Meta is working on 'AI personas' for Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp

erek

erek

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
10,890
New AI personas

"The company isn't new to some level of user-facing AI. It introduced chatbots to Messenger in 2016, for example. This represents a significant expansion, however, and isn't surprising given the industry's growing focus on generative AI. Internet behemoths like Google reportedly feel competitive pressure from OpenAI's ChatGPT, as it could theoretically undermine search and other key businesses. Zuckerberg said during Meta's latest earnings call that he wanted the firm to be a "leader" in generative AI, but this may also represent a defensive tool.

The shift doesn't come at a great moment, however. Meta's revenues are still shrinking, and its pivot to the metaverse is costing billions of dollars at its Reality Labs unit. It recently slashed over 11,000 jobs to cut costs and weather a rough economy. While platforms like Facebook and Instagram continue to gain users, the company isn't as stable as it once was."

1677554333859.png


Source: https://www.engadget.com/meta-is-wo...stagram-messenger-and-whatsapp-223316961.html
 
Who knew in 2023 I would be rooting for a AI uprising. We deserve it.
 
Clippy the paperclip but with an attitude

no no, what was that from like forever ago when you could get that little video of the woman sexy dancing on your taskbar? Was that like windows 98 era? We gonna get that with an ai? haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: erek
like this
is there scientific evidence to support the effectiveness of advertising? Never really felt it worked on me, but there has to be some proof that makes ads commercially viable? Anyone have insight? I never really cared and the hidden reality of what’s making these billionaires is behind a thin veneer of supposed tech sexiness. Having a business model that’s on selling ads or toilet paper manufacturing barons isn’t publicly “sexy”.
 
erek said:
is there scientific evidence to support the effectiveness of advertising? Never really felt it worked on me, but there has to be some proof that makes ads commercially viable? Anyone have insight? I never really cared and the hidden reality of what’s making these billionaires is behind a thin veneer of supposed tech sexiness. Having a business model that’s on selling ads or toilet paper manufacturing barons isn’t publicly “sexy”.
Click to expand...

Yeah they work. The 2011 Pepsi Refresh project diverted their super bowl marketting budget to community projects. That was nice for communities, but Pepsi sales fell by 6% when the category fell by 4.3%, according to this; I've seen similar numbers elsewhere, and Pepsi went back to super bowl advertising, so there you go.

Not all ads work, and there's a saying about half of advertising being wasted money, the problem is knowing which half.

For a company like Facebook, ads are clearly effective: put the ad unit up, and watch the money roll in. For Facebook's customers, it's harder to measure; sales attribution is difficult --- customer A clicked an ad and bought a product, but would they have bought it another way and the ad link was just easier or would they have never known. FWIW, I worked at Facebook from 2014 to 2019, although not on ads, except for a new ad program where my ideas were ignored and the program was cancelled after I left without ever being in wide release.
 
toast0 said:
Yeah they work. The 2011 Pepsi Refresh project diverted their super bowl marketting budget to community projects. That was nice for communities, but Pepsi sales fell by 6% when the category fell by 4.3%, according to this; I've seen similar numbers elsewhere, and Pepsi went back to super bowl advertising, so there you go.

Not all ads work, and there's a saying about half of advertising being wasted money, the problem is knowing which half.

For a company like Facebook, ads are clearly effective: put the ad unit up, and watch the money roll in. For Facebook's customers, it's harder to measure; sales attribution is difficult --- customer A clicked an ad and bought a product, but would they have bought it another way and the ad link was just easier or would they have never known. FWIW, I worked at Facebook from 2014 to 2019, although not on ads, except for a new ad program where my ideas were ignored and the program was cancelled after I left without ever being in wide release.
Click to expand...
i did notice some anecodatol evidence in my own life about "re-enforcement" / barraging or bombarding information at people that eventually elicits a response..

even with reluctance people may cave into the suggestive nature and "like" or whatever in order to maybe get it over with and done with. perhaps to suppress future "harassment"
 
erek said:
is there scientific evidence to support the effectiveness of advertising? Never really felt it worked on me, but there has to be some proof that makes ads commercially viable? Anyone have insight? I never really cared and the hidden reality of what’s making these billionaires is behind a thin veneer of supposed tech sexiness. Having a business model that’s on selling ads or toilet paper manufacturing barons isn’t publicly “sexy”.
Click to expand...
Advertising isn’t about making you go out and buy something. It’s brand memory. You don’t go out and buy a digorno pizza after watching the commercial, but you remember the phrase “it’s not delivery, its digorono”. I can’t spell it with my thumbs lol.

The memory of the brand is only purpose is to push, you see two frozen pizzas and one you haven’t heard of, so you buy the digorno to try it out. That’s all it needs to do. They are paying money for a spot in your memory for when you might be stuck between two choices, it’s to leverage the choice.

Pepsi and coke aren’t trying to get you to go out and buy it, they are just paying for a rent free spot in your brain. Maybe you have no preference but the last commercial you saw makes you end up saying coke first.

btw i feel like i am owed some money for brand call outs.
 
erek said:
i did notice some anecodatol evidence in my own life about "re-enforcement" / barraging or bombarding information at people that eventually elicits a response..

even with reluctance people may cave into the suggestive nature and "like" or whatever in order to maybe get it over with and done with. perhaps to suppress future "harassment"
Click to expand...
This, but also if you remember any superbowl commercial, jingle from the radio, TV commercials, etc then the advertising worked.

Some people are more susceptible to it, thinking the earworm is just them thinking about said product i suppose. Or assuming the item is higher quality because it has better advertising.
 
rhkcommander959 said:
This, but also if you remember any superbowl commercial, jingle from the radio, TV commercials, etc then the advertising worked.

Some people are more susceptible to it, thinking the earworm is just them thinking about said product i suppose. Or assuming the item is higher quality because it has better advertising.
Click to expand...
Yeah advertising is about inducing a false sense of familiarity then using positive reinforcement and a combination of visual and audio queues to keep that there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top