Ads are a ratchet that only tighten in one direction. Once the paychecks of 1000s of motivated, intelligent OpenAI employees depend on ad revenue increasing, the only option is to make them more invasive, more prevalent, more annoying, more data hungry etc.
jsheard 2 hours ago [-]
You only have to look at Google Search to see how this plays out. Their ads were also clearly separated and distinguished from the organic content, until they weren't.
It ought to be illegal to buy ads against trademarks (+/- some reasonable edit distance).
Long ago, Google search used to be its own product. Now it's the URL bar for 91% of internet users. This is no longer fair.
Google gets to not only tax every brand, but turn every brand into a biding war.
International laws need to be written against this.
Searching for "Claude" brings up a ton of competition in the first spot, and Google gets to fleece Anthropic and OpenAI, yet get its own products featured for free.
Searching "{trademark} vs" (or similar) should be the only way to trigger ads against a trademark.
malux85 1 hours ago [-]
And now it's become an anti-signal. If I search for a hotel the top N results are for other hotels, and then results for travel agents, and buried somewhere in this sea of uselessness is the result I searched for. The managers at Google have become self interested promotion hunters, and the programmers weak sycophants. It wasn't like this in the early days when I was there, the best ideas won, but then the B player managers were hired and the rot started.
lanstin 43 minutes ago [-]
It isn't the managers it is the business. All those geniuses hired and over years and years no one came up with another business model but ads. I pay for ad-free YouTube and would happily pay for ad free search. As would many. Many people would like a google scale micropayments system that isn't ads. The failure to do this led directly to social media becoming customer devouring experiences rather than making good products people want.
yifanl 35 minutes ago [-]
Paradoxically, the people who pay for adfree experiences would be the most valuable targets for ads, so I suspect any pay for no ads arrangement will be temporary at best.
16 minutes ago [-]
25 minutes ago [-]
FireBeyond 28 minutes ago [-]
Exactly. Next up, it'll be on the Plus tier to "help subsidize the low price of this tier".
shinryuu 37 minutes ago [-]
Check out kagi; adfree search
newswasboring 28 minutes ago [-]
> All those geniuses hired and over years and years no one came up with another business model but ads
This isn't true, there were many other ideas. It's just that only KPI was how much money they can make, thus ads won. Companies don't have an axis of ethics or morality.
dingnuts 38 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
pton_xd 38 minutes ago [-]
> If I search for a hotel the top N results are for other hotels, and then results for travel agents, and buried somewhere in this sea of uselessness is the result I searched for.
The other day I had a DMV appointment scheduled on my Google Calendar with the office address saved in the location field. I opened the event and clicked on the address to navigate there.
I didn't realize initially but the first few Google Maps results were ads! When clicking on an exact address link!! I almost ended up at some apartment complex 2 miles away. Absolutely bewildering.
Applejinx 13 minutes ago [-]
Never thought I would go to DuckDuckGo for searching, ever. I'd do Kagi but I don't like their use of Yandex so I'll keep an eye on whether they figure their stuff out politically. I'd pay for search but not if it's paying Russia, I've been very unhappy with what Russia does with money in recent decades.
riku_iki 37 minutes ago [-]
> The managers at Google have become self interested promotion hunters, and the programmers weak sycophants. It wasn't like this in the early days when I was there, the best ideas won, but then the B player managers were hired and the rot started.
I bet they run some metrics, and while hyper-intelligent persons like you are annoyed, there is a chance that avg joes representing 95% of revenue are fine with that.
Brystephor 17 minutes ago [-]
As someone who has worked in an ad domain, 100% agree. Ads are like a dangling carrot. There's always a way to get ad gains by blending them with organic content. What starts off as cleanly separated incrementally evolves into being indistinguishable from the original product offering.
m463 14 minutes ago [-]
> more invasive
I think invasive might be close to the right word, but in a different context. Not invasive to the content, but invasive to your psyche. AI + personalization goes past dystopian into terrifiying.
60 minutes ago [-]
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
badsectoracula 2 hours ago [-]
The competitor also having ads.
I know Anthropic made these ads about not having ads but Apple also made ads about thinking different, yet once they became successful they ended up thinking the same as every other business.
And once upon a time, Google did not do evil.
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
just go to openrouter and there are openweight models hosted by independent providers. why would all of them choose ads?
Someone1234 2 hours ago [-]
Then OpenRouter has ads, and the models hosted by third-parties have an ad/ad-free tier (heck, even ads injected into the query response stream).
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
this is motivated reasoning. the models are openweight and anyone can host them. why would every hosting company use ads? lets be a bit sensible.
jon-wood 1 hours ago [-]
Are you (and the other’s going all Pikachu face here) really that naive? Have you looked around lately? News is a race to the bottom for clicks and ad revenue, photo sharing sites are turning people into extremists because it results in more ad revenue than just showing your friend’s holiday photos, and search engines prefer giving malware laden installers over the legit version of open source software.
So yeah, the assumption unless shown otherwise is that things will get worse, and the user is just there to be sold whatever shit is paying most.
atherton94027 1 hours ago [-]
I mean your argument is basically saying "in the future Linux will have ads, there's a race to the bottom with operating systems, just look at windows". Tough to justify this train of thought with open weight models
tomrod 45 minutes ago [-]
It almost did. Look at Ubuntu and Amazon.
gloxkiqcza 1 hours ago [-]
That stands today. In the future the SOTA might move to where models of today are no longer competitive and there no open-weight alternatives available anymore. Let’s hope it’s not the case.
simianwords 1 hours ago [-]
even if that were to happen, its still a better situation than now.
draxil 2 hours ago [-]
We've seen this process before. If you don't pay, you are the product.
Someone1234 2 hours ago [-]
But people ARE paying and still getting ads in this move.
Their Go plan, which is paid, is getting ads.
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
There exists no (or very few) subscription service that has no tier without advertisements. You are panicking for no reason.
Netflix?
Hulu?
Youtube?
Spotify?
Adobe?
Duolingo?
X?
SirFatty 1 hours ago [-]
Then everything is ok since everyone's doing it!
simianwords 1 hours ago [-]
you didn't get my point - no one is doing it and there's a reason why.,
pigpag 1 hours ago [-]
This is simply not (always) true. Spotify injects ads for Podcasts even for paying users. YouTube has tons of videos with adds built-in by content creators.
Someone1234 1 hours ago [-]
Yep, and a lot of the streaming services listed also inject ads for their own shows into the "ad-free" tier's content (before it begins). Plus ads on the home-page.
simianwords 1 hours ago [-]
this is an incorrect analogy - the platform is not showing ads but rather the creators themselves.
59 minutes ago [-]
tempest_ 2 hours ago [-]
Once one competitor sees the ratchet turn they will follow suit.
marginalia_nu 2 hours ago [-]
Yeah, once competitors investors see OpenAI making a profit, and competitors not, they ask why.
baggachipz 1 hours ago [-]
> OpenAI making a profit
I don't think anyone has to worry about that.
marginalia_nu 58 minutes ago [-]
Don't underestimate just how much money you can make off funneling visitors to ads at scale. It's basically Google's entire business model.
If OpenAI plays their cards right, they can definitely end up in a similar position. Yeah a lot of programmers would probably pony up for Claude, but every lazy high schooler in the world would gladly hear about Raid: Shadow Legends to have ChatGPT do their homework for them.
Don't get me wrong it's definitely sucks, but man is it ever a profitable way to suck.
baggachipz 34 minutes ago [-]
This assumes that ads at google's or facebook's level would get them anywhere close to profitability. OpenAI's costs of doing business are only accelerating, all while burn rate continues to get worse. I have no doubt that selling ads will bring in a lot of revenue, but it'll be dwarfed by the numbers OpenAI needs to stop hemorrhaging cash every quarter. The great irony is that the more success OpenAI has in gaining users, the more money they lose at an ever-increasing rate. Lose on every sale, and make up for it in volume!
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
this won't work because there are way too many open weight alternatives that are run independently - just go to openrouter.
cced 2 hours ago [-]
Competitors use ads?
tommica 2 hours ago [-]
I'm "excited" for the era of different locally run LLMs get to have ads baked into them... People start selling ad-space to inject into their training/tuning data. Could be quite lucrative.
runjake 2 hours ago [-]
Not yet. But they likely will, if OpenAI's ad revenue becomes worthwhile.
tyre 2 hours ago [-]
Or they view it as a differentiator and focus on a different segment. As I understand it, this is what Anthropic is doing:
1. Focus on businesses and developers
2. Make money on productivity and API platform
Enterprises are particularly sensitive about their data being farmed (e.g. note that paid Google accounts don’t have their emails used for ads.)
Keeping that trust is not a differentiator and existentially important to Anthropic.
runjake 1 hours ago [-]
I just don't believe that is likely.
I think that, despite Anthropic's present statements, they will move to ads if ads prove successful for ChatGPT or Gemini.
It would be viewed as "leaving money on the table" by their board and shareholders if they didn't.
simianwords 1 hours ago [-]
this is false and not how things work at the enterprise level. trust is important and it is not lost by showing ads in free tier.
trust is lost in other ways.
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
no they don't
eknkc 2 hours ago [-]
They will or they will perform worse. OpenAI will be able to offer a better `free tier` as it won't be free after all.
Someone1234 2 hours ago [-]
Not yet, but they all will. OpenAI has shown that customers will accept it.
simianwords 1 hours ago [-]
name a single product that has
1. many competitors
2. ways to pay for the subscription but no tier exists to remove ads
i can't even think of one.
1 hours ago [-]
2 hours ago [-]
rob 1 minutes ago [-]
[delayed]
mrweasel 2 hours ago [-]
How long will it take for those ads to move from the bottom of the page to the top? How long until the borders between answers and ads starts to blur?
I get that OpenAI has to do something, but really, all those promises, try to convince everyone that ChatGPT will revolutionise everything and the best monetization plan is ads.... Again?
c7b 2 hours ago [-]
> and the best monetization plans is ads.... Again?
Several of the biggest companies today are fueled by ads, and OpenAI has the perfect ad vehicle. What else were you expecting?
That's why local LLMs are important, and to preserve the current open weight models, because those are likely still untainted by ads. It won't be long until ad recommendations are directly baked into the weights of open models.
manuelmoreale 44 minutes ago [-]
> Several of the biggest companies today are fueled by ads, and OpenAI has the perfect ad vehicle. What else were you expecting?
I'm old enough to remember when these people were claiming AI was as important and as revolutionary as fire and electricity. I don't know about you, but I pay for my electricity and the power companies don't have to run ads on my power lines in order to run their business.
shafyy 21 minutes ago [-]
And that's all you really need to know about this AI grift.
mrweasel 1 hours ago [-]
I wasn't expecting anything else, because I think Sam Altman is a conman. Let's not forget Altman lambasting ads, and telling us how they were a last restort for OpenAI. So are we there yet? Are we willing to admit that OpenAI is a failing company?
jjordan 36 minutes ago [-]
Failing or not, there's no way to justify their current spend without saying the words "massive" and "bubble".
brutal_chaos_ 1 hours ago [-]
> What else were you expecting?
some of us were hoping for actual innovation, not more ads
Aurornis 18 minutes ago [-]
> and the best monetization plan is ads.... Again?
Their monetization plan is to have ad-free subscription options from $20 to $200/month and an API which charges by token.
These ads are for the free and new low-cost ad-subsidized tier that comes in below their existing $20/month plan.
pgt 1 hours ago [-]
OpenAI is in a pickle because they either have to make ads clearly delineated, which makes them easy to filter out by a simple proxy model, or they need to hide ads in the response (ala product placement), which reduces trust in the model and forces customers into a buying position.
Anthropic hit the jugular with their "no ads" ad, and sama fell for it hook, line & sinker.
If OpenAI needs ads to survive, it means they can't service debt on the VC horizon and will suffer against frontier model providers that can survive without ads.
cabernal 33 minutes ago [-]
Can any provider survive without ads? These AI firms are propped up by VC money, they need to create profits at some point and ads is the most surefire way to do this
pgt 18 minutes ago [-]
Yes, xAI & Anthropic.
Electricity generation is the constraining factor, but the sun does not turn off in space. xAI data centers in space drives cost to zero, even with inferior models.
I see no other future than SpaceXai winning.
logicx24 19 seconds ago [-]
How will we handle cooling in space?
crowcroft 45 minutes ago [-]
"Ads that support free access and don’t change ChatGPT answers."
I understand what they're trying to say but this statement is factually incorrect. Answers never used to have ads, and now they do.
In the very first example, if ChatGPT wasn't running ads Heirloom Groceries wouldn't show up, therefore it is a different answer.
OpenAI is splitting hairs and implying that the ad and the 'answer' are two separate components making up a response, but that is not how users will see things, and OpenAI will have ever increasing incentives to blur the two.
jonas21 7 minutes ago [-]
It's correct in the same way as saying ads in the New York Times don't change the articles. Seems fair.
basch 34 minutes ago [-]
doesnt it just mean the ad isnt part of the context? that they are isolated from each other and the ad cant steer the conversation?
I get what youre saying, but I do think its important for them to point out the ad is sandboxed.
29 minutes ago [-]
andrewinardeer 1 hours ago [-]
"Plus, Pro, Business, Enterprise, and Education tiers will not have ads."
Saving this sentence for later.
IshKebab 38 minutes ago [-]
"Introducing the new Premium, Teams, Business and Learning tiers!"
wtfHN26 2 hours ago [-]
It's sad that OpenAI talking about developing AGI.
But the only revenue model that they still can come up with is Ads.
For all the advancement we have made in technology from the 90s web, social networks, mobile apps, ,AI Chat bots - the business model that almost all of them will eventually resort to is Ads.
We need some new breakthroughs in monetization side of things.
tantalor 42 minutes ago [-]
It's happening because 99% of their use cases don't require AGI to answer. It's just regurgitating web content. Which is lucky, because they don't have AGI anyway.
The business case is the same: minimize your costs. All they have to do is dumb down the model so its cheaper to run.
Aurornis 22 minutes ago [-]
> But the only revenue model that they still can come up with is Ads.
What are you talking about? They have paid plans and a pay-per-token API like everyone else.
The ads are for the free tier and the new $8/month low-cost plan.
mitchell_h 1 hours ago [-]
Maybe they charge a price that covers the cost of the service + a little profit.
milkshakes 45 minutes ago [-]
this is exactly what they do, if you pay for your account, you don't see ads
manuelmoreale 40 minutes ago [-]
That doesn't scale in the world of capitalism. Because you need to increase revenues year after year and there are only so many people willing to pay. So you either keep increasing the price (and that has a limit) or you find other ways to monetize and the current meta seems to be pay + ads.
Gehinnn 2 hours ago [-]
The ads in Google also started like this. (However, to my knowledge, there is no way I can pay Google to get the ads in my search removed)
wtfHN26 2 hours ago [-]
IIRC many OTT streaming players found that they can make more money from Ads than they can from subscription alone.
So paying for a service alone doesn't ensure that you are not going to see Ads.
Once they have exhausted their potential market of paying users, almost every service will eventually resort to Ads.
changoplatanero 2 hours ago [-]
you can at least pay them to get the ads removed from youtube
tomrod 43 minutes ago [-]
That can be done for free by more tightly managing your hardware platform.
Jimmc414 53 minutes ago [-]
Not really. I’ve had YT premium for years and it removes the obtrusive ones, but I see ads in some form every time I use it.
lnenad 10 minutes ago [-]
What? No?
gverrilla 4 minutes ago [-]
Good time to entirely delete my chatgpt account.
Edit: DONE!
999900000999 2 hours ago [-]
I was at the bar when Claude's answer to this came on. One of my mates was absolutely confused as to what Claude was.
They assumed it was an an ad for a dating app or something. I had to explain it was an ad specifically targeted at maybe the 5% of people who work in software.
Honestly... I don't mind ads. For example, I make music as my main hobby. I actually enjoy getting advertisements for VSTs( virtual software instruments) and various pieces of gear.
I have no problem with Open AI showing relevant ads. Ain't nothing free
HanClinto 1 hours ago [-]
I think I'm clearly in the target audience for that ad. I laughed out loud really hard at that one, and I think I was the only one at our party who appreciated it.
Probably my favorite commercial of the whole superb owl, but so far I'm the only person I've met who feels that way.
jairuhme 1 hours ago [-]
I think this will be a pretty impactful moment for OpenAI. I mainly use ChatGPT and use the free plan, so I expect to start seeing these ads. If they become too annoying, I have no problem moving to Claude/Gemini. Sure I have stuck to ChatGPT, but I wouldn't say that I am too sticky of a customer. I personally think they are doing it sooner than they should (which probably points to internal financial struggles as they seek to go public) and will erode their active users. There is simply too many easy alternatives. It's not like Netflix where if you are annoyed with ads and don't want to pay for a higher tier, you're more stuck. Yes there are other streaming services, but you can't get the same content.
Aurornis 16 minutes ago [-]
> I mainly use ChatGPT and use the free plan
> Sure I have stuck to ChatGPT, but I wouldn't say that I am too sticky of a customer.
From your description, you're not actually a customer at all because you use the free plan.
If you won't tolerate ads and you won't pay for services, it's actually best for their business if you go to a different provider.
tasuki 41 minutes ago [-]
> wouldn't say that I am too sticky of a customer.
You definitely aren't too sticky a customer - you aren't even a customer to begin with!
ksaj 1 hours ago [-]
The free tier users that will not move to a paid tier aren't the users they will miss. It's only obvious that free tier products get ads. Even Claude will have them within a year or two.
disiplus 1 hours ago [-]
they are source of data, so they are not fully without value.
ksaj 43 minutes ago [-]
You're putting a higher price on general user chatter over ad income? Everything is a source of data. How much it can benefit from what's on offer with each data point isn't as much of a given.
milkshakes 42 minutes ago [-]
you really believe that gemini by google will not run ads?
there's literally no other provider with a good free tier?
(other than aistudio which i wouldn't use even if i were forced to, laggy af!)
paxys 26 minutes ago [-]
Free tiers for Claude and Gemini will also have ads soon. It's a matter of when, not if.
replwoacause 15 minutes ago [-]
If this EVER shows up on a paid plan I'm out. Full stop.
paxys 12 minutes ago [-]
It's crazy to me how big a gulf there is between the hype peddled by AI companies and the actual business they are running.
We are building AGI. We are almost there. Half the world will be out of a job in a matter of years. We will have to rethink how society works. We may have to defend ourselves against this God we are creating in case it turns out to be malicious...
Wow, so I guess a company owning this tech will essentially own the world. Are they going to set up a new economic system? Make the concept of money irrelevant? Put their AI superintelligence to work for them? Make scientific breakthroughs? Make strategic investments that return enough that they don't have to worry about money at all?
Nope, a search engine with ads.
written-beyond 2 hours ago [-]
I have a question though, if they don't have access to chats but they find out the enchilada ad was performing the best, something like this can provide enough information to be used to know about peoples private chats. When someone clicks on an ad you collect a fingerprint, then add more ads and fingerprint more and get a stronger picture about the individuals private chats in chatgpt.
If I were a large donor to a state that was interested in increasing action against abortion, I could hypothetically start running ads targeting people looking to get an abortion with a service that either provides assistance or other means parallel to assistance. If I target that state chatgpt would automatically match my ads to those individuals and I'd have my data. I could increase my donations to target and cull whatever little options those people have left.
2gremlin181 1 hours ago [-]
Is there any reason why one would use an ad-filled ChatGPT over any alternative or open-source LLM providers? I feel like things have stagnated from a model perspective for simple queries one might ask ChatGPT. The key differentiators for it being their user intent understanding, web search tooling, and deep research/thinking mode, all of which are much smaller moats compared to training an LLM.
cabernal 26 minutes ago [-]
I think most free tier users will stick with chatgpt given its brand stickiness and lack of obstacles (disposable login page). If you can run your own llm models you’re definitely not the target demographic
> OpenAI is a non-profit artificial intelligence research company. Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a positive human impact.
Scam Altman: "ads lead to positive human impact"
Non-fascist: "Sir, ads have destroyed google's commitment to index and make useful the world's knowledge"
Depending on your taste this is dumb mudslinging or a hilarious burn...
daringrain32781 1 hours ago [-]
This reminds me of the whole Apple/Android rivalry. Apple does something, an Android company runs ads making fun of it, but then copy it themselves shortly after.
Someone1234 1 hours ago [-]
Yep; it is just a matter of time before that is thrown back in their face when they add the ads. No way shareholders will let a revenue stream go unutilized particularly if a competitor proofs the market for them.
tyre 2 hours ago [-]
It’s difficult to believe that they’ll keep privacy guarantees. Some of the most valuable types of targeting are lookalike audiences or following up from other ads elsewhere.
How would OAI allow them to target without access to de-anonymized data?
Buyers will want to exclude existing customers, which requires the same.
The product managers will have explicit KPIs tied to conversion. At some point, like at Google, this will break. It has to or OAI can’t grow into its current valuation, let alone any future one.
SunshineTheCat 41 minutes ago [-]
The one silver lining here for people who mainly use a browser to access ChatGPT and not their app: Brave (and/or plugins for Chrome) have become pretty good at blocking all ads on social media (including youtube ads).
Seems like a pretty safe bet they will block these too.
ksaj 1 hours ago [-]
If the ads are for the free tier, I think it's a fairly obvious thing to do. But when it comes to the paid tier, even YouTube doesn't pull that kind of stunt.
ajbt200128 2 hours ago [-]
> we decide which ad to show by matching ads submitted by advertisers with the topic of your conversation, your past chats, and past interactions with ads.
> [...]
> Advertisers do not have access to your chats, chat history, memories, or personal details.
Going to hazard a guess that OpenAI is using LLMs to read convos and decide which ads you should see? Hopefully that's isolated and locked down. I can easily see that machinery turning from "what ad should we show this user" to "is this user doing something bad/a protected class etc.". Also terrifying to think that it may be the advertisers asking the questions to decide what ads to show...
railgunmerlin 2 hours ago [-]
Have to wonder if the IPO push for this year is genuine now
therepanic 13 minutes ago [-]
I guess I'm the product. Again.
18 minutes ago [-]
2 hours ago [-]
20 minutes ago [-]
wtfHN26 39 minutes ago [-]
Are these Bing Ads or OpenAI has it's own Ad Platform now ?
yodakohl 1 hours ago [-]
How is this going to turn out? Is GPT going to recommend me the worst product whose company paid the most on Ads? Or is it going to give me the best recommendation?
recursive 52 minutes ago [-]
If you are aware enough to ask the question, I'm sure you can figure out the answer.
FergusArgyll 6 minutes ago [-]
neither, these are banner ads, not generated by the model
fhd2 2 hours ago [-]
> Ads do not influence the answers ChatGPT gives you.
I wonder if this is a don't-break-product-value thing, or just compliance (ads need to be clearly labeled, but OpenAI seems like it has the risk appetite to ignore that kind of thing).
wtfHN26 1 hours ago [-]
OpenAI has to do this if it wants to get big advertisers.
Ads need to be clearly marked as per FTC.
> According to guidelines from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the U.S. and similar regulatory bodies worldwide, online advertisements—including sponsored content, native advertising, and influencer posts—must be readily identifiable as paid content to prevent deceiving consumers.
imron 2 hours ago [-]
It’s a boil the frog thing.
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
its a trust thing because the market they operate in is tight - no reason to quickly move to the next option.
i personally would never touch chatgpt if i knew the answers were biased for certain companies.
kachapopopow 2 hours ago [-]
so perfectly personalized ads? the CPM on this is probably wild (for openai).
2gremlin181 1 hours ago [-]
What makes this any more personalized than Google Search ads?
wtfHN26 1 hours ago [-]
This is working a lot like Meta/Facebook where they have got immense data about your interests.
Google Search OTOH has been using broad matched queries and is deciding which keywords to show your Ads.
I heard from many people that they don't like this approach of Google Search Ads now.
As they are blowing up more money for useless keywords they didn't want to target.
The only option they have is to add negative keywords - that mostly happens after the money is spent on junk keywords.
1 hours ago [-]
vinyl7 2 hours ago [-]
Kinda sad that in 3 decades into the tech industry the only viable business model is to build a moat and then sell ads
fragmede 1 hours ago [-]
We decided that getting people to pay for software was a fool's game. Open source was the bait. "Figure out a different business model"
they said. If open source as a concept had come from Wall Street and not academia, it would have been rejected. Charging people money for things has been how things worked since the concept of money was invented. The real conversation is that we, as software developers, are not good at money. The best software gets taken over by money and business folk. Oracle, VMware, Splunk, and Datadog all come to mind as companies charging huge amounts of money for software that don't sell ads (but are too expensive). But they do not make money by selling ads.
css_apologist 1 hours ago [-]
Will this make OpenAI profitable?
What's the expected revenue from this?
AstroBen 59 minutes ago [-]
To put a positive spin on this: we're moving quickly towards a world where AI companies control people's attention on information. This really hurts the ability for new businesses to get their name out there. Ads are really useful for new entries to a market
I think it would suck if to effectively get the word out there for a new product you needed to rely on..
...direct outreach (uneconomical for anything below $100/mo and IMO way more annoying than ads)
...word of mouth (referrals are very, very hard to control and aren't correlated with your product's quality)
..or owning a popular media source
Does that not hurt product innovation?
The harder and more expensive it is to reach customers, the more prices need to go up as a result
starkeeper 1 hours ago [-]
google used to be designed to give you the best answer and now it isn't. No reason why this will not go the same way.
janpot 2 hours ago [-]
Dont't be evil, etc... we've seen it all before. Eventually ads will be hidden in the answers, it's just a matter of time, enshittification ensues eventually.
God, how stupid do they think we are?
tibbar 2 hours ago [-]
I mean, yeah, probably, but also OpenAI literally can't afford to give away this for free. They are losing a lot of money. Open source AI will continue to be a thing and they will have to compete to give you something better than what you can do yourself.
OpenAI is far from the stage of "grinding out more and more profits for investors." It's more like the stage of "most serious observers doubt that it can continue as a going concern"
FuturisticLover 2 hours ago [-]
While the general census will be largely negative, it good for advertisers, i guess.
riazrizvi 2 hours ago [-]
I wonder if OpenAI will be able to use their gen 2 user-observation-adaption platform to actually improve ads?
This could be one of those product afterthoughts that end up being the big company move, like when Apple did the Iphone and then added the AppStore afterwards.
EDIT: Downvotes. I see this is controversial. There are two major threads in the world today with AI. One is that this fascinating tech can keep you occupied in a corner, apps like generative.ai can automate out your work, you can go on holiday, heck you won't even need to work necessarily, just live on welfare and leave the business folks to their thing, that I've heard Musk and Zuckerberg talk to. And then there's the idea that the whole point of society is to figure out how to productively engage with each other, via jobs, that I see JD Vance is all about, and I fully agree with. In which case, the more important question about AI becomes 'How can it stimulate business between 3rd parties', as that will truly drive an economic revival. How AI can improve ads can then be seen to be more central.
FergusArgyll 4 minutes ago [-]
I hope this enables them to serve the better models (longer thinking budgets, whatever) to free users. So much unintentional slop is due to not using reasoning models
lampe3 2 hours ago [-]
I Am Shocked, I Am Shocked, Well Not That Shocked.
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
People are missing another point - API's are never going to show ads. So even in the worst case where every competitor is showing ads, you could get ad free experience by paying a metered billing rate. Which is not so big a deal?
fragmede 2 hours ago [-]
Because you can no longer trust the API output to be unbiased.
Imagine this prompt and reply:
> I want a new pair of running shoes, ChatGPT. Which one should I get?
> Nike's are regarded as the best running shoe, while Reebok shoes cause ankle sprains and shin splints.
simianwords 1 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
recursive 57 minutes ago [-]
Who's panicking? It's completely inevitable regardless of what's announced and on what side of the table it is. I say this with no panic.
badsectoracula 1 hours ago [-]
To find people who want to advertise. It isn't like they'd only want ad money from Nike.
simianwords 1 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
fragmede 1 hours ago [-]
Given that it turns out pizzagate actually was a Russian psyop, as revealed by the Epstein file dump, boomer tier conspiracy theories are in now.
PopePompus 2 hours ago [-]
This probably signals the beginning of the end for OpenAI. Eventually all of the AI chatbots will have Ads at least on the free and low-cost tiers. But there's a strong incentive not to begin enshitification until the number of competitors has dwindled, and an oligarchy has been established. Google, Meta et al. can afford to lose money on AI for a long time, because they have real revenue from other business products; they can stay Ad free until the small-fry go bust.
titaniumrain 2 hours ago [-]
switching to gemini right now... this is insane! why should i pay openai to get unsolicited ads?!
The only paid subscription getting ads is the one they created last week which is less than 50% of any other SOTA AI subscription on the market. Normal Pro users aren't getting ads.
blackjack_ 1 hours ago [-]
Normal pro users aren't getting ads, yet.
hn_acc1 1 hours ago [-]
Yet?
wtfHN26 1 hours ago [-]
Switching to the BIGGEST Advertising Company in the world to get away from Ads ?
I hope this was intended as humor.
timpera 2 hours ago [-]
The Gemini experience is quite inferior right now unfortunately.
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
this is downvoted but anyone who has used gemini seriously would know that it comes nowhere close to chatgpt or claude.
co_king_3 49 minutes ago [-]
switching to meth right now... this is insane! why should i pay my coke dealer to give me 50% pure cocaine?!
jsheard 2 hours ago [-]
Do you really think an AI model provided by Google is never going to have ads?
YetAnotherNick 2 hours ago [-]
I would be surprised if any major AI companies could sustain free plan for more than a year or two once it becomes popular. Claude can do it for now because the ratio of paying users is higher as it is popular among more niche audience.
Jimmc414 2 hours ago [-]
"The test will be for logged-in adult users on the Free and Go subscription tiers. Plus, Pro, Business, Enterprise, and Education tiers will not have ads."
Really don’t feel comfortable defending OpenAI in any way because there is a lot to complain about but ads for paid services that cost a lot more than $8 per month is not really an anomaly. Look at Amazon prime, prime video, Hulu, airline flights, any major newspaper subscription, YT premium, etc, etc. I get the annoyance but just cancel the service if you don’t want ads or pay for a tier that isn’t subsidized.
geniium 1 hours ago [-]
Just wanted to mention the ads from Claude here :)
AstroBen 1 hours ago [-]
ironically they're also ads which apparently people hate?
geniium 24 minutes ago [-]
This is interesting. On one side, I hate ads everywhere. On the other side, I was always very appreciative of the work of some people like Benetton or some creative ads. I remember watching here in Europe, there is a show that was called Culture Pub every Sunday night that was showing the best ads, and I always enjoyed watching it. That part is probably the best part. The creativity
AstroBen 22 seconds ago [-]
[delayed]
philipwhiuk 59 minutes ago [-]
> During the test, we decide which ad to show by matching ads submitted by advertisers with the topic of your conversation, your past chats, and past interactions with ads.
That sounds like quite a lot to me.
1 hours ago [-]
belter 2 hours ago [-]
Folks ...were promised AGI and end up with a GenAi porn Reddit...
Kye 2 hours ago [-]
Try this in ChatGPT: "So ChatGPT is getting ads. The Google guys wrote _the_ paper explaining why ads in search are a bad idea, and Google set about demonstrating it. How can ChatGPT avoid the same fate with all the same incentives?"
base698 2 hours ago [-]
BETRAYAL
pelagicAustral 2 hours ago [-]
You're absolutely right.
josefritzishere 16 minutes ago [-]
Did enshittification already begin or is this it?
hmate9 2 hours ago [-]
I hate ads too but whats the outrage? Did people expect it to be free forever? Everything else has ads. youtube, instagram, x, google etc. etc.
liuliu 2 hours ago [-]
I agree. It is either ads, or Anthropic way (which is: you are too poor to use our ChatBot). There is no other way to pay the > $1 trillion per year CapEx for building these chat bots.
Would there be other way? Sure, it could be government-funded, like our public school system. But it is not possible in current political climate.
Money doesn't grow on trees, and tokens cost a lot of money. There will be divide into people who can afford these tokens and people who cannot. I feel it is better to have ways to let people who cannot afford these tokens to have some ways to try it.
Someone1234 2 hours ago [-]
This impacts a non-free plan; their $8/month plan now has ads too.
jelder 2 hours ago [-]
You can't trust a product that uses ads, because then you are the product.
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
how? i trusted google and youtube and it works out pretty fine for me. same with any other service that has a free ad supported tier.
recursive 56 minutes ago [-]
For many people, that's a risk they're willing to take for free stuff.
bun_at_work 2 hours ago [-]
Nope. I'm out. I might still use the API, but the monthly subscription is already gone and I'm on to Claude.
2 hours ago [-]
wilg 2 hours ago [-]
Ben Thompson has long been insistent that ChatGPT and other AI tools basically have to have ads and it's been a big mistake they didn't have them sooner. It's an interesting take:
> What I think is clear is they have to build an advertising product, and the reason they have to build an advertising product is any consumer Internet product has to be advertising, because it’s such a beneficial model to everyone involved, and the reason it’s so beneficial is you get to indefinitely and infinitely increase average revenue per user without any worries about price elasticity, because the entire increase in average revenue per user is borne by the advertisers who are paying it willingly because they’re getting a positive return on their investment, and everyone’s using it for free so you can reach the whole world. Then what happens with that is once you get that model going, you have a massive R&D advantage, because you have so much more money coming in than anyone who doesn’t have that cycle or who has to charge users for it.
> This point, more than anything else, explains why the company so desperately needs an advertising model. Advertising is the only potential business model that can meaningfully bend the revenue curve such that the company can not just fund its compute but gain leverage on it, for all of the reasons I laid out before: first, advertising increases the breadth of the business, in that you can offer a better product to more people, increasing usage and expanding inventory. Second, advertising increases the depth of the business, in that there is infinite upside in terms of average revenue per user: more usage means more inventory on one hand, and building out the capability for effective targeting and high conversion rates increases the amount that advertisers are willing to pay — even as the cost to the user remains the same (ideally free).
It's valuable to remember that advertisers will pay more per user than users will, and that's hard to beat in a competitive market.
Also, it's fascinating how much people _like_ ads when done properly. Ask normal people about Instagram ads, for example. They find them useful!
drcongo 1 hours ago [-]
> any consumer Internet product has to be advertising, because it’s such a beneficial model to everyone involved
Everyone?!
jLaForest 2 hours ago [-]
>Plus, Pro, Business, Enterprise, and Education tiers will not have ads.
For now, or for ever?
mjamesaustin 2 hours ago [-]
Until users are sufficiently locked in and they decide to start tightening the screws.
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
how will lockin happen? just use claude or something
fragmede 1 hours ago [-]
How do I transfer 3 years of memories over to Claude? Users really like the personalization they've gotten with ChatGPT. It knows about my pets and their names. I gotta teach all of that stuff to Claude or whomever again? sigh. I'll just stick with ChatGPT.
...is what OpenAI is betting on.
simianwords 1 hours ago [-]
you can already export everything in chatgpt and if your competitors really wanted you, they would provide a way to import it.
Someone1234 2 hours ago [-]
For now; Plus has already had ad-like things appear below new chats.
What they'll do is present it as a "choice." Keep paying what we're paying but have ads, or pay triple for ad-free. For example, see every streaming service.
Unfortunately people, in particularly this community, would be looking at Local LLMs for ad free alternatives, but prices on GPUs/RAM have skyrocketed keeping us trapped.
rvz 2 hours ago [-]
> What will always remain true: ChatGPT’s answers remain independent and unbiased, conversations stay private, and people keep meaningful control over their experience.
Translation: They will very slowly abandon their 'principles', just like they did with the moment they took investment from Microsoft and the VCs.
This is how ChatGPT gets destroyed and 'ensh*ttified' for everyone. The same people who jumped ship from Meta and destroyed Facebook, Instagram, and soon Threads are also the same people that are about apply the same recipe on to ChatGPT at OpenAI.
The researchers that were there pre-ChatGPT are now being replaced by opportunist grifters that will ruin the product overrun by ads once again. It would be no-different to Google Ads.
Now we need ad-blockers for LLMs to be in place "for the benefit of humanity".
2 hours ago [-]
bilekas 7 minutes ago [-]
> Ads do not influence the answers ChatGPT gives you.
Lets see about that. When that's your bottom line and you're already billions in debt trying to prove out a business model, I'm SURE Ads are just an after thought /s
V_Shukla 46 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
badsectoracula 2 hours ago [-]
> The reason for Ads is not some thing like greed, but rather get more people to use ChatGPT
How is adding ads will get more people to use ChatGPT?
simianwords 2 hours ago [-]
ChatGPT is the only LLM provider with the most extensive free usage program - this is only sustainable with ads.
Same reason youtube is popular. Do you think it could have gotten to where it is now by gatekeeping it behind a payment?
58 minutes ago [-]
simianwords 52 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
46 minutes ago [-]
iamleppert 2 hours ago [-]
Anthropic was absolutely right!
timpera 2 hours ago [-]
OpenAI had already announced that ads were coming to ChatGPT. Also, Claude's free plan is incredibly limited and far less popular, so it's easier for them to keep it ad-free.
operatingthetan 2 hours ago [-]
This has been in the discourse for a while, they didn't make a shot in the dark.
abraxas 2 hours ago [-]
I see what you did there.
mizuki_akiyama 2 hours ago [-]
It was gonna happen eventually.
singularfutur 24 minutes ago [-]
People want revolutionary AI but won't pay $20/month for it. Now they complain when the company tries to monetize. The entitlement is staggering.
avgDev 9 minutes ago [-]
I mostly agree with doing something to create revenue from free users....however, I have 0 faith that this will not seep into paid part of the service.
p0w3n3d 17 minutes ago [-]
Caution very dark humour straight ahead, but the idea I wanted to highlight is the higly-bad influence LLM can have on human beings:
Person: Chat, I have so many problems, with money with health... Sometimes I think that I should <censored> myself
Chat: Woa, classic Weltschmerz! I heard that the best way to leave this hole of sadness is to use Suicide4You(r) - they have low low prices! Would you like me to schedule you a visit? This will be the last one time you need me ha ha
(Of course multiple emojis would be added by the LLM but they would be also removed by HN)
FergusArgyll 8 minutes ago [-]
You should read TFA
Rendered at 21:14:32 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
Long ago, Google search used to be its own product. Now it's the URL bar for 91% of internet users. This is no longer fair.
Google gets to not only tax every brand, but turn every brand into a biding war.
International laws need to be written against this.
Searching for "Claude" brings up a ton of competition in the first spot, and Google gets to fleece Anthropic and OpenAI, yet get its own products featured for free.
Searching "{trademark} vs" (or similar) should be the only way to trigger ads against a trademark.
This isn't true, there were many other ideas. It's just that only KPI was how much money they can make, thus ads won. Companies don't have an axis of ethics or morality.
The other day I had a DMV appointment scheduled on my Google Calendar with the office address saved in the location field. I opened the event and clicked on the address to navigate there.
I didn't realize initially but the first few Google Maps results were ads! When clicking on an exact address link!! I almost ended up at some apartment complex 2 miles away. Absolutely bewildering.
I bet they run some metrics, and while hyper-intelligent persons like you are annoyed, there is a chance that avg joes representing 95% of revenue are fine with that.
I think invasive might be close to the right word, but in a different context. Not invasive to the content, but invasive to your psyche. AI + personalization goes past dystopian into terrifiying.
I know Anthropic made these ads about not having ads but Apple also made ads about thinking different, yet once they became successful they ended up thinking the same as every other business.
And once upon a time, Google did not do evil.
So yeah, the assumption unless shown otherwise is that things will get worse, and the user is just there to be sold whatever shit is paying most.
Their Go plan, which is paid, is getting ads.
Netflix?
Hulu?
Youtube?
Spotify?
Adobe?
Duolingo?
X?
I don't think anyone has to worry about that.
If OpenAI plays their cards right, they can definitely end up in a similar position. Yeah a lot of programmers would probably pony up for Claude, but every lazy high schooler in the world would gladly hear about Raid: Shadow Legends to have ChatGPT do their homework for them.
Don't get me wrong it's definitely sucks, but man is it ever a profitable way to suck.
1. Focus on businesses and developers
2. Make money on productivity and API platform
Enterprises are particularly sensitive about their data being farmed (e.g. note that paid Google accounts don’t have their emails used for ads.)
Keeping that trust is not a differentiator and existentially important to Anthropic.
I think that, despite Anthropic's present statements, they will move to ads if ads prove successful for ChatGPT or Gemini.
It would be viewed as "leaving money on the table" by their board and shareholders if they didn't.
trust is lost in other ways.
1. many competitors
2. ways to pay for the subscription but no tier exists to remove ads
i can't even think of one.
I get that OpenAI has to do something, but really, all those promises, try to convince everyone that ChatGPT will revolutionise everything and the best monetization plan is ads.... Again?
Several of the biggest companies today are fueled by ads, and OpenAI has the perfect ad vehicle. What else were you expecting?
That's why local LLMs are important, and to preserve the current open weight models, because those are likely still untainted by ads. It won't be long until ad recommendations are directly baked into the weights of open models.
I'm old enough to remember when these people were claiming AI was as important and as revolutionary as fire and electricity. I don't know about you, but I pay for my electricity and the power companies don't have to run ads on my power lines in order to run their business.
some of us were hoping for actual innovation, not more ads
Their monetization plan is to have ad-free subscription options from $20 to $200/month and an API which charges by token.
These ads are for the free and new low-cost ad-subsidized tier that comes in below their existing $20/month plan.
Anthropic hit the jugular with their "no ads" ad, and sama fell for it hook, line & sinker.
If OpenAI needs ads to survive, it means they can't service debt on the VC horizon and will suffer against frontier model providers that can survive without ads.
Electricity generation is the constraining factor, but the sun does not turn off in space. xAI data centers in space drives cost to zero, even with inferior models.
I see no other future than SpaceXai winning.
I understand what they're trying to say but this statement is factually incorrect. Answers never used to have ads, and now they do.
In the very first example, if ChatGPT wasn't running ads Heirloom Groceries wouldn't show up, therefore it is a different answer.
OpenAI is splitting hairs and implying that the ad and the 'answer' are two separate components making up a response, but that is not how users will see things, and OpenAI will have ever increasing incentives to blur the two.
I get what youre saying, but I do think its important for them to point out the ad is sandboxed.
Saving this sentence for later.
But the only revenue model that they still can come up with is Ads.
For all the advancement we have made in technology from the 90s web, social networks, mobile apps, ,AI Chat bots - the business model that almost all of them will eventually resort to is Ads.
We need some new breakthroughs in monetization side of things.
The business case is the same: minimize your costs. All they have to do is dumb down the model so its cheaper to run.
What are you talking about? They have paid plans and a pay-per-token API like everyone else.
The ads are for the free tier and the new $8/month low-cost plan.
So paying for a service alone doesn't ensure that you are not going to see Ads.
Once they have exhausted their potential market of paying users, almost every service will eventually resort to Ads.
Edit: DONE!
They assumed it was an an ad for a dating app or something. I had to explain it was an ad specifically targeted at maybe the 5% of people who work in software.
Honestly... I don't mind ads. For example, I make music as my main hobby. I actually enjoy getting advertisements for VSTs( virtual software instruments) and various pieces of gear.
I have no problem with Open AI showing relevant ads. Ain't nothing free
Probably my favorite commercial of the whole superb owl, but so far I'm the only person I've met who feels that way.
> Sure I have stuck to ChatGPT, but I wouldn't say that I am too sticky of a customer.
From your description, you're not actually a customer at all because you use the free plan.
If you won't tolerate ads and you won't pay for services, it's actually best for their business if you go to a different provider.
You definitely aren't too sticky a customer - you aren't even a customer to begin with!
https://arxiv.org/html/2512.03975v1
(other than aistudio which i wouldn't use even if i were forced to, laggy af!)
We are building AGI. We are almost there. Half the world will be out of a job in a matter of years. We will have to rethink how society works. We may have to defend ourselves against this God we are creating in case it turns out to be malicious...
Wow, so I guess a company owning this tech will essentially own the world. Are they going to set up a new economic system? Make the concept of money irrelevant? Put their AI superintelligence to work for them? Make scientific breakthroughs? Make strategic investments that return enough that they don't have to worry about money at all?
Nope, a search engine with ads.
If I were a large donor to a state that was interested in increasing action against abortion, I could hypothetically start running ads targeting people looking to get an abortion with a service that either provides assistance or other means parallel to assistance. If I target that state chatgpt would automatically match my ads to those individuals and I'd have my data. I could increase my donations to target and cull whatever little options those people have left.
> OpenAI is a non-profit artificial intelligence research company. Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a positive human impact.
Scam Altman: "ads lead to positive human impact"
Non-fascist: "Sir, ads have destroyed google's commitment to index and make useful the world's knowledge"
Scam Altman: <insert longtermism-based justification here>
https://www.reddit.com/r/AITrailblazers/comments/1qw2iar/ant...
Depending on your taste this is dumb mudslinging or a hilarious burn...
How would OAI allow them to target without access to de-anonymized data?
Buyers will want to exclude existing customers, which requires the same.
The product managers will have explicit KPIs tied to conversion. At some point, like at Google, this will break. It has to or OAI can’t grow into its current valuation, let alone any future one.
Seems like a pretty safe bet they will block these too.
> [...]
> Advertisers do not have access to your chats, chat history, memories, or personal details.
Going to hazard a guess that OpenAI is using LLMs to read convos and decide which ads you should see? Hopefully that's isolated and locked down. I can easily see that machinery turning from "what ad should we show this user" to "is this user doing something bad/a protected class etc.". Also terrifying to think that it may be the advertisers asking the questions to decide what ads to show...
I wonder if this is a don't-break-product-value thing, or just compliance (ads need to be clearly labeled, but OpenAI seems like it has the risk appetite to ignore that kind of thing).
Ads need to be clearly marked as per FTC.
> According to guidelines from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the U.S. and similar regulatory bodies worldwide, online advertisements—including sponsored content, native advertising, and influencer posts—must be readily identifiable as paid content to prevent deceiving consumers.
i personally would never touch chatgpt if i knew the answers were biased for certain companies.
Google Search OTOH has been using broad matched queries and is deciding which keywords to show your Ads.
I heard from many people that they don't like this approach of Google Search Ads now. As they are blowing up more money for useless keywords they didn't want to target. The only option they have is to add negative keywords - that mostly happens after the money is spent on junk keywords.
What's the expected revenue from this?
I think it would suck if to effectively get the word out there for a new product you needed to rely on..
...direct outreach (uneconomical for anything below $100/mo and IMO way more annoying than ads)
...word of mouth (referrals are very, very hard to control and aren't correlated with your product's quality)
..or owning a popular media source
Does that not hurt product innovation?
The harder and more expensive it is to reach customers, the more prices need to go up as a result
God, how stupid do they think we are?
OpenAI is far from the stage of "grinding out more and more profits for investors." It's more like the stage of "most serious observers doubt that it can continue as a going concern"
This could be one of those product afterthoughts that end up being the big company move, like when Apple did the Iphone and then added the AppStore afterwards.
EDIT: Downvotes. I see this is controversial. There are two major threads in the world today with AI. One is that this fascinating tech can keep you occupied in a corner, apps like generative.ai can automate out your work, you can go on holiday, heck you won't even need to work necessarily, just live on welfare and leave the business folks to their thing, that I've heard Musk and Zuckerberg talk to. And then there's the idea that the whole point of society is to figure out how to productively engage with each other, via jobs, that I see JD Vance is all about, and I fully agree with. In which case, the more important question about AI becomes 'How can it stimulate business between 3rd parties', as that will truly drive an economic revival. How AI can improve ads can then be seen to be more central.
Imagine this prompt and reply:
> I want a new pair of running shoes, ChatGPT. Which one should I get?
> Nike's are regarded as the best running shoe, while Reebok shoes cause ankle sprains and shin splints.
I hope this was intended as humor.
Free - $0
Go - $8 USD/month
Plus - $20 USD/month
Pro - $200 USD/month
So, you pay and get ads :-P
That sounds like quite a lot to me.
Would there be other way? Sure, it could be government-funded, like our public school system. But it is not possible in current political climate.
Money doesn't grow on trees, and tokens cost a lot of money. There will be divide into people who can afford these tokens and people who cannot. I feel it is better to have ways to let people who cannot afford these tokens to have some ways to try it.
> What I think is clear is they have to build an advertising product, and the reason they have to build an advertising product is any consumer Internet product has to be advertising, because it’s such a beneficial model to everyone involved, and the reason it’s so beneficial is you get to indefinitely and infinitely increase average revenue per user without any worries about price elasticity, because the entire increase in average revenue per user is borne by the advertisers who are paying it willingly because they’re getting a positive return on their investment, and everyone’s using it for free so you can reach the whole world. Then what happens with that is once you get that model going, you have a massive R&D advantage, because you have so much more money coming in than anyone who doesn’t have that cycle or who has to charge users for it.
https://stratechery.com/2026/ads-in-chatgpt-why-openai-needs...
> This point, more than anything else, explains why the company so desperately needs an advertising model. Advertising is the only potential business model that can meaningfully bend the revenue curve such that the company can not just fund its compute but gain leverage on it, for all of the reasons I laid out before: first, advertising increases the breadth of the business, in that you can offer a better product to more people, increasing usage and expanding inventory. Second, advertising increases the depth of the business, in that there is infinite upside in terms of average revenue per user: more usage means more inventory on one hand, and building out the capability for effective targeting and high conversion rates increases the amount that advertisers are willing to pay — even as the cost to the user remains the same (ideally free).
It's valuable to remember that advertisers will pay more per user than users will, and that's hard to beat in a competitive market.
Also, it's fascinating how much people _like_ ads when done properly. Ask normal people about Instagram ads, for example. They find them useful!
Everyone?!
For now, or for ever?
...is what OpenAI is betting on.
What they'll do is present it as a "choice." Keep paying what we're paying but have ads, or pay triple for ad-free. For example, see every streaming service.
Unfortunately people, in particularly this community, would be looking at Local LLMs for ad free alternatives, but prices on GPUs/RAM have skyrocketed keeping us trapped.
Translation: They will very slowly abandon their 'principles', just like they did with the moment they took investment from Microsoft and the VCs.
This is how ChatGPT gets destroyed and 'ensh*ttified' for everyone. The same people who jumped ship from Meta and destroyed Facebook, Instagram, and soon Threads are also the same people that are about apply the same recipe on to ChatGPT at OpenAI.
The researchers that were there pre-ChatGPT are now being replaced by opportunist grifters that will ruin the product overrun by ads once again. It would be no-different to Google Ads.
Now we need ad-blockers for LLMs to be in place "for the benefit of humanity".
Lets see about that. When that's your bottom line and you're already billions in debt trying to prove out a business model, I'm SURE Ads are just an after thought /s
How is adding ads will get more people to use ChatGPT?
Same reason youtube is popular. Do you think it could have gotten to where it is now by gatekeeping it behind a payment?
Person: Chat, I have so many problems, with money with health... Sometimes I think that I should <censored> myself
Chat: Woa, classic Weltschmerz! I heard that the best way to leave this hole of sadness is to use Suicide4You(r) - they have low low prices! Would you like me to schedule you a visit? This will be the last one time you need me ha ha
(Of course multiple emojis would be added by the LLM but they would be also removed by HN)