The auction used to be automated. I could say my max spend is $30 an ad, but if my biggest competitor maxed at $15, I would pay ~$15 + 1. Now I pay $30
Also made more simply, if I made XBOX games, Google used to say “you can pick ‘Xbox’ as a target and they’d only show your ads to people who searched for Xbox. Not they generalize and show to all “video game” searches like PlayStation.
Comments
I tried following the logic in that writeup, but it seems like an incoherent rant. What is the author's point and what is their reasoning?
The auction used to be automated. I could say my max spend is $30 an ad, but if my biggest competitor maxed at $15, I would pay ~$15 + 1. Now I pay $30
Also made more simply, if I made XBOX games, Google used to say “you can pick ‘Xbox’ as a target and they’d only show your ads to people who searched for Xbox. Not they generalize and show to all “video game” searches like PlayStation.
What does any of that have to do with AI capex spending?
I think they’re theorizing that’s why they’re squeezing their customers.
He's asking hypothetically why Google would be willing to give up a healthy, lucrative business to Doctorow-ize their gravy train.