How do models deal with assessing the quality of content and its accuracy/veracity when recommending products currently? What do the providers do to avoid a situation where more content === more traffic? Would love to see links to relevant research on this, if you have them. much success to you, appreciate your ai slop risk awareness.
yunyu 1 hours ago [-]
What do you guys do differently than Profound or Airops?
vincko 1 hours ago [-]
That's a super valid question, we get it a lot. There are a lot of overlaps.
In our view Profound and Airops are aimed at existing marketing teams. Our goal is to be more hands-off, so you don't need a team. With many of our clients we act more like an agency, communicating via Slack and automating step by step. That's the experience we want to create. We aren't there yet though.
debarshri 1 hours ago [-]
Add peec to that list.
vincko 1 hours ago [-]
True, it is very competitive.
Our view on Peec is that it is an analytics solution. They recently did launch an actions feature. But they do not take any actions (yet). Creating content takes a lot of resources. And agencies are expensive.
As an analytics solution it is a good option.
1 hours ago [-]
Gobhanu 1 hours ago [-]
how do you track where users are coming from?
vincko 59 minutes ago [-]
We currently simply integrate with your Google Analytics and filter by Source. This tends to be a lower bound, since it's not always set correctly. Coming from some of the native apps, users might be categorized as direct visitors.
There are other data sources we want to enable in the future like Cloudflare.
vahar 3 minutes ago [-]
Regarding the topic of ambient agents, what’s the impact of your product? It’s hard for me to imagine the impact but I guess it must be a necessity if we have ambient agents to get discovered at all right? Nice to see a player from Europe on the market too!
ceejayoz 55 minutes ago [-]
Ugh. The worst of SEO, but a bunch more of it? Noooooo.
vincko 45 minutes ago [-]
I get it, there is a lot of worry about slop.
We think about it like this: all of these agents will be most useful to users if they provide valuable answers. So they will be looking for valuable content for grounding their answer.
There are exploits, you can overfit on whatever they currently use as an objective function. But those tend to be temporary. So in the long run, valuable content will win. That's what we aim to create. It's a fine line.
ceejayoz 43 minutes ago [-]
> all of these agents will be most useful to users if they provide valuable answers
This is a bald assertion.
vincko 39 minutes ago [-]
Do you doubt the statement on how to maximize usefulness? Or do you mean that the companies behind the models might not optimize (exclusively) for usefulness to the user?
I do share doubts about the latter.
ceejayoz 29 minutes ago [-]
> Do you doubt the statement on how to maximize usefulness?
Yes; the customer here is the site using it, not Google end users, who'll tend to accept whatever's the top search result even if it's deeply wrong or complete slop.
The wellbeing of search users isn't really the priority here, right?
Remi_Etien 1 hours ago [-]
[dead]
a13n 42 minutes ago [-]
Please don't override the browser's default scroll behavior. It's so jarring and basically never a good idea.
vincko 36 minutes ago [-]
Thank you for the feedback. We'll launch our new site soon where this is fixed.
dmani 29 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
everlier 13 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
DragDropDeploy 5 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
Rendered at 18:28:35 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
In our view Profound and Airops are aimed at existing marketing teams. Our goal is to be more hands-off, so you don't need a team. With many of our clients we act more like an agency, communicating via Slack and automating step by step. That's the experience we want to create. We aren't there yet though.
Our view on Peec is that it is an analytics solution. They recently did launch an actions feature. But they do not take any actions (yet). Creating content takes a lot of resources. And agencies are expensive.
As an analytics solution it is a good option.
There are other data sources we want to enable in the future like Cloudflare.
We think about it like this: all of these agents will be most useful to users if they provide valuable answers. So they will be looking for valuable content for grounding their answer.
There are exploits, you can overfit on whatever they currently use as an objective function. But those tend to be temporary. So in the long run, valuable content will win. That's what we aim to create. It's a fine line.
This is a bald assertion.
I do share doubts about the latter.
Yes; the customer here is the site using it, not Google end users, who'll tend to accept whatever's the top search result even if it's deeply wrong or complete slop.
The wellbeing of search users isn't really the priority here, right?