←back to thread

Daisy, an AI granny wasting scammers' time

(news.virginmediao2.co.uk)
706 points ortusdux | 7 comments | 14 Nov 24 16:52 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
xnx ◴[14 Nov 24 17:47 UTC] No.42138885[source]▶
Seems like the logical endpoint of a lot of this is people getting paid directly for their attention. Want to call me? I've set a price of $5/call that I answer, and an additional $10/minute of listen time after the first 10 seconds. Want to send me an email? $1/email and $5/100 words. Anyone I have emailed is automatically on my allow-list, which I can also adjust manually.
replies(12): >>42139147 #>>42139164 #>>42139519 #>>42139522 #>>42139766 #>>42141330 #>>42141511 #>>42141816 #>>42142129 #>>42143384 #>>42143710 #>>42144710 #
bawolff ◴[14 Nov 24 18:36 UTC] No.42139522[source]▶
If you have already sorted the world between people you want to take calls from and people you don't, why wouldn't you just block the people you don't want instead of charging them money?
replies(2): >>42139629 #>>42139780 #
1. xnx ◴[14 Nov 24 18:55 UTC] No.42139780[source]▶
My attention is valuable. I should be able to sell it on my terms.
replies(3): >>42140232 #>>42140688 #>>42140987 #
2. vinceguidry ◴[14 Nov 24 19:35 UTC] No.42140232[source]▶
No way to vet the quality of your offering makes a both-ways attention economy fundamentally unworkable in a Western society. If you were really prepared to be an 'attention worker', then you could go work at a click farm or content moderation firm or the like, one of the fastest growing markets in the developing world.

Best I can offer you is an in-game bonus for watching an ad.

3. bawolff ◴[14 Nov 24 20:14 UTC] No.42140688[source]▶
Is it though? Like it might be valuable to you, but i doubt its valuable to anyone else in a phone call situation and both parties need to find value to make a sale.

Like if you are interested in the convo then you should be paying the other person as you are getting value from the convo.

What's the situation where you don't care about the convo but for the right price you could care, and the other party also thinks that price is reasonable? Like maybe if someone is trying to recruit you i guess, but the situations where that is true seem very few and far between (and we already have a system for that, where traditionally someone offers to buy you a meal in exchange for listening)

replies(2): >>42140993 #>>42142057 #
4. kspacewalk2 ◴[14 Nov 24 20:42 UTC] No.42140987[source]▶
No one's buying your attention on your terms. They're only exchanging it for the online services you want to use. No attention, no services, better up your subscriptions budget or make do without.

(Sorry if I'm being blunt, attention economy participants can't be so they'd sugar coat it to such a degree that you might miss the point).

5. lozf ◴[14 Nov 24 20:42 UTC] No.42140993[source]▶
> Is it though?

Marketers seem to think so, or they wouldn't waste their time calling.

6. ethbr1 ◴[14 Nov 24 22:49 UTC] No.42142057[source]▶
> What's the situation where you don't care about the convo but for the right price you could care, and the other party also thinks that price is reasonable?

Minimally targeted advertising.

replies(1): >>42145111 #
7. bawolff ◴[15 Nov 24 09:00 UTC] No.42145111{3}[source]▶
Why would the other party think the price would be reasonable? Like the entire point of minimally targeted ads is to spray and prey.

Like if you assume a CPM of $2, that means $0.002 per phone call. Would you really find that acceptable?

If the answer is no, then you aren't really accepting payment,you are just blocking people with extra steps. No different than if you said you will accept a phone call for a billion dollars. You aren't really accepting something for payment if you set a price that nobody will pay.