logoalt Hacker News

xyzelementyesterday at 11:06 PM5 repliesview on HN

I don't love (but use...) Amazon but I think if done properly, ads can be relevant even when searching for a specific thing.

Let's use a Google Example: I search for Toyota RAV4 and get an ad for Mazda cx-50. Obviously Toyota hates that but as a consumer it has a chance of making me aware of something I didn't know but would want to know, especially as a part of a purchase decision. That's why Mazda pays for that ad slot, and also why Toyota makes it expensive for them :)

Obviously google in this scenario comes out ahead and it is annoying for some users but can be highly valuable if done well.

It's not how I search or shop but plenty of people do.


Replies

ryukopostingyesterday at 11:53 PM

No. If I search "Toyota RAV4" what I mean is Toyota RAV4. If I meant Mazda CX-50 I would have typed "Mazda CX-50." If I wanted information about various mid-size SUVs, rather than one in particular, I'd have searched "midsize SUVs."

The number of times I have searched something, got back something I did not ask for, and found that helpful, rounds down to zero. It's actively destructive to the platforms that allow this kind of hijacking of search terms.

show 3 replies
nashashmitoday at 12:12 AM

That’s pay to spam. Letting advertisers determine relevance of their product to a keyword is not exactly a user enhancing experience. When searching for rav4, i give you the ad for taylor swift concert, obviously understanding you can pay for it. This is spamming. “Relevant” ads should be determined by content producers

show 1 reply
yunwaltoday at 1:18 AM

This is the most baffling comment I think I’ve ever read

show 1 reply
esalmantoday at 12:10 AM

You search for Toyota RAV4, and you get an ad for whoever paid Google the most money to fingerprint your profile and bias your purchase decision. Since when did we start trusting everything we see on the Internet?

ButlerianJihadtoday at 3:03 AM

In any retail webstore, or even on Spotify, YouTube, etc. all the searches are infuriating today.

If I search for specific terms then I get a menu of slop to choose from. Search isn't built to serve the searcher at all. Search is meant to surface things that are promoted, hyped, advertised, or paid for in some way.

So you search Amazon for stuff and a lot of crap added on to it. Any retail site's filters are useless for filtering out what you don't want to see or casting a net for desirable features. I swear--search for "bananas" at a grocery store and you'll get results for ice cream and baby food and Minions merchandise and organic pears?

This behavior has already crept into LLM responses. I often request that they compile a list of the top-5 or top-10 according to some criteria. And it never fails that they cannot resist giving me outliers and things that don't fit by any means. Now I don't know what influences an LLM to give stupid non-matching results, but I know they do. Is RLHF already baking-in advertising and sponsorship? I wouldn't rule it out.

Case in point: the other day I was thinking of Amy Schumer but couldn't remember her name. So I struck up a convo with Copilot, and described Schumer by profession, personality, and physical attributes. Copilot first suggested a slender Black woman. Then Diablo Cody. And eventually compiled me a list of 5-7 people who were nothing like Amy Schumer. Never once even thought to mention her. Once I surfaced her name by other means, I went back and scolded Copilot, just so I could feel smug and better about myself. But it's genuinely surreal.