← Back to context

Comment by wrs

14 hours ago

This is where LLM advertising will inevitably end up: completely invisible. It's the ultimate "influencer".

Or not even advertising, just conflict of interest. A canary for this would be whether Gemini skews toward building stuff on GCP.

Considering how little data needed to poison llm https://www.anthropic.com/research/small-samples-poison , this is a way to replace SEO by llm product placement:

1. create several hundreds github repos with projects that use your product ( may be clones or AI generated )

2. create website with similar instructions, connect to hundred domains

3. generate reddit, facebook, X posts, wikipedia pages with the same information

Wait half a year ? until scrappers collect it and use to train new models

Profit...

  • from my understanding Anthropic are now hiring a lot of experts in different who are writing content used to post-train models to make these decisions and they're constantly adjusted by the anthropic team themselves

    this is why the stacks in the report and what cc suggests closely match latest developer "consensus"

    your suggestion would degrade user experience and be noticed very quickly

    • I guess that’s why I’m not seeing anyone trying to build a skills marketplace for agent skills files. The llm api will read in any skills you want to add to context in plain text, and then use your content to help populate their own skills files.

      2 replies →

In my last conversation with a Google support person, I was sent a clearly LLM-generated recommendation to switch to a competitor's product. Either they're not doing this, or the support person wasn't using Gemini.

Influencer seems like an insufficient word? Like, in the glorious agentic future where the coding agents are making their own decisions about what to build and how, you don't even have to persuade a human at all. They never see the options or even know what they are building on. The supply chain is just whatever the LLMs decide it is.

Probably closer to the Walmart / Amazon model where it's the arbiter of shelf space, and proceed to create their own alternatives (Great Value, Amazon Brand) once they see what features people want from their various SaaS.

An obvious one will be tax software.

Advertisers will only pay if AI providers will provide them data on the equivalent of “ad impressions”. And unlabeled/non-evident advertisements are illegal in many (most?) countries.

how is it a conflict of interest for a google product to have a bias towards using google products?

As users we must hold some accountability. AI is aiming to substitute for humans in the workforce, and humans would get fired for recommending competitor products for use-cases their own company is targeting.

If we want a tool that is focused on the best interest of the public users, then it needs to be owned by the public.

> A canary for this would be whether Gemini skews toward building stuff on GCP

Sure it doesn't prefer THE Borg?