[rwc]

Early audience response suggested the message struggled to land. According to an iSpot survey of 500 viewers, the ad’s likeability score placed it in the bottom 3% compared with Super Bowl ads over the past five years. Its top-two-box purchase intent scored 24% below Super Bowl norms and 19% below ads in its category that aired over the last 90 days. Viewers most commonly described their reaction as “WTF,” signaling confusion around both the message and the execution.

https://www.adweek.com/brand-marketing/super-bowl-revealed-a...

[SrslyJosh]

I think that the ideas of AI boosters and other tech maximalists will pretty much always "struggle to land" with normal people. (See also: the ring ad.)

[ryandrake]

I don't think "normal people" especially run-of-the-mill office workers, like the idea of AI or want it to succeed. Not that it's going to stop Silicon Valley from ramming it down everyone's throats.

[crote]

Only when the underlying product sucks. "Here's how the Torment Nexus is going to torment you - subscribe now!" is never going to be a popular message because it is actively making the world worse.

People aren't being luddites or not understanding innovation. They know perfectly well what is being sold, and they hate it.

Contrast it with the Dotcom bubble, where people mainly thought it wasn't for them or that they didn't need it. Look at interviews of people back then, and the services advertised are at worst described as "unnecessary": you would've had very little trouble convincing them that there would be some market for them.

But with those extreme AI examples? Normal people understand it, and they hate it.

[noduerme]

I think what mostly came across was "welcome to the next crypto bubble".

[FarmerPotato]

The worst one I remember was "Gerbils" by outpost dots com , a Super Bowl ad with a gerbil cannon. But opinions differ on that one.