320 pointsby freetonik9 days ago53 comments
  • Suppafly9 days ago
    If this is something their users actually wanted, they'd be paying xAI, not the other way around.
    • therealpygon8 days ago
      Exactly. Which do people think users will be more accepting of: “we sold all your data and chats for 300 million” or “we got paid 300 million to integrate AI”.

      This is a data sale, pure and simple. xAI certainly isn’t making their money off their LLM/inference. OpenRouter shows Grok at about a billion tokens a day while the top 20 account for 2.5 trillion per day.

      I’ve suspected Elon expanded his failing strategy to include data brokering when he saw the opportunity to get access to everyone’s data via Doge. Hence the reason Elon is ready to step away now that Doge (many of which are xAI employees) has finished gaining access to the data from every government system. Quietly offering access to corporate and political clients to query the data of every single person via Grok seems like an easy way to generate some revenue when no one wants your AI.

    • Hoasi9 days ago
      Exactly, but what users want is not part of this equation.
      • splatter98599 days ago
        Never usually is with Musk and his platforms. Both X and Tesla's software stack clearly show this readily. He has other purposes in mind.
        • serial_dev9 days ago
          I’m sorry, I don’t think this is on Musk or xAI. IMO it is on Telegram. Only Telegram has the obligation to know what their users want and look out for their own users. It’s not unreasonable for Grok to want to have more users.
          • dotcoma9 days ago
            Maybe not. But how much are they going to make by spending these 300 million USD ?
            • therealpygon8 days ago
              Who knows how much they’ll make off the data they obtain from users and chat history data, but in this day and age, no one gets paid to integrate AI, they pay for it which means there is clearly some other goal. And I can tell you there is a reason he didn’t make this offer to Signal instead, where they wouldn’t have access to any chat history, and that it would mean xAI (at this point which looks more like a data harvesting company) becoming a “partner” would normally allow data to be handed over. In this case, however, that isn’t necessary since lTelegram’s privacy policy is basically, “we can use your data for whatever we want”, including selling it for 300 million and claiming it is the payment to integrate AI.
            • colordrops9 days ago
              Are you claiming it's a stupid business decision, or something else? Because they must be thinking that there is a profit to be made somewhere, either through training data or brand exposure to Telegram's 1 billion users.
              • bratwurst30008 hours ago
                yes telegram user need a conspiracy theory friendly chatbot and grok needs users… win win win
              • littlestymaar9 days ago
                Or Musk just want to say “hey, we growed in users by x%” this year so that he can keep pretending being in the race, for some street cred', like the way he pays some progamer in Asia to boost his PoE2 account.
                • MonkeyClub8 days ago
                  That's quite a viable possibility, I don't get why you're getting downed.

                  Grok is indeed trailing the race and could use extra numbers. It doesn't matter to their bottom line (or their ad campaigns) if these numbers come from a flat rate agreement with Telegram.

                  If anything, Telegram should have bargained for more.

      • prettyblocks9 days ago
        As a Telegram user, I don't mind having an interface to Grok that is outside of X.
        • wongarsu9 days ago
          Isn't that grok.com? There is also a grok iOS and Android app (though the Android app is apparently a bit of a 2nd class citizen)

          Admittedly, some of the uses in the article do sound useful. Time will tell

          • csomar8 days ago
            That must be new because a few months ago I wanted to give it a try and the only option was to have a Twitter account.
        • Gud8 days ago
          I agree with you.

          But this is why we must champion open protocols and open source software.

          I absolutely believe both LLMs and social media platforms should be federated and controlled by the user.

          • prettyblocks8 days ago
            Yeah, I'm not contesting that at all. I think Telegram sold its soul a long time ago, so I kind of just treat it as a self-contained socially oriented splinter-net with its own integrated app environment... and it's actually really cool and feature rich. I also find Grok to be an LLM that performs pretty well, so I don't mind the integration, much the same way I didn't mind the AI integrations into WhatsApp, but I understand that many people just want a messenger that's a messenger so I can understand the pushback.
        • piyuv9 days ago
          [flagged]
    • nickpsecurity9 days ago
      I thought that. Then, I remembered PayPal straight up paying people to use their platform. We saw how that worked out.

      So, the question is whether they should pay to generate demand in a new market. Then, who to pay and how much?

      I'll also note that OpenAI took the market by offering an expensive service for free (ChatGPT). Then, they offered a monthly plan that may or may not have been profitable. One could argue that OpenAI has been paying people to use its service for a long time.

      I also wonder if xAI gets something out of it. For instance, they might get all the conversations with the AI. I believe ChatGPT similarly put free, user conversations to use internally in ways that boosted their paid apps. xAI might have some plays like that.

      • rchaud9 days ago
        When was PayPal doing that? I remember having to create an account 20 years ago because they were the only payment processor option on Ebay, that seemed to be their moat. These days, I use Paypal as a "wallet" that's connected to my CC, to pay for stuff on sites where I don't want to put in my CC information.
        • akurtzhs9 days ago
          Paypal paid people to open an account or to refer new accounts early on. Inspired Dropbox to do the same thing with free storage.
        • edent9 days ago
          PayPal still regularly send out offers which pay new users.

          https://www.paypal.com/uk/webapps/mpp/invite/terms

          It is a common way for businesses to acquire customers.

      • bag_boy9 days ago
        How do you PayPal straight up paying people to use their platform worked out?
        • nickpsecurity9 days ago
          It's market cap was recently $69.51 billion. I'll add the eBay partnership to the reasons for its long-term success.
    • bko8 days ago
      Google pays apple to be their default search. Do you believe apple users don’t want google to be their default search?
    • hintymad9 days ago
      Maybe xAI has some interesting way to make money in other places, like Google paying Mozilla for making Google search the default choice.
      • zinglersen9 days ago
        It's the same reason for Google and xAI - they want user data and are more than happy to pay for it.
      • nikanj9 days ago
        Google is paying Mozilla to keep Firefox on life support - so that they can pretend Chrome has competitors
        • hulitu9 days ago
          > Google is paying Mozilla to keep Firefox on life support - so that they can pretend Chrome has competitors

          And to collect firefox user data. That't why firefox is always connected to e100.net.

        • throwanem9 days ago
          Is or was? They just lost that suit, didn't they?
          • malfist9 days ago
            The case hasn't been decided yet
        • nerbert9 days ago
          Directly taken from Gate's book.
    • throw056789319 days ago
      A pretty clear admission that Twitter failed as a distribution channel.
      • A4ET8a8uTh0_v29 days ago
        Or.. an understanding that not all users reside in the same silos.
    • selcuka9 days ago
      > If this is something their users actually wanted

      Users wouldn't specifically ask for Grok, but they might like to have access to an AI assistant. When you are competing against OpenAI etc. it makes sense to incentivise big, PR generating customers such as Telegram.

    • Gothmog699 days ago
      Google pays Apple some 20 billion a year for search primacy on iphones
      • piyuv9 days ago
        That shows that their trust in users selecting google as primary if given the option when setting up a new device is not high. Otherwise they’d negotiate it down.
        • midnitewarrior9 days ago
          I think the point is that users mostly don't bother selecting their search provider, many will simply use what is pre-configured. Google is paying Apple so nobody else will.
    • blitzar9 days ago
      If it turns out to be something actually useful, everyone else will start doing it for $0.
    • Barrin929 days ago
      I don't think users really want this for what it's worth, but that's a bad argument. The median (social media) internet user pays exactly zero for anything, so deriving expectations from money is a bit silly. The actual currency to watch is attention. If they don't like it, engagement will drop.
    • roycebranning9 days ago
      if users specifically wanted Grok, yes. if they generally want AI, no.
    • hiddencost9 days ago
      Like Google with Apple?
      • eqvinox9 days ago
        Google pays Apple because Google has paying customers for that in their advertisers.

        For xAI to pay Telegram... where does xAI get value back out of that? I guess we'll be seeing AI with ads soon?

        • spacebanana79 days ago
          That’s the industry consensus. Sam Altman talked about something similar on a Stratechery podcast.

          It not exactly unrealistic to imagine that people will ask LLMs about flights, hotels, restaurants or even insurance.

          All that needs to happen is for LLMs to add a “buy now” button, and for the provider to take a 15% commission (still a lower take rate than Expedia FWIW).

          • harmmonica9 days ago
            I could use some help understanding this better. If you ask an LLM about flights or I think pretty much any of the categories of services you cite, what exactly would I expect to get back?

            The "dream" is that the LLM/AI does all the work for me and just magically gets me to "this is the perfect flight for you and here are the reasons" but I have to tell it the things I care about (price, time, etc.). A lot of the time it's not exactly clear, even to me, which of those parameters matter the most so as a consumer it's actually nice to see, for instance, the options with times/costs/stops/etc. and for me to be able to look those over and make a decision. The LLM could provide those options, but then what has it done that I wasn't able to do with Google Flights or another ota? Is it just using more natural language in the request? Or do most people really want to wholesale handoff the decision and just go with the "trustworthy" LLM/assistant without any of the rationale?

            I suppose actual personal assistants do that type of thing all the time for wealthy people, but that doesn't seem like it would be applicable to the masses who want/need to comparison shop for the best deal that meets a bunch of criteria.

            I say this as someone who gets major value out of LLMs already, but for buying things in particular I'm struggling to understand why you'd want to hand off the "browsing" and just fast forward to the "buying."

            • spacebanana79 days ago
              I see there as being two main types of people who’d benefit from using LLMs for booking flights.

              The first are power users, in the sense of people who have complex requests. Like those who’d ask for the cheapest flights from Manchester to Turkey during the summer school holidays for without layovers unless those layovers were in Paris, for a holiday to be roughly 10 days long, excluding very early morning flights. Such a request could be made with existing OTAs, but would be painfully time consuming.

              The other type of user for whom LLMs might be useful are the opposite, those with very loose requirements. Think “get me a flight to a warm place tomorrow”.

              Skyscanner etc would still have value for the people in the middle.

          • s900mhz9 days ago
            Perplexity basically has this right? They let you buy things with a button in the chat itself!
          • jbverschoor9 days ago
            Will? Are :)
          • dmonitor9 days ago
            ..and Honey will snipe their commission anyway

            https://fortune.com/2024/12/23/honey-extension-scam-drama/

        • siriusfeynman9 days ago
          Already here with google's ADK (agent development kit)

          https://google.github.io/adk-docs/tools/built-in-tools/#goog...

          > When you use grounding with Google Search, and you receive Search suggestions in your response, you must display the Search suggestions in production and in your applications. For more information on grounding with Google Search, see Grounding with Google Search documentation for Google AI Studio or Vertex AI. The UI code (HTML) is returned in the Gemini response as renderedContent, and you will need to show the HTML in your app, in accordance with the policy.

    • 9 days ago
      undefined
    • aaron6959 days ago
      [dead]
    • alterom9 days ago
      [flagged]
      • cosmic_cheese9 days ago
        Even if all this true, there’s unlikely to be a mass switch campaign until an alternative with better privacy and security gains the smoothness, flexibility, and platform coverage that Telegram has. Most people I know who use it do so because it runs everywhere, is nice to use, and isn’t a Facebook product (which while perhaps not being as bad as a foreign government, is a more prominently perceived threat for most people).
      • dayyan9 days ago
        we aren't playing that game anymore
        • alterom8 days ago
          What game?

          Is it "making a meaningful statement" or "citing sources for claims"?

          Not like you're playing either game, so it's hard to guess.

      • Geee9 days ago
        [flagged]
      • wltr9 days ago
        Why I’m not surprised you’re downvoted to hell? Yet your post provides plenty of evidence for those who happen to not know all this for some reason.
      • hintymad9 days ago
        I really don't get the sentiment of everything Russia. Russia has the GDP of a province of China. Russia does not have a thriving manufacturing sector. Russia has increasingly less influence or power over the world. Why would powerful people in the US succumb to to Russia's influence? That just does not make sense. If anything, maybe the Lenin-loving Stalin-admiring Marxists would love Russia, like half of the university professors in the 50s loving the Soviet Union, to the point that they'd rather leak all kinds of information, including how to build atom bombs, to the Soviet Union. Oh, and New York Times even won a Pulitzer for praising the Soviet Union by the great Walter Duranty in the 1930s.
        • matthewdgreen9 days ago
          The "why" is definitely an important question, but it's certainly pretty obvious that views of Russia are relatively favorable among some on the right [1].

          [1] https://www.vanderbilt.edu/unity/2023/04/07/first-ever-vande...

        • apercu9 days ago
          > Russia has increasingly less influence or power over the world.

          Russia punches above their weight because people believe what they want to believe (and what their peer group they want to fit in to believes), and are easily corruptible by "small" amounts of money. And they have nukes.

        • 9 days ago
          undefined
        • 9 days ago
          undefined
        • jedberg9 days ago
          They have nuclear bombs. A lot of them. And the person who controls them has little to lose in using them. So we have to be nice and keep that person happy.
          • hintymad9 days ago
            That's diplomacy? That does not mean that high officials and the richest people in the world bought Russia's propaganda machine, if any, or worse, get bought by Russia, right?
            • jedberg9 days ago
              Well the side effect of everyone playing nice with Putin is that he's most likely a multi-billionaire, possibly even in the top 10 richest in the world.

              It's billionaires helping billionaires.

        • Krasnol9 days ago
          It's not "Russia's influence", It's the influence of a few but very rich Russian individuals.
        • alterom9 days ago
          [flagged]
          • kurisufag9 days ago
            > This is not a sentence in English.

            > I'll be here at day.

            i hate to heckle, but... :)

            • alterom9 days ago
              Heckling deserved :)

              I'll be here all day, using flow typing on my phone :)

          • wltr9 days ago
            You cited your sources, but they are flagged and removed :)

            Because dang them, right?

            • alterom8 days ago
              HN (and the mods) seem to hate nothing more than a well-sourced, well-structured long comment.

              The sources are still there though.

              • wltr8 days ago
                That actually looks like forcing their view, censoring you just because they might not like your position. Useful, you cannot do a thing. Your comment is simply gone. I might wanted to save it, but it’s no longer.

                Yet, they did not bother to remove my useless neighbouring comment, only flagged it. I’m not surprised anymore. Not the first time I see this behaviour.

        • wltr9 days ago
          [flagged]
    • capyba9 days ago
      [flagged]
    • mquander9 days ago
      That's just not true. If Telegram wanted it a small amount, and xAI wanted it a large amount, it would be normal for Telegram to negotiate to get paid for doing it.
      • lolinder9 days ago
        This isn't quite the framing I'd use—the key thing that would make it make sense for the deal to go this way is if there's competition bidding for the slot. Say OpenAI also wants in and was willing to pay for it. Absent competition for the slot and assuming that Telegram actually wanted the deal, we'd expect to see at most a no-cost exchange.

        There's no reason for Grok to pay this much for the deal unless either Telegram sees it as a net negative that needs reimbursement or they're competing with other bids.

        • brookst9 days ago
          What if Telegram sees it as a $100m benefit but they know that it’s A $500m benefit to Grok. If you were in telegram’s shoes in that situation, would you just charge nothing, knowing that Grok would happily pay $300m?
  • bgwalter9 days ago
    Given the use in conflict zones and the prevalence of military bloggers from all sides, Telegram is already one of the most surveilled apps out there.

    Grok relaying your queries to certain agencies won't add much, but it will be interesting to see what bias Grok will exhibit on Telegram.

    • serial_dev9 days ago
      It’s his play to be an even more important part of the military industrial complex and the surveillance state.

      He already has rockets, internet satellites, social platforms, he has the ears of the president and now he will probably have a backdoor to one of the most popular “encrypted” chat apps.

    • rodgerd9 days ago
      I imagine Telegram-based training data will bias Grok to reflect Musk's own views more reliably than any other platform out there.
  • kklisura9 days ago
    > Telegram is the most popular messaging app in Iran and Uzbekistan [1]

    > Telegram’s largest market is India, which accounts for more than 20% of its userbase. Telegram also has a large amount of users in countries with heavy censorship and surveillance, such as Iran, Russia, and Uzbekistan. [1]

    > Percentage of users via region: Asia 38%, Europe 27%, Latin America 21%, MEMA 8% [1]

    It sure is valuable data - if you are a three letter agency. Not sure if it's valuable business data.

    [1] https://www.businessofapps.com/data/telegram-statistics/

    • sorokod9 days ago
      > Telegram also has a large amount of users in countries with heavy censorship and surveillance

      That citizens of those countries are allowed to use Telegram says something about the privacy it affords to them.

      • tdiff9 days ago
        Its well known that whatsapp is also available in Russia
      • machomaster9 days ago
        You don't know what you are talking about. Read on the multi-year attempts of Putin trying to ban Telegram and Telegram fighting back (technologically and also politically - demonstrations, etc). Telegram won the battle and Putin had no choice but to admit defeat.

        Similar things happened in other non-free coutries as well.

        • SXX9 days ago
          Telegram dont have E2EE by default. It's all you need to know. 99% of communications on Telegram are in plain text.

          Also Telegram banned or shadowbanned serveral protest channels / bots during elections and when war began.

          • greenavocado9 days ago
            Many Telegram groups are only Play Store banned or banned access is restricted based on the user's phone number. This is why you must install the APK from their website directly instead of using an App Store version.
            • SXX9 days ago
              This have nothing to do with Apple. One of largest anti-war public channels in Russia by relatives of mobilized people was marked as "FAKE" for a very long time by Durov's personal decision.

              Durov serves kremlin as much as any other company that operates in Russia.

              • greenavocado8 days ago
                It absolutely does have everything to do with Apple. Groups are not only marked "FAKE," they are completely banned for the App Store app users.
                • SXX8 days ago
                  I'm not iPhone user to begin with.

                  You completely missing the point.

                  • greenavocado8 days ago
                    Most channels are banned by App Stores, and not by Durov. What is your point?
            • codedokode9 days ago
              It is ridiculous that Apple decides what Telegram users can or cannot see, especially banning harmless things like nudity but allowing cruel things like war videos or propaganda.
          • 0xy9 days ago
            WhatsApp isn't E2EE by default either, since default flow pushes you to backup your key to Google Drive.

            Signal isn't E2EE, given the security blunder in which private images from your gallery were sent to random contacts (which indicates a scary state management situation in the apps, this isn't easy to do). E2EE implies that you purposely send content to specific people which is encrypted, not that your app sends potentially embarrassing or intimate pictures to your boss behind your back. That blunder is unforgivable.

            • areyourllySorry9 days ago
              i think we have different definitions of e2ee.
            • 9 days ago
              undefined
        • psychoslave9 days ago
          >Telegram won the battle and Putin had no choice but to admit defeat.

          That just seems such a unreal claim. Telegram removed features like "people nearby" after its CEO was arrested in France. Who seriously believe that the kind of threats France establishment would employ on such a person could dwarf those of Russia establishment in term of bending the braves?

          • codedokode9 days ago
            You should not forget that before creating Telegram Durov was the head of VK and he left it to the government with all data, photos (including deleted ones) and messages.
        • nickpsecurity9 days ago
          I'll warn that the FBI was publicly trying to get warrants for information while they and NSA were siphoning it off in secret from the same companies. One was likely a cover for the other.

          Unless there's legal protections, assume in your threat model any company has let their host government, maybe others, backdoor their offerings. It might have been willingly or forced. Police states like U.S. and Russia should be assumed to subvert any pprovider.

          If they don't like that, they need to repeal the Patriot Act, ban requiring companies to attach black boxes to their internal systems, give companies immunity for publicly talking about court orders, require companies to disclose what data they give to the government, and let individuals know what was ordered after a period of time. Then, I might trust statements about what they do or don't share.

          Also, if these bother you, try not to commit crimes.

          • bigfatkitten9 days ago
            > I'll warn that the FBI was publicly trying to get warrants for information while they and NSA were siphoning it off in secret from the same companies. One was likely a cover for the other

            That’s a wildly ignorant take, but it makes for a nice conspiracy theory if you make no effort at all to understand the legalities.

            Different warrants authorise the collection and use of information for different purposes. FAA 702 warrants only authorise targeting non U.S. persons outside the United States for foreign intelligence purposes, where there is probable cause to believe the U.S. person is a foreign power or is an officer, employee, or agent of a foreign power.

            The FBI has criminal investigation and counterterrorism functions which relate to persons in the U.S. and/or where there is no connection to a foreign power. They obviously need different warrants to authorize those activities.

            • nickpsecurity9 days ago
              That's what they said before the Snowden leaks. The Snowden leaks and latter revelations showed they were lying.

              For example, they use a different meaning for the Word "collect." Instead of interception and storage of data, collect means an analyst looked at it. So, they technically weren't collecting U.S. citizens' data if analysts hadn't looked at that specific data yet. Technically... based on a strange definition of collect.

              They originally also said this was limited to terrorism. Later, data showed they were looking at many more crimes. They were also passing the data onto many agencies. They were told to use "parallel construction" to deceive people about how they got that data.

              Finally, BULLRUN and ECI-classified level showed they were weakening U.S. security standards, but pretending to strengthen them, so they could attack U.S. systems in secret at any time. Per "Core Secrets," they were also having U.S. companies give them backdoor the FBI could "compel" them to make (somehow).

              With all that, they were caught lying under oath repeatedly. They got criminal immunity for that, too. I don't believe one word they say at this point. I also assume they're doing the same things they repeatedly lied about before and for which they can't be prosecuted.

    • troupo9 days ago
      Unfortunately it's also the most sleek and feature-rich messenger of them all :(
      • acjohnson559 days ago
        I agree. I need to migrate off, but I haven't figured out where to yet.
      • drdaeman9 days ago
        It sort of used to be, although not exactly as a messenger - it was never good for one-to-one private conversations, but as a social network with channels and groups.

        However, for the last couple years enshittification is in progress - it's not at Microsoft Teams levels yet, but they're really trying to get there, shoving more and more ads (third- and first-party both) into users' faces with increasing frequency.

        • distances9 days ago
          What ads is Telegram showing? I can't think of any, except a peristent birthday reminder.

          I also agree with the sibling comment that Telegram is sadly the best chat app I've used not only for group chats but also for 1-to-1 chats.

          Edit: there are paid emojis or stickers too, now that I think about it.

          • codedokode9 days ago
            There is humble text ads in public channels. There is no ads in 1v1 or group chats so you probably just didn't see it.
            • distances9 days ago
              I see, I haven't seen these as I'm indeed not interested in using a chat app for public channels.
          • thunderfork9 days ago
            [dead]
        • int_19h9 days ago
          Since the protocol is actually open, you don't have to use the official client.

          I'm curious as to why you say it was "never good for one-to-one private conversations". I've been using it for this exact thing for many years, and still find it the best option currently on the market for a variety of reasons (e.g. unlike Signal it doesn't limit the number of devices which are linked to the same account).

          • jazzyjackson9 days ago
            I wasn't a telegram user for long so this may have changed but isn't the secret chat limited to device to device? So messages sent from my phone can't be decrypted by the same user account on my laptop?

            I just remember thinking, well this is dumb, and going back to Signal (Signal annoys me in other ways, requiring a single phone to be the "master" and other devices to be merely linked. I miss keybase, they had a great system including paper backups)

        • greenavocado9 days ago
          The main Telegram enshittification is caused by spammers and scammers. They purchase lots of Telegram Premium credits and proceed to spam the hell out of users and they get away with it. Telegram Premium users are treated much more leniently than regular users when it comes to moderation affairs.
    • alterom9 days ago
      [flagged]
  • duskwuff9 days ago
    The situation just got murkier: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1927839555828220165

    ("@durov @grok No deal has been signed")

    • hn_throwaway_999 days ago
      And Pavel Durov responded:

      > True. Agreed in principle, but formalities are pending.

      This is how I know I'm not cut out for business - because I just can't lie with total impunity. Like, how could you do a global, public announcement like this when there is no dry ink, and the other side obviously hasn't authorized you to announce, and feel literally zero shame ("formalities are pending", lol).

      I feel like more and more one of the biggest requirements for success in business (not to mention politics) is just total shamelessness.

      • vl9 days ago
        He is the CEO of a corporation. Let's assume Pavel and Elon had a phone call and agreed on the deal. One of them or both are entitled to announce it. Pavel Durov announced multiple deals before on his tg channel. Now it is surprising turn of events, it seems they didn't work out details to the degree implied, but calling it lying is a far stretch.
        • hn_throwaway_999 days ago
          > Let's assume Pavel and Elon had a phone call and agreed on the deal. One of them or both are entitled to announce it.

          Lol, because it was Elon himself who called out Durov's original tweet with his "no deal has been signed" response. So obviously the agreement was not agreed upon yet.

          Ironically this sounds just like Elon's infamous "funding secured" tweet. I'm tired of all these bullshitting bullshitters, and then the follow on of apologists.

          • vl9 days ago
            Obviously one of them though they had an agreement and other didn't.

            Or maybe Elon is backpedaling after being hand-slapped by US of A administration for dealing with what they potentially consider to be unfriendly social media network.

            • deepsun9 days ago
              I believe the current US of A administration considers them friendly. All dictatorships except China are "friendly" now.
      • A4ET8a8uTh0_v29 days ago
        << I feel like more and more one of the biggest requirements for success in business (not to mention politics) is just total shamelessness.

        I am going through 'Signal and Noise' by Nate Silver and, after dismissing it at first read, now I am starting to wonder if his attempt to categorize some people on how well they can predict things is onto something. The boorish bravado ( or at least a perception of it ) is clearly part of the requirement though. You simply cannot even register to people with all the noise around them.

      • meepmorp9 days ago
        It's not a lie if you (choose to) believe it!
    • dcchambers9 days ago
      For as much shit as I give Elon for Twitter and everything else, at least he's a non-stop source of entertainment.
  • game_the0ry9 days ago
    Call me stupid, but I fundamentally do not grasp why xAI would pay Telegram for access to its users. $300M seems like a crazy amount of money to put into a chat app.

    I am genuinely curious about the business strategy behind the move bc that would be a market worth exploring - having something that the AI industry would pay for bc they are willing to spend a lot right now.

    • ben_w9 days ago
      > Call me stupid, but I fundamentally do not grasp why xAI would pay Telegram for access to its users.

      Perfectly valid question.

      IMO, because xAI is the junior partner in this relationship.

      Telegram is bigger and more important than X.

      Unlike the 45 billion self-purchase price xAI paid for X, the realistic value for X is, what, 9 billion? I've heard Telegram is estimated to be in the 30-40 billion range: https://web.archive.org/web/20210323132059/https://techcrunc...

      • pier259 days ago
        TIL Telegram has like 1 billion users.
        • miohtama9 days ago
          It has more users. 1B is monthly active if I recall correctly.
    • top_sigrid9 days ago
      When OpenAI bought Windsurf a lot of the discussion was about which market and which customers they hope to get access to by that acquisition. This deal gives xAI privileged distribution among nearly a billion of users (and potentially future customers) for a magnitude less of money.

      Who will „win“ the LLM-AI race is as much undecided as is the common way to interact with them and this seems like quite a sensible bet on distribution for a huge userbase with a very specific integration into a platform. Doesn’t seem at all crazy to me.

    • cowpig9 days ago
      Seems fairly obvious that Musk's strategy is to monetize political influence, isn't it? It's just advertising but a leap darker
    • felipeerias9 days ago
      Nothing is more valuable for an AI company than exclusive access to large amounts of human-generated data.
    • rasz8 days ago
      $300M is peanuts when it comes to pumping fake valuations of AI companies. Elmo will now boast about 1.4 billion active xai users. He might even claim those are paid users, because he paid them to use his ai :D
    • z3dd9 days ago
      oh, cause telegram is not a chat app, it's Facebook of eastern Europe
      • game_the0ry9 days ago
        And how is the data of Eastern Europe as valuable as xAI is paying for it?
        • XorNot9 days ago
          AI training data is in short supply from new sources. Chat and group apps are handy for many reasons, but one obvious one is people posting images with caption text they provide basically does your image tagging for free (remember the original big image model was just a list of URLS with useful alt-text descriptions).
        • ZeroTalent9 days ago
          $300M is not a lot of money in this situation
        • alterom9 days ago
          [flagged]
      • bearjaws9 days ago
        Used pretty heavily by island nations and LATAM.
    • didibus9 days ago

          - Data to train on
          - Being the first GenAI experience of users that then might associate this stuff with xAi branding.
      • beAbU8 days ago
        Not sure I buy your second bullet.

        Windows has had copilot baked in for a while now, where genai stuff is already possible.

        Meta has their ai baked into WhatsApp, and probably into instagram as well (not sure though)

        Google is rolling out gemini on android.

        I would posit that for a majority of telegram users, xAi is just going to be "yet another AI integration" for them, and it'll be nothing novel.

        • throwaway2908 days ago
          Where is LLM in my whatsapp? Never seen it, latest version.
          • beAbU4 days ago
            On the chats tab, right above the green "+" floating button there is a "meta AI" icon on my version of WhatsApp. If you click on it it opens up a chat with the AI like normal.

            I guess they are still rolling out the feature.

    • arizen9 days ago
      Chat app with 1B+ users
    • anbr9 days ago
      intelligence gathering
      • verdverm9 days ago
        thought policing and influencing

        The value is in manipulation, not monies

    • alterom9 days ago
      [dead]
  • culebron219 days ago
    Well, as a 9-year user of Telegram, I expected some monetization and paid mode, but looks like we're going to be used otherwise, for more free cheese.
    • miohtama9 days ago
      Telegram made $500M profit at ~1.3B revenue.

      Revenue comes from ads and premium users and some minor sources.

    • herbst8 days ago
      I have a premium account as I really like the idea of just paying for the service I use.

      I highly assume that the AI will be integrated in a way that you can mostly disable it or barely notice it if you aren't looking for it, like all the other paid or special features.

      So many people never noticed stars, NFTS, a whole nft market, pay for messages, pay for groups, ... While using it ever day

    • tgv8 days ago
      I had my doubts before, but this was the proverbial drop in the bucket: I removed my account. People can still contact me via phone, sms, email, or Signal, or by just ringing at the door.
  • hintymad9 days ago
    So that means Telegram users will use XAI for free, which means it will cost xAI potentially multiple times of $300M a year to serve the Telegram users?
    • fundad9 days ago
      It looks like Telegram sold the US government a back door to users' messages.
      • herbst8 days ago
        Because you assume all messages will be relayed to AI?
    • leptons9 days ago
      "if it's free, then you are the product" applies here.
      • dist-epoch9 days ago
        Yes, this is why I switched from free Linux to paid Windows. I don't want to be the product.
        • steve_adams_869 days ago
          Linux makes you to work so hard to get it working sometimes that I can't imagine anyone would consider it free (half-joking)

          edit: at least you can get it working, though

        • mystified50169 days ago
          You're being deliberately obtuse
          • juliend29 days ago
            It's just a troll (although not valid in this context) counter-argument to the saying above.
      • npteljes8 days ago
        This is a tired, and untrue cliché. Everyone is the product, all the time.
        • SahAssar8 days ago
          Not at all true, there are many services I pay for where I am not the product.

          I also use much OSS software where I am not the product. If you disagree say why.

          • npteljes7 days ago
            In retrospect, I agree. I worded it too strongly out of emotion. "Everyone could be the product of a service, free or not" would be closer to what I think. The message being that if being a product is important to a would-be user, they should investigate in every case, because power dynamics play more of a role, than being free or not.
        • 8 days ago
          undefined
  • DisjointedHunt9 days ago
    Telegram channels are upstream of ALL text based social media and to an increasing degress, culturally upstream to many content trends as well.

    Take the war in Ukraines for example, the uncensored and real time updates you get in open Telegram channels make most intelligence agencies except for Five Eyes nations look regular.

    This deal may be much bigger than it seems off the bat. The cohort of people using Telegram to exchange content is maybe the top 5% of the world in many important niches.

  • evan_9 days ago
    The Facebook-inspired pogroms in Myanmar were a prologue to the horrors that this will incite
  • iamtheworstdev9 days ago
    the good news is that when this doesn't yield any positive results for xAI and they need a bailout then they'll get bought by Tesla, and Elon is saved once again.
    • spwa49 days ago
      Reference to:

      * https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ceqjq11202ro (xAI bought Twitter)

      * https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/01/elon-musk... (Tesla bought solarcity)

      Effectively, of course, Twitter and Solarcity went bankrupt. That's what really happened.

      I hope the CxO's at companies realize this, and so realize that Musk's big plan for Twitter ("just fire everyone, keep collecting the income") had a slightly different outcome when put into practice: fire everyone, rehire half, get publicly shamed by important people refusing to go back, bankruptcy in 2 years, 5 months. In other words, since 2022 Musk lost 5 million per day, on average, for 2.5 years.

      Let that sink in!

      • fundad9 days ago
        It wasn't about revenue, it was about a massive propaganda and surveillance apparatus.
        • spwa49 days ago
          Is that why he, and his entire management staff, were seen begging for advertisers to return ... how many times now? 5? Not sure.

          https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-begs-advertisers-re...

          Clearly it was about revenue, at least to an extent.

        • jjfoooo49 days ago
          It was about very stupidly thinking that selling subscriptions to Twitter would be more profitable than selling ads
    • JumpCrisscross9 days ago
      Given Tesla’s current prospects it seems more likely that xAI or SpaceX wind up bailing it out.
      • h27829 days ago
        This is a self-comforting argument I keep seeing all over against Tesla. Yet, their refreshed models are showing up on roads very quickly.

        Demand for Tesla isn't permanently going anywhere just to make a few new Elon haters happy. I also don't like Musk, but I am not deluding myself like so many these days that Tesla is dead. Elon is much like a roach; he will survive nuclear Armageddon.

        • JumpCrisscross9 days ago
          > not deluding myself like so many these days that Tesla is dead

          Nobody said it's dead. Just that the car part of the company, the stable part, is somewhere between being abused and neglected by Musk. While the self-driving part has no competitive advantage and the robotics part seems to have legitimate synergies with xAI.

      • rendang9 days ago
        Market seems to think pretty highly of Tesla's prospects given the 1T+ market cap
        • XorNot9 days ago
          I direct your attention to the market a few months before the 2008 crash.
  • bognition9 days ago
    I can't help but think this means that all my telegram conversations will now be fed into grok. I'm curious how I'd go about verifying that this is or isn't going to be the case.
    • egypturnash9 days ago
      I'm thinking about most of my communications on Telegram and it's kind of hilarious to imagine it suddenly starting to reply to people on Xitter with unsolicited horny furry roleplay instead of unsolicited white supremacist rants.

      Not so hilarious that it doesn't make me want to consider trying to convince all my circles to move to a community-run Matrix server or something though.

    • timewizard9 days ago
      Looks like we're at the point where it's both convenient and useful to destroy and recreate entirely new digital identities every few months.

      The only cheap way out for users is to generate noise. Clog up their systems with useless data.

    • numpad09 days ago
      Yeah, sounds like they finally accepted that tweets don't make LLM smarter, only less biased, and so they're doubling down to feed more tweet-like data to make it smart and biased.
    • mdhb9 days ago
      No I am sure the fine and morally upstanding leadership of xAI are paying $300M just for the fun of it.
    • mlinhares9 days ago
      Why wouldn't you automatically assume this is the case?
      • herbst8 days ago
        Because it's expensive and telegram already is bot traffic to a large portion (channels, bots, ...) that would be completely useless for training.
      • yladiz9 days ago
        I wouldn’t trust X or Elon Musk, and $300M is the kind of money that you can ask for a lot of things from the recipient.
        • jaoane9 days ago
          It’s not X or Elon musk that you have to trust with regards to the privacy of your telegram conversations.
          • rvnx9 days ago
            Yes it's some rich Russian dude trading with Elmo.
            • qingcharles9 days ago
              FTFY.

              Yes, it's some ̵r̵i̵c̵h̵ ̵R̵u̵s̵s̵i̵a̵n̵ ̵d̵u̵d̵e̵ ̵t̵r̵a̵d̵i̵n̵g̵ ̵w̵i̵t̵h̵ Russian president calling Elmo.

      • 9 days ago
        undefined
    • Molitor59019 days ago
      Did you have an expectation of privacy using Telegram? I think that's the real issue here. If you were paying for Telegram, then I would say yes, those conversation should not be handed over to xAI. But, if you were ostensibly not paying for it, then I think it should be assumed that use of the service is considered consent to take that and use it as they please.

      So yeah, it's almost certain that everything you ever put into Telegram is in Grok.

      • dgellow8 days ago
        That’s not at all how consent works
    • alphager9 days ago
      Seeing that telegram is clear text by default, you should consider alternatives that offer end to end encryption by default.
      • paxys9 days ago
        End-to-end encryption isn't going to help if the chatbot/data harvester is embedded in the app itself.
        • bboygravity9 days ago
          Or if the endpoints are mostly pwned by NSA at all times (Android, Windows).
      • harg9 days ago
        It's not clear text by default, it's just not end-to-end encrypted. Messages are still encrypted between client and server.

        I agree about considering alternatives though.

        • crop_rotation9 days ago
          > Messages are still encrypted between client and server.

          This is just a clever way of saying they use TLS, which I would be shocked if any mainstream app is not using.

          • malfist9 days ago
            Don't look under the hood at sms then
            • crop_rotation9 days ago
              SMS is never claiming to be E2E nor is any army of SMS defenders online talking about how some virtue of SMS is almost same as E2E. While I don't like Telegram I will happily admit it is better than SMS, but how is that an argument for anything.
            • Sohcahtoa829 days ago
              SMS isn't an app, it's a protocol that was created in 1992.
        • jazzyjackson9 days ago
          Ok so theyre plaintext on the server, encrypted in transit just means https
        • 9 days ago
          undefined
        • Spooky239 days ago
          Is the server -> FSB connection encrypted?
  • jug9 days ago
    Given the shady stuff there, sounds like a match made in heaven to be honest, haha...
    • alterom9 days ago
      [flagged]
      • slt20219 days ago
        this is actually pretty bad deal for russia. with xAI.

        US based company will get access to the messaging of all russians/ukrainians/Iranians (with soldiers being very well represented), with the ability to run NLP and identify information of great importance to the NSA/DoD/CIA.

        Imagine if AT&T routed all Americans' SMS/text messages to the Russian version of xAI, would you call this a bad deal for Russia or USA ????

      • 9 days ago
        undefined
  • dcchambers9 days ago
    The $300M "in cash and xAI equity" could turn out to not be that much money, depending on what percentage of that was equity.

    xAI recently raised at an $80B valuation and it's highly debatable if it's actually worth that...and who knows if you'd ever actually have a liquidation event.

    • fragmede9 days ago
      How do you want to define liquidation event? SpaceX employees are getting rich despite no IPO in sight.
      • dcchambers9 days ago
        Fair enough. I'm not at all familiar with SpaceX's comp but I assume they do private liquidity events/stock sales for their employees. Who knows if X/xAI will do something similar, and if outside equity holders are subject to those same rules. Far above my pay grade to figure that out.
  • sidcool9 days ago
    Every week, at least once I am added to a spam Telegram group. It was fun earlier, but now it's a nuisance.
    • lawrencejgd9 days ago
      You can change that in Settings → Privacy and security → Invitations → Select My contacts
      • Suppafly9 days ago
        >You can change that in Settings → Privacy and security → Invitations → Select My contacts

        Bizarre that that's not the default and that it's actually an option at all.

        • machomaster9 days ago
          Not bizarre at all. How else would you invite people (study group, work, etc). Especially thinking 10 years back.

          This is a sensible default for most people. If it is no more, then settings can be changed.

          • Suppafly9 days ago
            Wouldn't you first add those people as a contact?
        • herbst8 days ago
          If you use Telegram in a 100% private setting (only friends and family and private groups) you won't be invited anywhere else either.

          When your name is out there in public channels things change. Just like with an email address

        • wtk9 days ago
          driving interaction count > your peace
  • l5870uoo9y9 days ago
    If paying Apple 20 billion to be the default search engine in Safari, paying Telegram 300 million in cash and equity for access to their 1 billion monthly active users, seems like a good deal for xAI. Where else are they gonna get users at that scale?
  • miohtama9 days ago
    xAI is paying to be "the default" AI of s chat app of 1B monthly active users.

    They pay for distribution and they likely believe they can later monetise this by sheer mass, roping people in Grok or offering professional paid services.

    Telegram has in-app monetisation for 50 payment providers and more than hundred countries. They also have crypto but it is unrelated.

    Also if someone still believes into the freedom of speech, Telegram was just banned in Vietnam this week when they refused bend the knee to the government. It aligns with Musk's ideology.

  • taurath9 days ago
    This just made a whole ton of people I know on telegram (furries who make the internets go) immediately accelerate their movement off the platform. I found out about this news because of some backup signal rooms started sending notifications. They need to get ahead of the privacy implications and quickly. Furries are basically the roma of the internet at this point - what they value hasn't changed (anonymity, moderation tooling, rich expression, security) but they move on as platforms betray their original usecases. They're like the canaries for enshittification especially around privacy.
    • loopdoend9 days ago
      Where are they going?
      • taurath9 days ago
        Too early to tell - usually they'll settle on something with a balance of those main values. If matrix is truly the new IRC then perhaps that, though it doesn't seem mature enough yet and it seems like it might be costly if one needs to host non-text content. Furries contain both highly technical people and also very low-tech artists so any platform that requires a lot of maintenance can be a non-starter. Signal seems like privacy over expression. Maybe this is the time that they'll make their own.
        • Klonoar9 days ago
          Most of that crowd that I interact with was already off Telegram to begin with, and (in some cases, begrudgingly) run their own Matrix instances.

          I think if you interact with non-tech-users, Signal is the go-to; Matrix has way too many thorns for normal users to put up with in comparison to the alternatives.

        • fennecfoxy8 days ago
          As a furry: lmao no Matrix. Matrix does not get the job done at all. Profiles stored on the server you decided to join? Lots of silly design decisions.

          Also the whole "furries make the internets go" is not really that true. There are certainly many of us in tech fields but going to meets/cons the average furry is not working in technology. The whole "suspiciously wealthy furry" thing just arose from the divide between tech worker and retail worker within the community. Gotta remember that most furries are like 16-25. Many tend to drop out or leave the community over 30-40 or so.

      • Vilian9 days ago
        Signal and matrix probably
        • ben_w9 days ago
          I was about to suggest Discord, but then I checked the news and it looks like that company is also in the middle of its own mid-life crisis?
          • Vilian9 days ago
            Discord is even worse than telegram
    • herbst8 days ago
      Not a furry but before anything happens I guess we need to wait how telegram is actually going to implement it. The way it got presented, basically as additional add-on not getting in your way for normal telegram business at all I doubt it will matter.
    • culebron219 days ago
      Confirming. Discussed this in many chats today.
    • jaoane9 days ago
      [flagged]
  • JamesAdir8 days ago
    I don't understand how Telegram is still around. The app has zero support, even for paid users. You can't rely on it, and unlike Meta products, where at least there is someone to escalate to, in Telegram it's nonexistent. My account was taken over by a malicious actor, and I can't get it restored no matter how many emails and DMs on X I've sent them. Zero response
    • jadbox8 days ago
      As someone that has friends on every chat platform out there, I must say that Telegram is the most polished chat app in existence. Everything just works. I notice bugs in WhatsApp all the time, but hardly ever with Tg. Even stuff like video chat and video messages has always been reliable and fast. As a developer, the API is amazing... in 30min you can make a bot and publish it. The real shame is two fold: chats are not encrypted by default and there's so. much. bot spam on the platform. These two problems have made it my least favorite platform, even though the usage experience is the best.
      • dgellow8 days ago
        And it has been the most polished chat platform since a decade, they have been just excellent at creating a product people love to use. I really don’t want xAI, so I guess I could switch to WhatsApp, but that would be a downgrade…
    • ivm8 days ago
      Because it's the only social network that mixes blogging/feeds (channels) with anonymous chats and public groups. Most other messengers require your phone number to be exposed (although WhatsApp has been fixing it lately).
  • amadeuspagel9 days ago
    > xAI will pay $300 million in cash and equity to the chat app as part of the deal, Telegram’s CEO Pavel Durov said on Tuesday.

    So what's the valuation for that equity?

  • dawnerd9 days ago
    If this shows up in my Telegram app I'll be immediately switching. I don't want or need a harmful LLM in my chat app.
  • explain9 days ago
    This makes Telegram a very minor owner of X.
  • ARandumGuy9 days ago
    Is this the same Grok that started inserting talking points about "white genocide in South Africa" on completely unrelated queries? Even if you wanted some AI chatbot integrated with your chat app (which I personally don't), it feels like Grok is the worst one you could pick.
    • nosioptar9 days ago
      Wouldn't bullshit white power rants fit right in on telegram?
  • 9 days ago
    undefined
  • smrtinsert9 days ago
    That is absurdly low given that grok probably will be learning from the inputs. If anything this number should be in the billions. Do telegram users even want this? I thought it was privacy focused app.
    • dgellow8 days ago
      > I thought it was privacy focused app.

      Not really. It’s what people repeat over and over by ignorance, but it is popular because it has the best UX for a messaging app.

      Encrypted chats exist but are opt in and nobody is using them.

  • slt20219 days ago
    telegram is big in Russia, Ukraine, Iran.

    could be used for spying purposes, if xAI can analyze telegram chats and identify texts of interest to the next-get USA military industrial complex (SpaceX, Palantir, Anduril, etc)

  • Nerd_Nest8 days ago
    Grok in Telegram? That’s one bold move by xAI. I'm curious to see how users actually engage with it in day-to-day conversations.
  • dgellow8 days ago
    Well, I’ve been a really happy telegram user since at least 2014. If anything from xAI is forced on me I’m out asap.
  • logic_node8 days ago
    Surprised to see Grok coming to Telegram—if true, this could shake up how we interact with AI inside messaging apps.
  • afavour9 days ago
    Feels oh so telling that xAI has to pay Telegram and not the other way around. If these offerings were so great wouldn't we all be clamoring for it?
    • jsheard9 days ago
      It's the next logical step after companies shoving AI into every corner of their own products regardless of whether their users want it - now they're paying other companies to shove AI things into their products regardless of whether their users want it. Genuine user interest doesn't come close to justifying their insane valuations so they have to put their thumb on the scale by shoving it everyones face and then pretending that's the same thing.

      See also: Googles AI summaries, which always get top billing so they can tally nearly every search up as an "AI engagement" regardless of user intent, and can't be disabled because that would get in the way of what's clearly the actual goal (to juice the AI metrics as hard as possible, user experience be damned).

      • ryandrake9 days ago
        It's absolutely wild and scary watching how much money is being spent on pushing AI down the unwilling public's throats. Nobody wants this. Yet we're hiring expensive AI researchers and developers, buying datacenters full of GPUs, and now paying "partner" companies, to deliver this thing that nobody is asking for. What in the world is going on here? What am I not understanding?
        • Disposal84339 days ago
          > What in the world is going on here? What am I not understanding?

          I don't think you're wrong in any way. I've been in denial for the past few years because the world is going crazy with AI and politics. But it's actually very good for me because I'm shunning all that shit and I focus on local people and local problems more: taking care of the finances of a non-profit, being more available for my friends and relatives, solving actual problems that people may have, etc. Denial is great and it makes more active. The downside is that I now have the calendar of a CEO and less time for me, but I believe the world need some care and we all can do something about it by doing small stuff.

        • rchaud9 days ago
          What's not to understand? Enormous amounts of money have accrued to a tiny proportion of humanity in the past 30 or so years. There is no way there wouldn't be tons of waste when spending decisions are made by so few people.

          Now add in the fact that these decision makers are often openly avaricious egomaniacs who don't even make symbolic efforts help the poor and vulnerable, that narrows the scope of their spending to wasteful, sometimes outright harmful investments.

          • andrekandre9 days ago

              > Enormous amounts of money have accrued to a tiny proportion of humanity in the past 30 or so years. There is no way there wouldn't be tons of waste when spending decisions are made by so few people.
            
            the other issue with that isn't just the decision making but the fact so much capital is accruing at the top they have nowhere else to put it all, meanwhile average people are struggling to pay rent and buy food...
          • pessimizer9 days ago
            > Enormous amounts of money have accrued to a tiny proportion of humanity in the past 30 or so years.

            30 or so? So Reagan and Bush I somehow get a pass? It's literally still the same people and their stupid children.

            • rchaud9 days ago
              Reaganism set the wheels in motion but those wheels didn't actually come off until events like the dotcom boom normalized billion dollar valuations for half baked MVPs, creating a generation of future nutters like Thiel, Bezos, Zuck and Musk. Things accelerated even further with zero interest rate policy post-2008, making capital free for this "job creator" class while working people were charged "market rates" for home and education loans.
        • overfeed9 days ago
          FOMO. Everyone is trying to landgrab as much territory as possible with the hope of piles and piles of money in the future.

          What looks like irrational exuberance to sceptics is a perfectly reasonable attempt to not miss out on the next "iPhone moment" by the believers.

          • ryandrake9 days ago
            But the land they're grabbing is desert with no water and no access roads. Does anyone besides the few with their wealth invested in AI believe that AI is the next iPhone moment?
            • overfeed9 days ago
              > Does anyone besides the few with their wealth invested in AI believe that AI is the next iPhone moment?

              It doesn't matter because for such an industry-wide hype, there are no consequences for being wrong. If a CEO ignores AI and it does become the next iPhone moment, they'll be deposed in short order. If "everyone" is wrong and nothing comes off AI, they'll write off some investments, write some "What we learned" LinkedIn posts, and carry on. Our existing framework has no incentives to correct or innoculate agaisnt hypes led by the management/capital classes

        • theideaofcoffee9 days ago
          I think it’s probably as simple as some old fool on Sand Hill Rd got suckered into writing a check for this nonsense with promises of world domination by AI’s promised infinite profit with minimal cost. And to keep the whole charade going, everyone has to pretend that this will eventually see some returns otherwise the whole farcical system will come crashing down. We can only hope that happens and some correction rears its head.

          The end result being all of us suffers in some way for the greed of a handful.

      • babypuncher9 days ago
        The corporate world is overrun with executives designing products that look like solutions to other executives but that don't solve any problems problems people in the real world actually have.

        It is funny seing xAI, the trash-tier AI company, integrate with Telegram, the trash-tier messaging service.

        • andrekandre9 days ago

            > products that look like solutions to other executives but that don't solve any problems problems people in the real world
          
          intuitively, this looks like the root cause of enshitification imo... but idk maybe its something else...
          • runlevel18 days ago
            Enshitification is often a company-wide culture problem, but the fish does rot from the head.

            There are a variety of reasons why a company might begin to over-incentivize short-term gain (or high-stakes risk-taking) at the expense of customer happiness and possibly to the detriment of the company's long-term interests.

            For example: Growth stagnation, an existential threat, a pessimistic long-term financial outlook, bad reward structure, low customer regard, organizational infighting, low employee retention, etc.

            The sudden emergence of AI and volatile economy are triggering several of those for a boat load of companies. And, well, show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome.

      • seanhunter9 days ago
        Example: Since this deal was cash + equity I wondered whether telegram has a public valuation. I searched google and got an AI summary saying that the market capitalization of TELEGRAM is $7.4767.

        That's dollars not billion dollars, because google's AI summary was referring to some scam coin which has a total marketcap of a big mac and fries plus or minus. It seems now to have updated to refer to the messaging app and _their_ (probably also scam)coin.

      • fhd29 days ago
        Well, there's -ai for Google.

        I do take some grim satisfaction from having Google pay for inference and then ignoring it though.

        • desdenova9 days ago
          The models that run the search overview slop are probably some shitty 1B models running as cheaply as possible.
        • FredPret9 days ago
          If they invest in nuclear stations, they may get AI slop "too cheap to meter"
      • luma9 days ago
        xAI has essentially zero market outside of twitter, and with recent system prompt shenanigans from Elon, I cannot imagine anyone signing up to pay for API hits when there's a non-zero chance your application will suddenly start complaining about white genocide. They're painted themselves into a corner with the product and Elon's increasingly erratic behavior, they now have to pay companies to use their service.
        • cheema339 days ago
          > xAI has essentially zero market outside of twitter

          I suspect some MAGA use it.

          • luma9 days ago
            Are they paying for API hits and developing application stacks around the service? It's clear who uses it, it's a lot less clear who might be willing to pay for it.
      • FirmwareBurner9 days ago
        >Googles AI summaries, which are pinned to the top of results and can't be disabled

        You CAN disable them. Append -ai to your Google search query. You're welcome.

        Edit: curious why are people downvoting a helpful workaround?

        • Evidlo9 days ago
          Or use this search URL: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=%s&udm=...

          Firefox: `Edit > Settings > Search > Add`, then set as default

          This also disables Google's automatic product search mode that sometimes triggers.

        • input_sh9 days ago
          That's not disabling it, that's a funky workaround that happens to work for now.
        • frabcus9 days ago
          Because it isn't disabling them - that would be an option to actually disable them.

          Of course there are hacks round it, but ultimately Google want us to have the AI summaries, don't care about user choice, and the best course of action is to change search engine.

        • rcoveson9 days ago
          Huge oversight by Google. Now they're going to have to invent some other way to indicate that you want to show hidden search results and inodes.
        • Arnavion9 days ago
          Wonder if DDG can be convinced to append that automatically for !g queries...
          • blibble9 days ago
            I've got a violentmonkey script to redirect any google.com query to the non-AI version

            (unfortunately not on this PC else I'd paste it)

        • dowager_dan999 days ago
          or instead of searching for "best dog breeds for apartments" change it to "best f'in dog breeds for tiny s-hole apartments" - feels much more cathartic
          • floren9 days ago
            You can say "fucking" and "shit" on HN
      • enceladus069 days ago
        Just like the Google+ days.
      • bobxmax9 days ago
        We've seen multiple companies in the last twelve months blast past any past benchmark of fastest growing company ever. It's become pedestrian for some of these companies to scale to $10m ARR in a quarter which has never happened before.

        "Genuine user interest doesn't come close to justifying their insane valuations" - classic HN copium

        • dragonwriter9 days ago
          > We've seen multiple companies in the last twelve months blast past any past benchmark of fastest growing company ever.

          So tonight I'm gonna party like it's 1999

          • bobxmax9 days ago
            No, dot com companies were famous for soaring valuations that WEREN'T revenue generating. Learn your history.
        • hwillis9 days ago
          You sound like a Madoff investor
          • bobxmax9 days ago
            I don't think you know what Madoff did.
    • Tycho9 days ago
      Same as OpenAI paying Apple to integrate ChatGPT with Siri/iPhone.

      Apple has the users. As does Telegram. Of course, non-paying users are a loss-leader, but some portion of them will convert to premium users.

      They’re paying for distribution. And maybe mindshare.

      • Handy-Man9 days ago
        OpenAI is not paying Apple though. Only money exchange that happens is the cut Apple takes of the subscriptions.
        • hu39 days ago
          Could you share a source for the OpenAI deal?

          What I could find is that iPhone users get it for free regardless:

          https://openai.com/index/openai-and-apple-announce-partnersh...

          > The ChatGPT integration, powered by GPT‑4o, will come to iOS, iPadOS, and macOS later this year. Users can access it for free without creating an account, and ChatGPT subscribers can connect their accounts and access paid features right from these experiences.

        • Tycho9 days ago
          But then I suppose it’s also payment-in-kind if they are serving the (non-premium) iPhone requests for free.
      • MaxPock9 days ago
        Or Google paying Apple 20 billion dollars to be the default search engine in Apple devices
      • alterom9 days ago
        [flagged]
        • abrahadabra9 days ago
          Durov is also a citizen of France and the UAE.
          • alterom8 days ago
            And as long he's still a Russian citizen that regularly travels to Russia, that matters not in the slightest.
    • bognition9 days ago
      Models are only as good as the data that is fed into them. OpenAI is paying Reddit 70M for access to the data. So the real value here is the conversations, not the model.

      And in the case of Telegram, you will get very intimate data about people. You know in real time who they are talking to, what they are talking about, etc... Its extremely valuable data

      • jermaustin19 days ago
        I think this is more the case. xAI is looking for more data to ingest.

        I'm not sure how the integration will work with Telegram if the contents are supposed to be "secure". Are you just allowing your conversation to get exfiltrated to xAI? Does the other party you are talking to get a say in that?

      • jpalomaki9 days ago
        In certain countries Telegram channels also seem to be a very popular news source.

        Just with access to the feeds from X, Grok is already sometimes quite handy for checking some latest developments.

    • smeeth9 days ago
      I don't like Grok that much, but there's nothing particularly new or interesting about this deal. Telegram has a big international audience, it makes sense someone would pay to be the default for user adoption reasons.

      "Feels oh so telling that Google has to pay Apple and not the other way around. If Google search was so great wouldn't we all be clamoring for it to be the default search in Safari?"

      • rurp9 days ago
        The Google Search deal seems like a much more defensible business decision to me for a couple reasons. For starters Google gets revenue almost every single time that search integration is used so there is a direct return on the investment. What's the conversion rate for a paid Grok account? It might turn out to be terribly low and $300M is a substantial amount of money. I doubt a normal company without Elon's vast wealth network that needs to actually make money would gamble on a deal like this.

        The other reason is that the Apple deal is a big part of maintaining Google's search monopoly. Owning a tech monopoly is vastly more valuable than competing in a crowded market so locking down market share to achieve that can be worth spending more per user than their median value. Grok isn't even in the ballpark of an LLM monopoly so those benefits don't apply in their case.

      • nemomarx9 days ago
        people go out of their way to install chrome but don't go out of their way to change away from Bing search as much, su that seems correct to me.
      • croes9 days ago
        Google does it to hinder competition, so it is telling.
    • linkage9 days ago
      No matter how good your offering is, you always need marketing if you are competing against an established behemoth in the space like OpenAI. Even Google has been unable to make much of a dent in OpenAI's daily active users despite having superior distribution and (recently) comparable quality.

      Grok 3 is legitimately one of the best general purpose models out there. People don't know about it because ChatGPT is "good enough". And people have no reason to care unless Grok 3 is 5x better or ships a feature that goes viral like Ghibli portraits.

      • afavour9 days ago
        $300m could buy you a hell of a lot of marketing, no? Then people could choose to use your product rather than be forced to.

        We’re side stepping the elephant in the room: X/xAI/Musk’s brand is toxic and forcing the product onto users is one of few paths available.

        • smeeth9 days ago
          It did buy them a hell of a lot of marketing, Telegram has a billion users and those users are mostly in countries where Musk's brand isn't as toxic.
          • overfeed9 days ago
            Telegram is ostensibly a competitor if you buy into Musk's pitch for X as an "everything app". Paying Telegram $300M instead of developing chat features and/or marketing proves that plans for the "everything app" are dead in the water, or perhaps were never sincere from the get go.
          • mrweasel9 days ago
            It's honestly a good fit. Telegram also doesn't have the best image, but people don't care, so it's highly likely that they also don't care about the image of XAI or Musk.

            I do struggle with the 1 billion users, but I also don't believe that X has 600 million users actual users.

          • kjkjadksj9 days ago
            You really believe 1/8th of the world is on telegram?
        • mattstir9 days ago
          We'll have to see how privacy is handled (whether you can opt out of it suckling on every one of your personal conversations) but assuming some baseline decency from Telegram, I don't think anyone would be "forced" to use it.

          > We’re side stepping the elephant in the room: X/xAI/Musk’s brand is toxic and forcing the product onto users is one of few paths available

          This statement is baking in a lot of personal convictions, even if they feel self-evident. Telegram has a billion users and not everyone one of them will share those views. This setup is a lot closer to Google paying Apple and Mozilla to be the default search engine than some desperate attempt to get people to play with your toys.

        • MangoCoffee9 days ago
          >$300m could buy you a hell of a lot of marketing, no?

          a quick google search shown Telegram have 1 billion users worldwide.

          >X/xAI/Musk’s brand is toxic

          Is it?

          • input_sh9 days ago
            > Is it?

            Yes.

            • andrewinardeer9 days ago
              I know my experience is anecdotal, however, I know at least three people at my workplace who have said in our Slack channel they will never, ever but a Tesla because of Musk's antics while typing it using a Statlink connection.
              • overfeed9 days ago
                It sounds like they'll buy an alternative product when one is available. Tesla, X, and xAI all have multiple viable alternatives - superior alternatives even. That's not yet the case for Starlink in many locations[0], but in 5-10 years, your colleague may be using an Amazon Kuiper, One World, Garmin[1], or Apple[1] connection.

                0. Symmetric gigabit fiber Internet remains the gold standard, where one can get it, but unfortunately that's not many places.

                1. I hope these companies are at least looking into doing these, as it's adjacent to their current products.

      • saubeidl9 days ago
        Grok3 could be leagues ahead of anything else in the game and yet a large portion of the western population would never use it due to its owners antics.
        • fourseventy9 days ago
          Most people have no idea who the CEO of the various tech companies are and don't care.
          • afavour9 days ago
            True, but Musk is an exception. And deliberately so, his media image was one of the things that made Tesla so notable. But we’re seeing recently that it goes both ways.
            • overfeed9 days ago
              Musk was the PR, press and Marketing departments rolled into one for Tesla and X, so much so that he fired the PR team at Twitter.

              "The public doesn't care who the CEO is" is certifiably not true for Musk ventures, and Musk exploited that brand value in the past positively. The inauguration Seig Heil, and the subsequent DOGE misadventures are the other side of that "personal brand" coin, which very much exists for this CEO.

            • drivingmenuts9 days ago
              It's maddening that everyone seems to just overlook the whole neo-Nazi supporter bit.
          • saubeidl9 days ago
            I don't think that's true. Pretty much everyone knows that Twitter is owned by the guy who gives Nazi salutes and supports far right parties abroad.
        • stackedinserter9 days ago
          Don't overestimate the size of that portion.
          • saubeidl9 days ago
            • abletonlive9 days ago
              It’s fair to underestimate it when Tesla is still the dominant fully EV automaker globally and in all the markets that this article talks about.
              • seangrogg9 days ago
                By what metric(s)? Not being disingenuous, purely curious.
                • abletonlive9 days ago
                  By number of fully EV sold each quarter. Take out hybrids from the metric because Tesla does not make hybrids
                  • ascorbic9 days ago
                    Don't underestimate how far they've fallen. Tesla is nowhere near the top in Europe anymore. VW sold three times as many EVs as Tesla, with BYD in second place.

                    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-just-got-overtaken-euro...

                    • abletonlive9 days ago
                      This is wrong and I would encourage you to check your sources or look into the industry more before posting a blind yahoo article that was clearly written by AI.

                      VW did not sell three times as many EVs as Tesla. https://www.carscoops.com/2025/04/vw-finally-beats-tesla-out...

                      In many of the comparisons, they try to make it more dramatic than it really is by saying volkswagen as an entire brand sold X more than tesla. Well of course they did, they sell hybrids and ICE vehicles too.

                      > Tesla is nowhere near the top in Europe anymore.

                      This is factually incorrect. They are #2 overall BEV sales in europe for Q1 2025 and also own #1 and #2 spots for best selling BEV models.

                      I would expect such a low quality comment from reddit, not HN, but alas here we are in 2025.

                      And additional reminder for folks that have an axe to grind that perhaps clouds their judgement of reality: when you've dominated the BEV market for almost 10 years, going sideways and down in marketshare is pretty much the only option.

                      • seangrogg9 days ago
                        Definitely makes sense that if they are a market leader for an extended period of time they would expect to trade sideways; my question is whether or not Tesla is expected to come out stronger as a growth company in the upcoming quarters (i.e. their recent talks of doing robotaxi work; are investors seeing that as a serious growth angle?) or should Tesla begin investigating an income/dividend stock angle?
                  • seangrogg9 days ago
                    Valid. And I do think they'll continue to own the lion's share of total sales for a while. But is there any concern over their being down YOY for Q1 while other manufacturers are largely growing? Or is the expectation that it's a temporary blip and they'll continue growing in the upcoming quarters from previous YOY numbers?
                    • overfeed9 days ago
                      > And I do think they'll continue to own the lion's share of total sales for a while

                      Maybe in the US where they are protected from Chinese competition. Tesla's fall in Europe has been precipitous, falling by more than 50% YoY. BYD sales overtook Tesla for the first time ever in the last quarter in Western Europe.

      • oblio9 days ago
        Don't bet against Google. Their cloud is growing despite coming from 4th or 5th place, now it's on 3rd place and growing faster than AWS and if I recall correctly, faster than even Azure.

        And Google basically invented LLM tech.

      • theijcfj47744l9 days ago
        This is mostly a HCI problem - Google's AI interface for eg. is horrible, but Perplexity is a joy to use.
      • Spooky239 days ago
        It’s pretty good. I think it seems better especially early on because the guardrails aren’t as stringent.

        ChatGPT is really wussified. I tried to edit a fence from a picture of my son hitting a baseball and it was flagged as violent content.

        From a business context, i wouldn’t put my customers data anywhere near grok.

      • Hikikomori9 days ago
        Tech fascists have the best ai, great.
      • reverendsteveii9 days ago
        I honestly don't care about the technical capabilities of the tool when I know it's being actively mismanaged.

        Incidentally, have you got a moment to talk about the white genocide in south africa?

        • zo19 days ago
          > "Incidentally, have you got a moment to talk about the white genocide in south africa?"

          Is this some sort of joke, or are you genuinely wanting to discuss what's happening here in South Africa?

          If it's a joke, I think it's in very poor taste at the expense of a persecuted minority. I have seen it, experienced it, and know full well how real it is, no matter how much social-media pushes it one way or the other.

          • afavour9 days ago
            Musk’s AI Grok bot rants about ‘white genocide’ in South Africa in unrelated chats

            https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/may/14/elon-musk...

            OP is using it as an example of mismanagement.

            • loopdoend9 days ago
              Didn't someone discover the entire system prompt also?
          • reverendsteveii9 days ago
            [flagged]
            • FredPret9 days ago
              > you can relax your grip on your pearls.

              Not the most polite way to discuss a genocide, or at the very least an absolutely dire situation.

              • alterom9 days ago
                >Not the most polite way to discuss a genocide, or at the very least an absolutely dire situation.

                It's as polite way as using the word genocide to describe the experience of white people in South Africa today merits.

                I can only reiterate the parent's recommendation to you.

                • FredPret9 days ago
                  Here's Genocide Watch's take: https://www.genocidewatch.com/tenstages

                  Stages currently active in SA: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6. Some people claim that the high murder rate among white SA'ns means they're also in stage 8/9, but actually the murder rate among black SA'ns is even higher.

                  There's no genocide, but there's a whole lot of red flags and generally terrible things. Just because Trump believes something does not make it wrong.

                  From elsewhere on that site: "Dr. Gregory Stanton, Founding President of Genocide Watch, warned that early warnings of genocide are still deep in South African society, though genocide has not begun."

                  There are countless examples of early warnings. Here are a couple:

                  - Former president of SA sings "bring my machine gun" song at ruling party conference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFIobjP3xAI

                  - Same guy singing "kill the Boer": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JNc7SLUE1g

                  Many similar statements have been made by other politicians, among them Julius Malema, who collectively represent a large part of SA's population, over the course of many years.

                  Don't respond to something like this with a flippant statement about clutching your pearls.

                  • hnfever9 days ago
                    >Stages currently active in SA: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6.

                    Actually, genocide watch says only stage 6 is present in SA. https://www.genocidewatch.com/country-pages/south-africa

                    For comparison they list 3 different signs for an active genocide against black americans.

                    • FredPret9 days ago
                      You need to make your way through 1-5 to get to 6, but I specifically excluded 5 (organization of militias).

                      There are rumours of this but if it's true, these militias must be very secret indeed.

                      One problem is that violent criminals run rampant and the state seemingly has little desire to stop them, and zero capacity to do so. Meanwhile prominent politicians sing songs whose lyrics include machine gun sounds and calls for the murder of whites.

                      Parallel to this, there are job restrictions limiting the maximum number of whites companies may employ or promote. Franchises limit the number of white owners. White business owners are strong-armed through law and government contracts to give up some of their equity. There's regular talk about seizing white-owned property.

                      Whatever label you want to put on all that, I think the it's fucked up.

                      The worst part is, the average poor black South African is innocent in all this and now has to live in a place with a spiraling economy, power & water outages, even worse crime than the whites have to face, terrible standards of education, and much more.

                      • hnfever9 days ago
                        >You need to make your way through 1-5 to get to 6

                        This isn't true. As the genocide watch page says "The process is not linear."

                        White South Africans are less likely to be victims of crime, make more money, live longer, and are over-represented among corporate and political leadership. Taking steps to undo the damage done by apartheid isn't fucked up, it's necessary as evidenced by the aforementioned inequalities.

                        • FredPret9 days ago
                          And I'm telling you that 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 are the ones that are active right now.

                          > "Taking steps to undo the damage ... it's necessary"

                          What a bullshit argument.

                          How does any of that help "undo" the damage done by apartheid? The government of SA prizes ideology over outcome. The ideology is to attack Western things, even if the outcome is that black South Africans are now very much worse off than they would've been if SA was thriving.

                          And to cite this as a defence for the abuses and outrages that has literally landed white SA'ns - despite their relative wealth - on a genocide watch.

                          • hnfever9 days ago
                            >And I'm telling you that 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 are the ones that are active right now.

                            I trust genocide watch more than you to determine which of the genocide watch stages of genocide are underway,

                            >How does any of that help "undo" the damage done by apartheid?

                            White South Africans make up 8% of the population but own 72% of farmland. This is a direct result of apartheid and colonial racism more broadly. Expropriating some of this land and returning it to black South Africans is directly undoing this damage.

                  • alterom9 days ago
                    >There's no genocide

                    Thank you. This is all that needs to be said on this subject.

                    The word genocide does not mean "a lot of red flags and generally terrible things", nor was it made to describe that.

                    >Don't respond to something like this with a flippant statement about clutching your pearls.

                    Don't clutch pearls then.

                    As long as you keep abusing the word "genocide" to apply it to the plight of white people in South Africa, you'll get the response you think is flippant, and I consider to be insufficiently stern given the harm and disrespect of such usage.

                    Saying this as a Jew whose family members were killed by the Nazis during WW2, by the way.

                    They were KIA as soldiers, so I'm hesitant to label them as victims of genocide, even though they were certainly the target of it — out of respect both to them, and those who didn't get a chance to die fighting.

                    You don't get to call a demand for respect flippant.

                    • FredPret9 days ago
                      > Thank you. This is all that needs to be said on this subject.

                      No? There are tons of completely insane things happening in SA, and much that needs to be said and done. If you're saying the minimum threshold for caring about what happens in other countries is actual genocide, then I disagree with you.

                      People have been incorrectly calling this a genocide for a long time, which is why the PDF from Genocide Watch dates back to 2015.

                      On the right you have people trying to make this even worse than it is, and on the left you have people trying to ignore it, or minimize it.

                      • alterom9 days ago
                        >There are tons of completely insane things happening in SA, and much that needs to be said and done. If you're saying the minimum threshold for caring about what happens in other countries is actual genocide, then I disagree with you.

                        I'm not saying that.

                        The subject at hand is whether there's a "white genocide" taking place, and that subject is summed up in a single word: no.

                        >People have been incorrectly calling this a genocide for a long time

                        Which is why it's important to not perputate this harmful falsehood any further.

                        >on the left you have people trying to ignore it, or minimize it.

                        By using the term genocide where it's not applicable, you're actively minimizing the actual genocides that have taken place (or are taking place) — and by extension, you're complicit in minimizing the very issue you're discussing.

                        See, we both agree that whatever is taking place in South Africa is not as bad as an actual genocide.

                        But by using the word "genocide" in conjunction with it, you're diluting the meaning of the word reserved for the absolute extreme — you're helping spread the notion that genocide doesn't have to be that bad; that "red flags and terrible things" fits under the something sort of kind of like genocide label.

                        What we have in the end is the parable of the boy who cried genocide [1].

                        The point of the parable isn't that there's no threat of a wolf attack, nor that is shouldn't be seriously considered.

                        [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf

    • 98codes9 days ago
      AI models being "sold" into apps is the new version of Google paying to be the default search in web browsers.

      Main difference now is that the worst version is the only one being sold.

      • asadotzler9 days ago
        Main difference is Google was paying a rev share, so both parties make bank off the deal, mostly Google. Here, there is no shared interest, just one company taking money from another for distribution with no financial return. Neither company has any incentive to make it work well.
    • aresant9 days ago
      Not sure that's the right way to look at it

      Premium Telegram users get to try for free, will move to a subscription model

      Telegram has 12m premium users up from 4m in 2023, and 1b+ users

      Not unreasonable to think a 5% take rate from just premium users at say $10/month extra

      Which - at 50% revenue share to GROK - would be a ~$36m a year run rate for Grok

      At $36m in this category of AI SaaS that's something like $400 - 500m in enterprise value out of the box

    • msgodel9 days ago
      Language models should all converge to something that's more or less identical. They're commodities.

      The hype bubble might mean they're commodities with a negative price for a little while.

    • bastardoperator9 days ago
      This type of legalized data exfiltration doesn't come cheap.
    • johnfn9 days ago
      Google paid Mozilla XB to keep Google as the default search engine, and Apple XXB. Does that mean that Google wasn't a good product?
      • mrguyorama9 days ago
        Google didn't have to pay anyone back in 1999 or early 2000s.

        Google paying Mozilla and Apple to be the "standard" search engine absolutely means it is a bad product. IMO it's purely anticompetitive too, but I'm a competitive market radical.

        I feel similarly for how chrome didn't win by being "good", it won by being bundled, and by putting one click "Hey hey click here" buttons on google.com.

      • dughnut9 days ago
        Yes
    • sidcool9 days ago
      It's like Google paying Apple. Doesn't mean Google is bad, just means it needs the traffic and Apple has the reach.
      • asadotzler9 days ago
        Google pays a rev share on the return it gets from the deal. This isn't pay and cross your fingers child's play here. Google makes most of the money for search transactions that click ads and the distributor, Apple, makes a small fraction of that for providing the search access points. Where's xAI's lucrative return here? Where's their 80:20 split?
        • sidcool9 days ago
          Eye balls, DAU and SuperGrok subscription. Also, data. It's a smart move. Also helps to get integration between X and Telegram.
    • pjc509 days ago
      Time for some no-evidence conspiracy theory: the API-based "AI"s are surveillance vectors, so this is just cover for running all your conversations through a tool to determine which ones to report to which authorities.

      (while in theory they can be run locally, in practice this is rare)

    • huevosabio9 days ago
      Depends on the monetization strategy.

      Google pays Apple a ton to be the search engine.

      But yea, if xAI isn't going for ads, this is a pretty bad sign.

    • bobxmax9 days ago
      Or, y'know, there's a lot of AI vendors and Telegram doesn't need to pay for it because they have something to offer.

      Hacker news users will consistently use the dumbest arguments to try and poo-poo AI.

    • dmix9 days ago
      How is it different than Google paying Firefox?
      • nitwit0059 days ago
        Most users would probably use Google by default if forced to pick on install. Google is effectively paying so that their competitors like Microsoft won't sign their own deal and become the default Firefox search instead.
      • hirako20009 days ago
        That's different as X is buying a form of exclusivity there.

        Paying a browser to become the default search engine is just to serve first. And, there is the argument users are not asking for, nor want Ai features, I bet most don't want it. They just want to chat, with humans that is.

        They are inserting Ai everywhere they can, not to rank up their product as the kind of product people are looking for, against those of the competitors.

        A browser without a default search engine is a downgrade for everyone. Although it would be more ethical if it simply prompted for which to default to. One could point at it and see an issue, but that's pretty different.

    • fallingknife9 days ago
      Doesn't feel much different than Google paying for being the default in browsers
      • swyx9 days ago
        i get what youre saying but there are impt differences:

        1) search is much cheaper to serve than chat

        2) chat is a less frequent usecase

        3) google paid for entry into a locked ecosystem (apple. also to appear like they are not a monopoly). telegram is far from locked.

        • fhd29 days ago
          4) Search already has working monetisation through ads. They can acquire users at profit, as opposed to at a loss.
        • guywithahat9 days ago
          Yeah but chat results in paid subscriptions and it disincentives telegram from creating their own AI chat. Google also pays for most browsers and other ecosystems which aren't really considered "locked"
        • 9 days ago
          undefined
      • toomuchtodo9 days ago
        No different. It is an attempt to prime the pump to stoke valuations. The product is the stock price go up, the illusion of value creation is the work. "Please Use."

        If people aren't paying for it, and you have to pay them to use it, what is the value? Russ Hanneman Silicon Valley pre revenue rant meme here

    • antisthenes9 days ago
      I think this deal is more xAI buying advertising for Grok in Telegram.
    • mylons9 days ago
      it's quite possible many model producers are trying to do this with telegram, and therefore there is a price for exclusivity?
    • apercu9 days ago
      Completely agree, but another way to look at it is that Elmo is using someone else's money anyway...
    • xyst9 days ago
      It’s training data. That’s all that Felon wants.
    • moralestapia9 days ago
      Flawed logic.

      Google pays Mozilla for a spot in Firefox.

      • asadotzler9 days ago
        Google pays Mozilla a fraction of the money Goggle makes from ad clicks driven by Firefox, a revenue sharing agreement. Where's xAI's 80:20 split here? Where's the default AI interface in Telegram that users would fill with some other AI service if Telegram wasn't getting paid for the distribution? Where's the user expectation of AI in the product in the first place.

        This is nothing like the Google Mozilla (or Googlge Apple or Google whoever) deal.

        • moralestapia9 days ago
          *sigh*

          Let's see if this helps you grasp it ...

          "Feels oh so telling that Google has to pay Mozilla and not the other way around. If these offerings were so great wouldn't we all be clamoring for it?"

    • abletonlive9 days ago
      Please tell us what you believe this is telling us. You’ve left it up to interpretation and this feels more like a Reddit quality comment than one that the hackernews community deserves.

      In my opinion, it’s telling us that competition in the LLM space is accelerating and it’s anybody’s game right now. It’s important enough of a space that companies are willing to pay for exposure and squeeze out the competition.

      I’ve interpreted your comment as “llm has no value so the providers are paying for people to use it”, which is, naive at best

      • diggan9 days ago
        > “llm has no value so the providers are paying for people to use it”,

        I feel like for that to have been even possible to understand from that comment, then "not the other way around" couldn't have been there. If authors opinion was that LLMs has no value, why'd Telegram pay to use Grok?

        Maybe I'm just used to reading between the lines, but I think parents comment strike a fine balance between saying too much, saying enough and saying too little. It's understandable what they mean, if you read the full comment. Not everything has to be explicitly spelled out for the lowest common denominator.

        • abletonlive9 days ago
          They pretty much did say “not the other way around” with

          “If these offerings were so great wouldn't we all be clamoring for it?”

          The entire question is flawed. It’s a rhetorical question and the implication is “these offerings are not so great and we aren’t clamoring for it”.

          I’d argue we are clamoring for it, and we have a lot of options here and they are all great options.

          But since the rhetorical question is flawed you now have nothing to anchor on to know exactly what OP meant because if they are flawed here that means whatever they meant in the first half of the comment is also likely flawed.

          Maybe you’re not as good at reading between the lines, or the line in general, as much as you think you are and you’re actually the LCD that would be served by a deeper comment.

          The whole point of the comment is that it is “telling” of something but the commenter at this point could come back and basically go in any direction. That’s an indication the comment is not saying enough…

      • sefrost9 days ago
        That's an interesting way of looking at it thanks for sharing. In that way it's similar to Google paying to be the default search engine in Firefox or on iOS. They _did_ have the best search engine at the time but they still paid platforms to have it embedded as a default option.
  • animitronix9 days ago
    If your llm is so unpopular that you have to pay people to use it, you should probably just stop
  • thewileyone4 days ago
    Time to delete Telegram
  • seydor9 days ago
    if people don't want to use the AI it means the AI is not useful or interesting enough. paying 300M won't really move the needle in that. Now , if they actually paid the users to use it ... who knows
  • 9 days ago
    undefined
  • 9 days ago
    undefined
  • fennecfoxy8 days ago
    As a furry: nooooooooooooooo. Please God, no!
    • theasisa8 days ago
      If anything this will make text written by Grok easily identifiable by the constant yiffing
      • fennecfoxy7 days ago
        Contrary to popular belief that's not really so much a thing. Even back in the day RP was only vaguely popular with a portion of the community. Most furries don't have sex in fursuit, only some.

        Otherwise it's not yiffing, it's just sex. Probably more prevalent among furries given that we have a higher ratio of queer people than wider society, and we're all mostly more open about sex. Straight non-furs are comparatively Catholic in their relations.

  • phillipcarter9 days ago
    Sad to say this as a formerly happy user of telegram:

    Boy that tracks. The shadiest AI model provider paying the shadiest chat app provider to integrate the racist slop machine into the scam and CSAM distribution machine.

    xAI engineers, I genuinely hope you get the bag soon and switch jobs back into a reputable AI lab.

    • rchaud9 days ago
      Out of interest, why were you using telegram to begin with, considering that it's known for being a haven of shady content? Not just hate groups and paramilitaries, but also tons of pirated content? All that content browsed gets linked back to your phone number does it not?
      • phillipcarter9 days ago
        It was a reasonable messaging app for a lot of folks in ~2013-2016. The stickers support was excellent and it had a lot of excellent features, even though its psuedo-open source stance was always a little weird. I also ascribed some level of trust to Pavel Durov as ultimately being anti-authoritarian given his history with Putin and thought that was ... fine, I guess. Anyways, with the rise of crypto came a lot of other unsavory things where Telegram became the de facto comms platform for criminals. While criminals will use any medium, it's also a matter of critical mass to me.
      • int_19h9 days ago
        Not OP, but Telegram is the only popular option with E2EE that has good clients across all desktop and mobile OSes (including Linux), doesn't tie your account to your phone number, and doesn't limit the number of devices which can use the same account.
  • bibinou9 days ago
    @grok: is this true?
  • _ink_9 days ago
    That might be finally a reason for my friends to leave that app.
    • Klonoar9 days ago
      I spent half an hour dealing with a group I’m in getting off the platform today. Frustratingly, the majority wanted iMessage.

      I’d prefer Signal but the story for backups on iOS is still a mess, and nobody wants to deal with it.

  • rgavuliak8 days ago
    Since Grok is too left leaning despite all of Musk's efforts, he needs to get in some more training data that has an alt-right conspiracy bias.
  • anonzzzies9 days ago
    As I said before here recently; I am replacing all my tooling by stuff I built and that includes chat. I own my company so my colleagues can leave or use it too (they help me build so yes, they will use) and family will come on board if they have a side access to people who won't, which we do: we integrate other chats and for those we losen the rules. I have no interest, when I die in 40 years, to depend on even one line of software not inspected by me.
  • 9 days ago
    undefined
  • EastSmith9 days ago
    "No deal has been signed" per Elon Musk's post on X just now.
  • pseudony9 days ago
    Oh yes, I was really missing an Apartheid AI. .... Guess its time to switch everyone.

    Sueprising they thought thst 300M was enough. I think they seriously underestimate how Musk's name is perceived in the EU, for example.

  • smileson29 days ago
    Interesting!
  • jazzyjackson9 days ago
    Just painted a target on Telegrams back as a channel to feed misinformation into Grok
  • EastSmith9 days ago
    "No deal has been signed" per Elon Musk post on X.
  • retornam9 days ago
    Telegram is a haven for scammers and malware authors, who frequently use it as a command and control channel. These scammers and malware authors can now seamlessly integrate Grok into their tools.

    Congrats everyone.

    • northzen9 days ago
      Still better and more feature rich than WA.
      • retornam9 days ago
        Indeed, it is undoubtedly advantageous for scammers and malware authors.
        • northzen9 days ago
          One day you will discover Internet and how advantageous it is for scammers and malware authors.

          Wtf is this argument even about? Knife is advantageous for robbers. Phone calls are advantageous for scammers.

          Your existence is advantageous for many malicious agents.

          So what?

          • AmazingTurtle9 days ago
            Thanks for this comment, came here to say the same thing.
    • drivingmenuts9 days ago
      What is the alternative? Discord is just a PITA to use. I need to suggest something to a group of people that have been meeting online since 2007 (it's a small group with widely varying technical abilities/time).
      • cheema339 days ago
        > What is the alternative?

        WhatsApp is better even if you don't like Zuckerberg. I may not trust Zuck, but I trust a Russian dude and Musk a lot less.

    • bn-l9 days ago
      Whatsapp and signal may even be more pearl clutchable as they have end to end encryption and in signal’s case I believe it’s audited.
      • retornam9 days ago
        It is worth noting that WhatsApp Trust and Safety team is more effective in removing and blocking large-scale scam operations compared to Telegram.

        For instance, Telegram’s founder was recently arrested in France for failing to adequately remove malware, scam, and CSAM from the platform. It was only after his arrest that Telegram began to take moderation seriously, although their efforts remain woefully inadequate.

    • transcriptase9 days ago
      Wait until you find out about IRC!
      • retornam9 days ago
        When was the last time you ran into an IRC CnC server?
  • drivingmenuts9 days ago
    [flagged]
  • IAmGraydon9 days ago
    [flagged]
    • northzen9 days ago
      I heard that Internet on its own is a home of underage media, drug deals and Russian hackers. I guess we need to rant about it also, right?
    • rvnx9 days ago
      The fun fact is that the supposedly uncensored Grok ("unhinged") is actually very much censored. The only thing it can do is to say bad words and be anti-Woke, but it actually refuses to be really subversive or give its opinion on many topics.
    • stackedinserter9 days ago
      [flagged]
    • bboygravity9 days ago
      Wow, a Musk rant. So original and refreshing.

      Meanwhile pedos are actually just on Facebook and Instagram and not even hiding: https://www.wsj.com/tech/instagram-vast-pedophile-network-4a...

      • IAmGraydon9 days ago
        The Instagram pages the article references almost all link to...you guessed it...Telegram, where they can distribute illegal materials with less oversight.
  • 9 days ago
    undefined
    • 9 days ago
      undefined
  • outside12349 days ago
    And deleting the Telegram app. Will save me time anyway closing spam messages.
  • starik369 days ago
    My god, the level of negativity about absolutely everything is insane.
  • declan_roberts9 days ago
    Now xAI is fully plugged into the zeitgeist.

    Integration into telegram chats seems like a natural extension to the data xAI gets from Twitter.

    $40 billion for twitter is a steal in retrospect now that we've entered an era of insatiable appetite for training data.

    • overfeed9 days ago
      > $40 billion for twitter is a steal

      How so, when they could have paid around $300M for the data?

      Telegram may even be more valuable in terms of conversations, because Twitter data has very low signal:noise ratio - such as replies whose entirity are 3-word sentences or just emojis

      • cosmicgadget9 days ago
        I don't know about you but many of my messages are 1-3 emojis. Not that it matters, that is an easy thing to filter out of training data.

        Elon's election-buying effort was certainly assisted by the Twitter purchase. And look how few (formerly) blue checks have left the platform despite his antics.

        • myko9 days ago
          Definitely a good investment in taking over the presidency of the United States, but I don't feel like many bluechecks are still on Twitter? The platform feels dead, you can't even access it without logging in.
          • cosmicgadget9 days ago
            I think most businesses and journalists still have their Twitter accounts? I don't know how much they use them of course.