And the downfall of anthropic starts, OpenAI has had this all in the bag the whole time. Anthropic is a poor imitation of Sam's Master plan, it was over before it even started. Money grubbers, the lot of em!
It's generally easier to start typing your street address (maybe 4-5 characters), see an auto fill, click your address and all information, including the zip is already filled out.
If you started with just the zip you still have to type your street address afterwards.
I will repeat here again the same comment I made when they posted their constitution:
The largest predictor of behavior within a company and of that companies products in the long run is funding sources and income streams, which is conveniently left out in their "constitution". Mostly a waste of effort on their part.
Conway's law seems apt here. The behavior of Claude will mirror the behavior and structure of anthropic. If anthropic deems one revenue source higher than another, Claude's behavior will optimize towards that regardless of what was published here.
What a company or employee "wants" and how a company is funded are usually diametrically opposed, the latter always taking precedence. Don't be evil!
The largest predictor of behavior within a company and of that companies products in the long run is funding sources and income streams (anthropic will probably become ad-supported in no time flat), which is conveniently left out in this "constitution". Mostly a waste of effort on their part.
Awful awful awful, ads lead to anti consumer behavior, anti free market competition, turns capitalism into a pay to win game, are similar to a cancer, incentivize the creation of extremely harmful platforms, such as slop filled tik tok, destroys existing companies such as Facebook, generally harms society in every measure, the cons outweigh any and all pros. It transforms your product into a sticky candy box trap for unassuming visitors while your actual customers are now just the advertising industry, you become, as is so well spoken , the product. Adopting ads should be taken as a step towards harming your consumer base so you can vampiricaly extract attention from them indefinitely and forever, as your company slowly becomes a skeleton drain on all of humanity. There is no such thing as a "good" ad.
Dutch Mao (mentioned briefly in the wiki) is a variant where everyone comes up with a hidden rule before the game begins, and is one of my favorite games of all time.
Not everything has to be black and white, there is middle ground for improvement. I'm not sure anyone loves the same MegaCorp™ ad plastered all over buildings, highways and stoplights.
The size, depth, and reach of the advertising industry is a direct result of the amount of money injected into it. The current ad industry is effective, awful, anti-competitive and resembles more of a cancer at this point than it's intended purpose to provide useful information.
The main arguments I hear against banning all ads is that it will hurt small businesses, a better solution might be to ban all adds for companies making above X amount per year, or even better: create systems where users pay for ads themselves, then the incentives would switch to be in favor of consumers.
In any case, totally agree, ad companies are out of control, I'm hoping more Kagi like services start appearing soon.
Deshitification is directly related to profit motives, VC dollars, and providing a service or good that overwhelmingly exceeds any hope of making substantial ROI in the future. None was shown in any of the above promotional materials, your company and product is tarnishing and devaluing the term, congrats on the achievement. We'll continue to look for another word that has not been captured.
Throwing my two cents in, the problem with all of this, is that we're dealing with artificially created scarcity, for content that can be easily duplicated. Artificial scarcity is a terrible thing to exist, and if got rid of it as a whole in society, we might end up with less high production content, but at least we would own all digital content that would be created. Services where consumers are paying for or perhaps even have sway over the creation of content, not the distribution, i.e. like patreon, are much more in line with nature of digital things.
Woah now, I would completely disagree, heroin does not make you happy, short term pleasure is not the same thing. New information which helps people is inherently a good thing, but can be obtained through other means than ads, i.e. word of mouth. The fact is that most ads are targeted badly and thus useless for most people, and the targeted ads that do help some are breaches of privacy, the better the ad the more information you must know about the person, which leads to all types of misuse of information.
Ads also give large companies leverage to destroy small companies. Basically if two entities are trying to compete, if one has more money, and a worse product, then they have the ability to out compete the smaller company specifically by spending more on advertisements.
The incentive model for advertisments is to take away as much privacy as possible from you (which we have seen in practice) and removes the effectiveness of the free market to function properly. Case in point, we should completely remove ads and only have new information from word of mouth or people who are willing to be paid for their time.
Another alternative is patreon. Remove all ads on your site other than ones to your crowdfunding page. Users are happy, the site makes money in proportion to it's quality.
I make money through patreon, patreon mainly advertises itself through their users advertising their own patreon pages on their own content, which is far different than what you mentioned above. patreon itself doesn't advertise at all.
You are wrong, ads only waste people's time. It's just the main way that online companies have found to turn attention and time into money, and it's never great for the consumer. Usually the free market (adblocked internet searches) gives better results for what consumers are looking for rather than the targeted paid for inferior quality products of ad companies.
A better service would be one where consumers pay with money to ask a service for the best recommendation of a product by an independent company. However automatic ads slapped on to every webpage are never warranted, are worse quality than the products shown without them, and are at best annoying, at worst misleading. 99% of ads do not fit into your definition of a good ad, in so far as I would catagorize your idea of a good ad just as a brokerage service, and not an ad at all. Consumers never go looking for ads, it's always the other way around.
Furthermore there are multiple other ways to make revenue online that don't involve ads, such as patreon. Imagine every site, but the only ads found are for the site's own support page. The quality of that site or creator rises, while still generating revenue. In the future, I believe that products and services that are not on some sort of crowdfunding service, will be outcompeted by those who are, no ads are necessary here.
If adblocking is left up to the browser than companies who own the browser have a financial incentive to let certian ads from paying companies through, as has been seen by adblock plus, and the proposed built in chrome ad blocking (which would obviously never block Google's own ads for any reason). Conflicts of interest should be separated into different independent organizations.
Chrome mobile not allowing extensions and therefore adblockers is a crime. There are different revenue sources other than ads (patreon or crypto micropayments for instance) which might evolve as the next means of payment for the internet and search engines. Google purposefully stopping the growth of new technology in order to grasp at an increasingly shrinking past is hurting the end user and is evil.