene open source forks and utilized in a variety of use cases. Google might be referring traffic to H&M webstore, but the actual search on the store, keeping the store running, storing the backend dataset of SKUs and tracking usage, fulfilment backend search etc it's all other platforms.
It might be contrarian, but this is more of a "the emperor has no clothes" moment rather than Google can just flex around and do whatever they want.
You're right, betting against Google is dumb. This is the right idea but for the wrong reasons.
Will explain right here:
This tech is all based on work done by Google in 2017. Gpt stands for "Generative Pre-Trained Transformer." A transformer is a type of DeepLearning model usually used for text2text generation tasks.
OpenAI is literally using GoogleTech - most of the AI industry is. They released it first so they can use user inputs as data for Reinforcement Learning - because they do not have the data Google has and they need to get it by users playing with GPT3.
Google (along with DeepMind) created all of this tech and have the same products that OpenAI has but they have not released it for reasons I do not know or fully understand.
The point is Google can flip a switch and kill OpenAI - they can integrate their transformer models into search relatively easily. The question is why hasnt Google done this yet? I do not know.
So the question isnt: will this technology prove useful at all or when will it die because its a fad. The question is: how long until Google decides to release their stuff and dominate the market totally?
It seems like you're getting a bit too hung up on ChatGPT/OpenAI and are perhaps not thinking about the bigger picture.
ChatGPT/OpenAI can fail, and Google can still be a radically different company. And not just in terms of operations, but in terms of profits.
Google right now is sitting on their own version of "Chat GPT", created by DeepMind (an AI-focused subsidiary).
Whether you think it is slightly worse or slightly better than Chat GPT is debatable, but in either case, I believe the following to be true: *Google does not know how to monetise it*.
At least, not to anywhere near the extent that they monetise organic search with ads. And they know that this "Google chatbot" will cannibalise their existing market.
Google is at a crossroads. Every day more people learn about Chat GPT and use it to answer their queries.
Every day this goes on, Google loses a *tiny bit* of the monopoly they have had over search for the last ~20 years.
They may reclaim this lost market share in the minds of consumers. But the more people explore alternatives to Google, the less popular "Google" becomes as a verb.
They have the option right now to release a "chat bot" on their home page that can answer queries in a similar way that Chat GPT does.
The problem? Their costs start increasing exponentially (each query is a lot more expensive than a standard Google search) and their profit starts decreasing exponentially (cannibalisation).
Once they show their one billion MAU what is possible, they won't want to go back to "regular search".
So each passing day then becomes a mad rush to monetise the chatbot akin to Google search.
This is why Google is sitting on their hands.
They can see they’re losing their monopoly on search.
They know they can release a ”Google chatbot” *right now* to stop that.
But they’re not sure if the cure is worse than the disease.
As a remote software engineer, it's been very helpful. Give it the error message you're getting, it explains why you're seeing it and what you can do about, with examples. Then you ask follow up questions and often converges to the exact solution or required code.
Compare this with search. You search the error message, click on a link, read an article, not really relevant to what I'm doing, click back, next link, not what I'm looking for but maybe I've found a new keyword. Search google with new set of keywords, etc. Not to mention all the ads on google, more fluff, more clutter, more annoying.
I've already developed a strong preference for chatgpt vs google search because search is just that - a search. Vs chatgpt can often just spit out the answer, or at least get you on the right track faster.
Don't mean to argue with the post, just sharing my experience. This doesn't feel like some fad like Clubhouse. I'm using it every day for the convenience and in some cases a bit of a dependency.
mostly tangential, but: Salesforce might have more enviable data stockpiles than anybody on that list other than Google.
their core CRM alone is a giant repository of the highest-quality/utility business data around; Slack and Tableau and all their other tools also have crazy specific, usable stuff.
my company banned the use of ChatGPT today because it's picking up internal info that shouldn't legally be public knowledge (code, undisclosed partnerships, etc)
- If there is an armageddon of a Google update for AI content it will bring down a lot of people that did not know AI content was on their site.
IE if you have any writers and they used "some" AI tools, will you get penalized? Certainly a concern atm.
- Google cares about making the searchers (their customers) happy and they've already said they're "ok" with AI if it is helpful to the searcher.
- AI content is not easy to detect on the surface if it is edited. No tool on the market (yet) can reliably detect AI content. Definitely not Originality dot AI. Not saying the words aren't watermarked.
- Bing is interesting. ChatGPT powered search box right in your task bar?
- Google has YouTube, they'll adapt. A quick answer followed by "here's the best video to watch also" would be pretty powerful.
- Maybe they offer API access to their own AI and then in return give you a boost in the rankings for using it. Not super different than Adwords.
- Agree they'll figure something out and definitely won't go down without a fight.
- Love anything that can challenge big G, because competition will result in the end users getting a better experience.
One of my clients is a top professor in comp sci specializing in AI. He wrote his own framework and sold an AI company. He said Google is far behind ChatGPT, and believes this represents an existential threat to Google. Microsoft is infusing CharGPT in all things: Bing, Azure, Office...everything. And Google’s revenues are still heavily reliant on AdWords. If that begins to teeter, their whole business model may unravel.
LOL the most out of touch article I've seen. AI content, once changed just a bit, becomes completely indistinguishable from human content. I don't care how many "smart" people work at google, there's plenty of counter examples of past too-big-to-fail companies that were outshined by the new kid on the block.
If google had anything remotely as good as openai, they would have used it to improve their absolute dogshit search results (first 20 results all SEO-hacked garbage Ads).
I do agree google has more data than anyone else... they've been in the data stealing business long before openai... but they haven't done much with it. Hopefully OpenAI lights a fire under their ass.
ChatGPT has a paid offering now. Whether they successfully compete with Google or not - I think they're about to start generating a lot of revenue. Enough to offset the crazy compute costs? Unsure.
The impact to Google may be like how people use Alexa or Siri to ask questions instead of Googling those questions, but Chat GPT can handle much more complex answers.
It's hard to gauge how much revenue Google makes on folks researching complex topics though (10, 20, 30 separate searches?). One things for sure.. once some better interfaces come out (even voice interfaces like the Echo).. way more things can be integrated with Chat GPT's paid API.
If Big G allowed sites to spam AI content they would destroy their business model.
The benefit of searching on Google for the user is getting unlimited perspectives on different topics. If everyone just spams ChatGPT then there's only one perspective.
If all the information on the internet is generated by chatGPT then there's no incentive for anyone to use Google instead of going directly to the source.
Google has the smartest people in the world working for them. They won't let that happen.
This will end terribly for everyone using chat gpt on their site
A bit of commentary from the trenches:
1) Google is not the "place where the smartest people in the world work". It's Silicon Valley tech company like any other - pay well, hire a lot of woke capital, run some really exciting projects, mishandle investments badly into bad ideas and pull the plug late.
Fundamentally their success in the last 10 years revolves around google.com, reasonably good play into the market with the GSuite for Work and half-hearted performance for GCP. All of these have some glaring holes which have allowed for other players to push them hard:
- Google is becoming less and less useful for practical searches, with several different information venues attracting interest in recent years (whether alternative search engines, the "tik tok as search" teen crowd or now chat gtp). The real dominance is serving web traffic via SEO, but thats only one angle of the story (if very $ valuable).
- GSuite for Work was one of the big winners of the pandemic, with a lot of adoption in the tech scene, together with other SaaS work tools like Zoom and Slack. That has mostly cooled off now due to the revamp of Teams, which is slowly going back to the "default" choice. MS's dominance on work tools is extremely difficult to overcome and they've invested smartly into improving the quality of the apps and rolling it out on any platform.
- GCP and the GCP Marketplace is an also-ran in the cloud space. AWS is the default choice, with Azure going hard at it as well. GCP is competitive and arguably has an interesting set of native tools on the platform but they continue to be very slow at integration of external apps. They try to cover it with rather approachable GTM initiatives with external partners but so do the rest of the players. To give you an idea of how silly some of their decision making can be - if you want to onboard new resellers for private offers between you and the end customer (i.e. big ticket business), if they were registered until 1/1/2022 they can't allocate margin to them since they stopped onboarding the new resellers. They stopped onboarding them since they were keeping the margin allowances per reseller and sub customer on a manual spreadsheet and the process completely grinded to a halt. They were supposed to fix it 6 months ago, it's still not fixed. They launched a full new private offer platform and STILL didn't fix it.
2) Most of you are looking at the topic from an end user perspective and e-Commerce/twitter creatives hustling for crap. The actual big money topic is related to the infrastructure required to run this and how do you scale it across applications. MS is making a very aggressive bet here of utilising Azure capacity (which atm is very valuable) on running this at an affordable scale and baking it in into native apps.
Bing getting Chat GPT integrated is one thing, adding it to Office 365 is an exponential power bet for both customer retention and new subs (both private and corporate), putting it as advanced ML tool you can implement within your apps natively and run them on Azure is another upside for going with a MAC committed spend (1M+ annual cloud commit to MS). Adding integrations further into LinkedIn, GitHub, etc further changes the info value of those products.
Ultimately the outcome will be that if you are a user and you want to find information, you can go on google and get ads and dubious results, or you can use a search bar integrated in most platforms that MS servers and get low ms usable result on the spot (powered by Azure infrastructure). One way or another this will divert significant traffic away from google.com as a platform and a lot of websites relying on that traffic.
As other players start to make their own plays into it (AWS will not sit on the sidelines), who is willing to reserve capacity and take a margin hit to gain market share will become a big topic of deploying this type of ML into applications with significant downstream effects. There is not enough hardware long term to cover all of the computational needs of the economy, and that was based on existing usage. Big play into AI powered search will eat a lot of cloud capacity, both due to the ML jobs as well as the expectation for fast search results (several miliseconds at best). That means hot machines, which means the most expensive hardware to keep the service running AND do relevant ML jobs on additional hardware.
3) Google is dominant in search - it's dominant in one subset of search which is indexing the web and moving traffic around for money. The majority of day-to-day applications doing search and running in the backend are powered by Apache Lucene open source forks and utilized in a variety of use cases. Google might be referring traffic to H&M webstore, but the actual search on the store, keeping the store running, storing the backend dataset of SKUs and tracking usage, fulfilment backend search etc it's all other platforms.
It might be contrarian, but this is more of a "the emperor has no clothes" moment rather than Google can just flex around and do whatever they want.
You're right, betting against Google is dumb. This is the right idea but for the wrong reasons.
Will explain right here:
This tech is all based on work done by Google in 2017. Gpt stands for "Generative Pre-Trained Transformer." A transformer is a type of DeepLearning model usually used for text2text generation tasks.
Google created the Transformer model in 2017: "Attention is All you Need" https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762
OpenAI is literally using GoogleTech - most of the AI industry is. They released it first so they can use user inputs as data for Reinforcement Learning - because they do not have the data Google has and they need to get it by users playing with GPT3.
Google (along with DeepMind) created all of this tech and have the same products that OpenAI has but they have not released it for reasons I do not know or fully understand.
Example: DeepMind has an unreleased version of a transformer called "Sparrow." It would compete directly with chat-gpt: https://www.deepmind.com/blog/building-safer-dialogue-agents
The point is Google can flip a switch and kill OpenAI - they can integrate their transformer models into search relatively easily. The question is why hasnt Google done this yet? I do not know.
So the question isnt: will this technology prove useful at all or when will it die because its a fad. The question is: how long until Google decides to release their stuff and dominate the market totally?
Also, Microsoft is partnering with OpenAI so closely for this exact reason, they want Bing to compete more. They are in the midst of integrating gpt into Bing right now: https://www.reuters.com/technology/microsoft-aims-ai-powered-version-bing-information-2023-01-04/
From a month ago - its already happening now.
It seems like you're getting a bit too hung up on ChatGPT/OpenAI and are perhaps not thinking about the bigger picture.
ChatGPT/OpenAI can fail, and Google can still be a radically different company. And not just in terms of operations, but in terms of profits.
Google right now is sitting on their own version of "Chat GPT", created by DeepMind (an AI-focused subsidiary).
Whether you think it is slightly worse or slightly better than Chat GPT is debatable, but in either case, I believe the following to be true: *Google does not know how to monetise it*.
At least, not to anywhere near the extent that they monetise organic search with ads. And they know that this "Google chatbot" will cannibalise their existing market.
Google is at a crossroads. Every day more people learn about Chat GPT and use it to answer their queries.
Every day this goes on, Google loses a *tiny bit* of the monopoly they have had over search for the last ~20 years.
They may reclaim this lost market share in the minds of consumers. But the more people explore alternatives to Google, the less popular "Google" becomes as a verb.
They have the option right now to release a "chat bot" on their home page that can answer queries in a similar way that Chat GPT does.
The problem? Their costs start increasing exponentially (each query is a lot more expensive than a standard Google search) and their profit starts decreasing exponentially (cannibalisation).
Once they show their one billion MAU what is possible, they won't want to go back to "regular search".
So each passing day then becomes a mad rush to monetise the chatbot akin to Google search.
This is why Google is sitting on their hands.
They can see they’re losing their monopoly on search.
They know they can release a ”Google chatbot” *right now* to stop that.
But they’re not sure if the cure is worse than the disease.
As a remote software engineer, it's been very helpful. Give it the error message you're getting, it explains why you're seeing it and what you can do about, with examples. Then you ask follow up questions and often converges to the exact solution or required code.
Compare this with search. You search the error message, click on a link, read an article, not really relevant to what I'm doing, click back, next link, not what I'm looking for but maybe I've found a new keyword. Search google with new set of keywords, etc. Not to mention all the ads on google, more fluff, more clutter, more annoying.
I've already developed a strong preference for chatgpt vs google search because search is just that - a search. Vs chatgpt can often just spit out the answer, or at least get you on the right track faster.
Don't mean to argue with the post, just sharing my experience. This doesn't feel like some fad like Clubhouse. I'm using it every day for the convenience and in some cases a bit of a dependency.
mostly tangential, but: Salesforce might have more enviable data stockpiles than anybody on that list other than Google.
their core CRM alone is a giant repository of the highest-quality/utility business data around; Slack and Tableau and all their other tools also have crazy specific, usable stuff.
my company banned the use of ChatGPT today because it's picking up internal info that shouldn't legally be public knowledge (code, undisclosed partnerships, etc)
Bull this is why they hate you, making bold predictions and usually right..
The irony is you always say no one bats 100, to give the haters a little cope, but it’s not enough I guess.
Like clockwork, big G announces a big investment (though not $10b big like MSFT) in OpenAI competitor Anthropic late this week. AI wars heating up.
Some random thoughts...
- If there is an armageddon of a Google update for AI content it will bring down a lot of people that did not know AI content was on their site.
IE if you have any writers and they used "some" AI tools, will you get penalized? Certainly a concern atm.
- Google cares about making the searchers (their customers) happy and they've already said they're "ok" with AI if it is helpful to the searcher.
- AI content is not easy to detect on the surface if it is edited. No tool on the market (yet) can reliably detect AI content. Definitely not Originality dot AI. Not saying the words aren't watermarked.
- Bing is interesting. ChatGPT powered search box right in your task bar?
- Google has YouTube, they'll adapt. A quick answer followed by "here's the best video to watch also" would be pretty powerful.
- Maybe they offer API access to their own AI and then in return give you a boost in the rankings for using it. Not super different than Adwords.
- Agree they'll figure something out and definitely won't go down without a fight.
- Love anything that can challenge big G, because competition will result in the end users getting a better experience.
In other words, this post was written by ChatGPT after Buzzfeed Korea bought BTB for a handful of spare change.
One of my clients is a top professor in comp sci specializing in AI. He wrote his own framework and sold an AI company. He said Google is far behind ChatGPT, and believes this represents an existential threat to Google. Microsoft is infusing CharGPT in all things: Bing, Azure, Office...everything. And Google’s revenues are still heavily reliant on AdWords. If that begins to teeter, their whole business model may unravel.
Definitely overhyped right now but what will die out is medias overreaction.
Never bet against Microsoft, at least for the next 10 years, everything they touch turns into a golden goose.
They have “monopoly” with everything enterprise, they’re going to integrate openAi with their productivity tools. And they’ve been quick at that:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/blog/2023/02/01/microsoft-teams-premium-cut-costs-and-add-ai-powered-productivity/
The only thing I’m curious about is how they’re going to use it to improve Bing.
Overall it is going to empower anyone that can think critically and knows what to ask it!
Just like every IT tool, it Will empower you to do more and faster, and open the door for more creativity!
Google is believed to have their own version of ChatGPT they shelved a while back. If that’s the case, expect it to be rolled out quite soon
LOL the most out of touch article I've seen. AI content, once changed just a bit, becomes completely indistinguishable from human content. I don't care how many "smart" people work at google, there's plenty of counter examples of past too-big-to-fail companies that were outshined by the new kid on the block.
If google had anything remotely as good as openai, they would have used it to improve their absolute dogshit search results (first 20 results all SEO-hacked garbage Ads).
I do agree google has more data than anyone else... they've been in the data stealing business long before openai... but they haven't done much with it. Hopefully OpenAI lights a fire under their ass.
ChatGPT has a paid offering now. Whether they successfully compete with Google or not - I think they're about to start generating a lot of revenue. Enough to offset the crazy compute costs? Unsure.
The impact to Google may be like how people use Alexa or Siri to ask questions instead of Googling those questions, but Chat GPT can handle much more complex answers.
It's hard to gauge how much revenue Google makes on folks researching complex topics though (10, 20, 30 separate searches?). One things for sure.. once some better interfaces come out (even voice interfaces like the Echo).. way more things can be integrated with Chat GPT's paid API.