[user00012-ab]

but what motivation do people have to create something, that will never been seen/read/listened to, and on top of that will just make the people that take it richer while providing no credit back?

you are just working for free so other people can get rich off your work.

[volkk]

i sort of get your point, but in a way that's kind of what blogs/reddit posts, writing samples published anywhere, short of a paid publication, are. its just that GPT does it a lot more efficiently compared to your slow manual brain/process of scavenging the internet yourself for inspiration for your next novel or some creative thing.

[dageshi]

There's a lot of sites out there that try to answer questions people are likely to search for specifically to monetise via ads. GPT probably kills them all if it becomes more popular than standard web search and then GPT slowly becomes outdated because people have no reason to publish the information GPT needs.

[sliken]

I've always wished I could have an ad free internet experience, I'd happily pay whatever revenue the ads would have generated.

Would it be terrible is GPT replaced ads with subscriptions? Of course they'd have to split the income with the sites they get the info from. Much how ads on a website make the ad network and the site owner money.

[dageshi]

My guess is, if you look at what a subscription would actually cost to cover what ads do right now, it would be a figure so large per person that most people wouldn't pay it.

[thequadehunter]

Why are you assuming that no one will ever see it?

[user00012-ab]

Will the chatbot that gives the answer also give a link to the sources it found this information at? if not then no one will go to your page (via search results) I've only played with chatgpt and it never gives back sources to where it finds the information.

Although someone in the comments above said Bing tries to include links back to sources where available, so that helps.