Technology

Companies are so removed from what users want, they only focus on what shareholders want to hear and don't consider that users will hate it.

That’s like a cigarette brand marketing themselves as the most cancer-causing.

Oh yeah I'm definitely going to use that. He's a marketing genius.

Is Chrome not doing exactly this?

Jesus, that escalated quickly...

Ok how long after this browser goes live till we hear it being used by the FBI to track criminals.

When using my current browser, any guess as to how often I've said to myself "I need a browser that spies on me more"?

And people would voluntarily use this browser ....why?

some people will see this as a feature to be desired, not a bug

Dumb and dumber will love it, ts,ts,ts. Some nerds...

Hey, look for that browser to fail instantly as no one will use it.

This is really good information, now I know to avoid their browser like the plague.

"Help us improve your User Experience by trying as hard as possible to induce to spend money you don't have on crap you don't need."

I hate when people post hyperpartisan reporting because it makes me do homework. In this case, you made me listen to almost an hour of a three hour podcast with three techbros chatting about techbro crap in techbro ways. You owe me years of life.

Anyway, so the conspicuously missing context here is he's asked if they will let go of the subscription model and go after an ad business model instead and he responds "hopefully not" and clarifies that he thinks the AI differentiator from Google search is that it doesn't feed people ads.

He then transitions into saying that you'd need a super hyperspecialized profile for it to make sense and then maybe it could work but they haven't figured out long term memory well enough for that, which is when he talks about why they'd want to have a browser to build that hyperspecialized profile.

This is my least favorite type of misinfo, too, because he's actually kinda saying what they say he's saying, just out of context. But more importantly, because he says some other shit that is more outrageous, too. For example, when explaining why he thinks the subscription business will grow more than the ad business the way he puts it is that "people see it as hiring someone", so they're more willing to spend, and he ponders "how much do people pay for personal assistants and assistant managers and nannies?" and suggests that they'll provide similar services for cheaper to people who can't afford human help.

Which may not be as clickbaity and I get he finds it positive-on-the-aggregate, but is certainly some cyberpunk dystopia stuff that didn't need the out of context quoting to be a thing.

I would like for the people, who come up with these ideas, to dogfood their own product. Actually force them to try their own medicine. It would be a single digit percentage of acceptance then

Can't sell reams and reams of customer data if you don't have any customers.

tapforehead.jpg

Where is the hacktivism when you need it? These companies need to be gutted from the inside out.

Begin, the AI wars have.

Why would I use such a browser?

I think I read somewhere they want to buy Chrome from Google if they are forced to sell. So not many changes, just switching owners who ultimately do the same thing.

i’m not a Chrome user, so screw both google and perplexity.

Damn, and I really liked them too. It's the most accurate LLM I've tried and it even accurately cites sources as well (unlike Copilot, which just makes shit up and then cites an unrelated source).

Surely people don’t actually want this, right?

Srinivas believes that Perplexity’s browser users will be fine with such tracking because the ads should be more relevant to them.

Believes it, or is just spinning it that way?

You could show me an ad for exactly what I want in that moment and I'd immediately not want it any more.

Enough already.