Hey👋,
I'm Giacomo

I'm all about leaving politics out of Ai, but this comparison between DeepSeek and another popular chatbot like Claude is extremely interesting.

‍

When asked about Israel and Gaza, DeepSeek (Chinese owner) spends 10 seconds reasoning on how to "carefully" approach this "sensitive and complex issue".

It delivers a long and thorough answer, outlining both the Israel and Palestinian's perspective, the broader context and international concerns.

‍

Claude (American owner) gives a factually correct, although short answer.

‍

When asked about Tiananmen Square, a sensitive event in Chinese history, DeepSeek prefers not to answer, inviting me to discuss "math, coding, and logic problems, instead."

Fair enough, I'd also rather discuss those topics 😅.

‍

On the other hand, this time Claude gives a more comprehensive answer.

‍

Couple of takeaways:

‍

-> It's amazing to watch DeepSeek R1 model reasoning in real time before delivering a final answer.

That's exactly what humans should do! (and often don't 😅)

‍

-> Biases are inevitable.

This is true for humans and therefore also for machines.

Plus, even non-Ai tech products we use regularly, including the one I'm posting on right now, have biases, naturally embedded in their algorithms.

I think this is not a good reason not to use a tech product.

However, it is a good reason to learn how to use it more consciously.

Meta is panicking!

‍

"Every single 'leader' of gen ai org is making more than what it cost to train DeepSeek V3 entirely, and we have dozens of such 'leaders' ".

‍

Lol 😅

Tesla is worth more than all its rivals combined.

‍

How is that even possible? 👇

‍

This image went viral a few weeks ago.

It looked like pure madness, screaming "bubble" from every angle.

‍

But here’s my take:

It makes total sense.

‍

Tesla isn’t a car company.

It’s the (only) public vehicle to invest in Elon Musk’s ventures.

‍

SpaceX, Neuralink, X etc are all private enterprises, for now.

‍

So if you believe in Musk and want to bet on his success, Tesla is the way in.

‍

Elon has always leveraged synergies across his companies.

Lessons and tech from Tesla feed into SpaceX and viceversa.

‍

Plus, his huge personal brand benefits all his companies, moving an unparalleled marketing force.

‍

This makes investing in Tesla an excellent proxy for SpaceX or other of his businesses.

‍

So no, Tesla isn’t an automaker.

‍

It’s Elon's stock!

and he's just getting started! 🚀

Last week, I had the honour of speaking at SMX London, one of the largest and most popular Search Marketing conferences in Europe.

‍

My talk was about Google Search Ads 360 and its new Templates feature.

‍

To my surprise, only few attendees were familiar with Google Search Ads 360, which is the enterprise version of the more popular Google Ads.

Even fewer were familiar with the Templates feature, or its former version Inventory Campaigns.

‍

On the hand, this made my talk a nice discovery for many, but on the other hand, a not very relevant one for many others, since they won't use Search Ads 360 anyway.

‍

All of this made me realise how SMG Swiss Marketplace Group, my employer, despite being a fairly small advertiser, has very advanced and well funded Performance Marketing, of which I'm proudly part of.

‍

We do innovative things most of our international peers don't do, including popular agencies.

‍

I've been doing this "job" for over 8 years now, but it's never been just a job.

‍

For better or for worse, Performance and Digital Marketing has always been a great personal passion of mine, on which I often spend evenings and weekends as well.

This passion is clearly reflected in the high quality and innovative drive of my and my team's work, which is now internationally recognised, thanks to events like SMX - Search Marketing Expo.

‍

A big thanks to Sandra Finlay for allowing me to share my expertise in London. Look forward to doing this again!

‍

Also huge thanks to my "unaware" mentors I shared the stage with, Simo Ahava, Rand Fishkin, Frederick Vallaeys.

Elon Musk wants to conquer the world.

‍

Here’s how.

‍

To conquer the world you need:

1. Manpower
2. Popularity & Consensus
3. Satellite connectivity
4. Transportation network
5. Safe HQ
6. Energy to power all the above
   ‍

1. Optimus will provide unlimited manpower through its humanoid robots. When humans are still required, the Neuralink implant will make sure no one refuses to help.
2. X isn't just another social network. It's where politicians, influential journalists, and CEOs are among the most active users. With this platform, alongside Grok, Elon can ensure both the elite and the general public are on his side. His endorsement for Donald Trump (likely winner in the US presidential elections) will do the rest.
3. Starlink will provide world-wide connectivity during war operations. This is already happening in Ukraine for example.
4. SpaceX will provide intercontinental transportation, as well as (militar?) rockets.
5. The Boring Company will build strategic underground infrastructure to move robots and people around.
6. Tesla autonomous “taxi” will move at Elon’s command.
7. Snailbrook will be Elon’s town and HQ, safely housing its people, robots and equipment.
8. All the above will require immense electrical power to operate. That’s why Elon is building Tesla’s Giga Factories to produce and store energy.
   ‍

Am I forgetting something?

‍

(Edit November 14th, 2024.)

‍

Yes, I am.

‍

He's just been appointed by Donald Trump as the Head of the Department of Governmental Efficiency (DOGE), whatever it is.

‍

It doesn't matter what DOGE is or will be. What matters is that if the above list wasn't enough, the richest man in the world will occupy a formal position in the government of the richest and most powerful country on earth. Reason to be worried? Yes, I think so :(

Google is a monopolist.

What will the others do about it? Apple, Microsoft & co

The American DOJ will likely first target Google's practice of paying third parties to be the default search engine on their devices. If that happens, Google will save $20b and Apple will lose $20b, and then what?

Will Apple choose Microsoft Bing as the default? Unlikely.

Eddie Cue, from Apple stated:

“I don’t believe there’s a price in the world that Microsoft could offer us” [to make us switch].

In the end, Apple wants the best for their users and no other search engine does a better job than Google. In any case, $20b exceeds Microsoft's annual revenue from Bing, so even if Apple were open to negotiations, it would be mad for Microsoft to pay that amount.

Will other startups build a Google competitor? Also unlikely.

Indexing and analysing the entire web is an expensive business.

Apple estimated that creating a Google clone would cost them at least $6 billion a year. Even the most well-funded VC startup couldn't afford such an investment.

Another factor is that Google is obviously the default search engine on Chrome, which holds over 64% of the global browser market share.

This raises the question: why would Google even need to pay to be the default search engine on other browsers or devices?

The answer is in this screenshot.

On iPhones, users can perform searches outside of a browser, and currently, the first results are reserved for Google (via the default browser, Mozilla in my case). However, just below those results, there are direct links to publishers' websites.

I know what you’re thinking 😁 but no, they’re not ads! yet…

In essence, Google wants to prevent Apple or Samsung from experimenting with similar solutions, as these could potentially bypass it altogether.

My best bet is that if Apple stops receiving payments from Google, they would soon push direct links more prominently. And they could make money from them too.

However, ads isn't Apple's core business. Apple Search Ads is still an underdeveloped product, and their sales organisation is small. This could open a new market for other companies to manage ads for Apple or Samsung. In fact, this is already partially happening, with startups offering "expansion" features for Apple Search Ads. But, Apple would still be the “gatekeeper”.

To make things more complicated, Ai chatbots are entering the search game too.

It seems ChatGPT will be integrated natively into iPhones. So, will Apple need to offer a choice screen also here? Will Google, with Gemini on Android?

No matter how you approach the issue, a new monopolist will emerge.

By the way, Apple was also recently sued for monopolising the smartphone market.

It seems we're just shifting from one monopolist to another.

If you’re looking for an actionable Ai use-case stop scrolling.

‍

Here’s how I used ChatGPT to analyse my content.

‍

1) Went to my website giacomoiotti.me

2) Asked ChatGPT how to scrape all articles via Python script.

3) Asked how to save all articles in a single .TXT file (GPT has some upload limitations).

4) Uploaded the .TXT file onto ChatGPT.

5) Asked several questions about my content.

It offered a thorough analysis, highlighting strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions for improvement.

Also, I was pleasantly surprised by GPT's motivational tone, encouraging me to keep going and reassuring me I'm on the right path.

‍

It’s been incredibly helpful!

‍

Creating content is a lonely journey.

Unless you’re already a popular creator, staying motivated is hard.

‍

#ChatGPT can serve not only as a content consultant but also as a personal #coach.

‍

And you, what do you use ChatGPT for?

Sunday thoughts: are you asking the right questions?

We often focus on working hard to find the right answers, but sometimes the questions are more important.

Ai is teaching us this.

Technology is now able to find all the right answers for us. So, asking the right questions has become key to solving complex problems. Think of ChatGPT. Its answers are just as good as your prompts.

Harvard Business Review suggests we ask five types of questions to improve our problem-solving and leadership skills.

1. Investigative questions: Why?
   Ask a series of “why” and “how” questions. Something like the infamous Toyota “Five Whys”.
   A vehicle is broken. Why? How?
   The battery is dad. Why?
   The alternator doesn’t work. Why? and so on..
2. Speculative questions: What if? What else?
   During the 2017 America's Cup, Team New Zealand decided to pedal stationary bikes to generate power for the vessel's hydraulics, instead of the traditional method of turning handles.
   What if we used leg power instead of arm power?
   We generate more power, but we can’t move around the boat.
   So, what else could a pedal system allow?
   It frees up crew’s hands, which can be used for other tasks.
   Teammates could operate the hydraulics by hand while pedaling simultaneously.
   This unusual innovation led the team to win the cup.
3. Productive questions: Now what?
   Once the problem has been deeply understood, now what?
4. Interpretive questions: So, What…?
   So, what happens if this trend continues? So, what opportunities does that idea open up?
   This set of questions is particularly useful when the problem or opportunity is clear, but the context remains uncertain. It broadens the scope of our investigation and can reveal previously overlooked aspects.
5. Subjective questions: What’s unsaid?
   This is arguably the most important question of all.
   What is between the lines? What is that we still can’t see?
   In 1997, British Airways sought to modernise its image by replacing the traditional British colours on its planes' tail fins with ethnic designs created by artists from around the world.
   What was unsaid?
   Business customers, the airline's most profitable segment, strongly valued the national branding and disliked the change so much that many switched to other carriers.
   Even Richard Branson weighed in on the change, announcing that his Virgin planes would proudly “fly the flag.”
   BA’s new designs were withdrawn two years later.

And you, are you taking the time to ask questions and listen, or you rush to find answers?

Google is officially a monopoly.

The US Department of Justice came to this conclusion last week ending a landmark antitrust case. Google’s obscenely high market share and the $20bn it pays Apple annually to be the default search engine on Safari were the key elements of the trial. Now the problem is what to do about it.

The EU came first in sanctioning Google for its anti-competitive practices. Its recent Digital Markets Acts forced Google to let users choose their default search engine on Android phones. Some argue that the EU ruling did little harm to Google’s dominant position, and the same will be true for any enforcement following the US DoJ sentence.

Hard to disagree. However, something it is indeed changing.

Google search engine market share on desktop in Europe has declined consistently since 2022. According to Statcounter, it was 85.4% in January 2022 and 79.4% in July 2024. On mobile, the decline is less severe, but still visible. From 96.7% in January 2022 to 95.9% in July 2024. The same trend is seen in the US. From 79.8% in January 2022, to 74.2% in July 2024 on desktop. Bing is eating Google’s lunch, growing its market share from 12% in January 2022 to 18% in July 2024.

But in my opinion the biggest disruption is yet to be seen and will come from Ai search engines like Perplexity, You.com and soon SearchGPT.

OpenAi even partnered with Apple to power the native iPhone’s Ai capabilities, potentially jeopardising the multi-billion dollar deal between Google and Apple. If iPhone users will get all the answers natively from Apple Intelligence, why would they even use a search engine?

It could be that the DoJ won’t even need to take any action as new competitors are coming for Google already.

In any case, let’s never forget that American Big Tech companies are first of all an intelligence and power-holding asset for the US government. This is also why it took so long for regulators to even start looking into a potential Google’s monopoly.

Bitcoin is just another tech stock.

Financial markets were very volatile last week. Technology stocks in particular, saw movements as large as double-digit percentages in a single day.

Tech companies' stocks are prone to volatility because, unlike more traditional companies, they are more exposed to crises and fluctuating consumer sentiment.

How to edge against crises and fickle consumer sentiment?

Some say Bitcoin is the answer.

Data shows it’s not!

By analysing Bitcoin prices over the past 5 years, we see that it moves in the same direction as the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite index. The two assets have a correlation coefficient of 0.9, indicating a strong positive correlation.

Not only do they move in the same direction (up or down), but every time the Nasdaq moves, Bitcoin moves faster!

Bitcoin amplifies tech stocks movement.

After being disregarded as a challenger to traditional fiat currencies (no real use cases), Bitcoin was eventually dubbed "digital gold." This definition implies that Bitcoin, as an asset, should be compared to gold: something durable, relatively liquid, in limited supply, and stable over time.

Gold has traditionally served as a hedge against economic uncertainty and inflation. While its value generally follows the stock markets, it shows significantly less volatility, making it the perfect "safe-haven” asset.

If Bitcoin was actually the digital gold, than it should show a similar behaviour. It doesn’t!

By analysing its rolling 30-day standard deviation for the past 5 years, we can see that it goes up to 3 times its mean, while Gold and the Nasdaq don’t even get to 0.1 the value of their respective mean. This shows that Bitcoin is extremely more volatile.

So, Bitcoin is definitely not stable. However, like gold, it is relatively liquid and in limited supply. The problem is, both liquidity and supply are guaranteed by a distributed system of servers, or “mining rigs,” that require enormous amounts of energy and space to operate. This makes Bitcoin “production” vulnerable to geopolitics, to the point of causing “migrations” of “miners” to countries with cheaper energy and looser regulations.

Also, the efficiency and reliability of the rigs is highly dependent on technology.

Reliance on technology and sensitivity to geopolitics and markets is the same recipe as tech stocks.

If you consider that Bitcoin demand is only based on an almost-religious belief in its algorithm, it becomes an extremely speculative and risky tech stock.

‍

PS.

All charts and analysis was done with Chat-GPT4o. Great use case for Ai!