I’m very familiar with the motivations, but the challenge for publishers with long intro offers and dynamic subscription pricing is ensuring their most loyal customers don’t feel price gouged.
"By working closely with publishers we will ensure advertisers are equipped with technology, tools and insights to support news content and confidently engage with valuable news audiences.” - @jackmarshall, Head of News at DoubleVerify
Learn more: https://t.co/35aIYrWZyn
The Yorkshire Post has launched a limited time deal with The New York Times that means its annual digital subscribers also get unlimited access to the US giant for a year. The cost for both for a year is £129.90; NYT normally costs £20 for a year then £90 https://t.co/Cc00V09UTT
@thesamparr I can see how it might. But some authors and copyright owners believe AI companies are using their work to train LLMs without compensating them.
I like uploading the PDF version of books I'm reading and asking ChatGPT questions about the book.
Like as a reference tool if I have a question weeks after reading.
But ChatGPT makes too many errors.
Anyone have a better tool for this? Any tips?
@AdamBlacker25 My guess would be that major LLM’s have scraped enough data at this point to handle the bulk. License a little new content to keep things fresh and incorporate new human ideas/trends/innovations and it can remix the rest.
Google is testing "Quick view" buttons that show your content on Google, leaving the searcher with little reason to click over to your site - not good Google https://t.co/F90g94bhLQ via @tomcritchlow
@rameeztase I think as a publisher it comes down to how commoditized, valuable and high-stakes your content is. Easily accessible info with low stakes (eg recipes) I suspect will be almost entirely replaced by AI. Curious what will happen in categories like health, which seem borderline.