Top
Best
New

Posted by speckx 4 days ago

Walmart: ChatGPT checkout converted 3x worse than website(searchengineland.com)
362 points | 238 commentspage 3
exabrial 7 hours ago|
The first comment is probably spot on. I'll add one thing:

Speed is your greatest feature. LLMs are slow. Loading 450mb of javascript to the client just to buy a bag of Doritos is slow.

Server side rendering owns here.

keiferski 13 hours ago||
I don’t trust AI bots to access my wallet. Not sure I ever will.

I sort of trust them to make product recommendations, but at best I will only open a link they suggest and buy the product there.

falcor84 12 hours ago||
> my wallet

Does it actually need direct access to your wallet? I haven't tried it yet, but assumed it would work with a separate wallet, fed through by top-ups.

keiferski 12 hours ago||
Sounds like they are an intermediary between the user and the business. So it’s not a top-up thing. That would be needlessly complex from ChatGPT’s end, too.

https://chatgpt.com/merchants/

everdrive 12 hours ago||
>I sort of trust them to make product recommendations

Never, ever.

raincole 12 hours ago|||
Your argument is "they're designed to influence us" right?

Amazon reviews are paid influence. Reddit posts are paid influence. Everything everywhere you read online is paid influence. I'd rank LLMs between "people I personally trust" and "random people online."

vulcan01 12 hours ago|||
Since LLMs are trained on "random people online", why are they not of equal rank?
TeMPOraL 12 hours ago|||
For me, for now, they are. And being "many random people" and not "random person", they average out into something much more trustworthy than even recommendations from most individuals I know personally.

Operative word is "for now" - LLMs caught entrepreneurs unprepared, but they'll catch up and poison this too, same thing that happened with search giving rise to SEO.

raincole 9 hours ago|||
I see LLM as the average of multiple random people and traditional common sense from wikipedia and books.
hrimfaxi 9 hours ago||
It's worth keeping in mind that some of those random people are trolls.
everdrive 9 hours ago|||
In fairness to your point, I also find that Amazon reviews can no longer be trusted, and I really try to buy as little as possible from Amazon. Due to this, and other reasons, I find it quite difficult to have a good sense for whether I've bought something high quality, or if it'll be a piece of trash.
WarmWash 8 hours ago||
Drifting off topic now, but Amazon could easily implement a few measures to really lock down reviews, but they purposely leave it gameable because it drives sales.
keiferski 12 hours ago||||
I trust them as much as any other online source, which is to say, sort of, but only as a starting point for research.

Do you have a better alternative?

everdrive 9 hours ago||
It depends. For home improvement projects, you can see what tools people are using. If a home repair channel is trustworthy, that may be a good start. General market research can help as well. For instance, post-China-buyout Craftsman should be avoided. For nearly anything else, it really depends. Name-brand electronics are usually safe unless they're small items (eg, power adapters, USB cords. Batteries are nearly impossible to purchase online without getting ripped off.) For clothing, I would just generally recommend only buying from thrift stores. For a lot of physical items (eg: door knobs, fuel hoses, etc.) it is actually quite difficult to purchase online. In person, we can tell a lot about quality just by touching the object with your hands. (eg: a flimsy shelf is not self-evident online, but is obvious in the hardware store.)

I suppose that's a long-winded way of saying that nearly every category of item requires its own strategy. For a brief period consumers were winning the information war and you could just go to Amazon, read the reviews, and get a superior product for cheap. We're now in a modern-but-old-fashioned situation. It's quite difficult to know if you're going to get ripped off, and you're forced to rely on more blunt heuristics. (eg: trust specific brands, buy things in person, etc.) None of these are perfect, but they are quickly becoming the best of some bad options.

crooked-v 12 hours ago|||
Even if they're (somehow) bias-free, you're still stuck with "the state of the internet circa 20XX" from the training data.
kvisner 4 days ago||
That doesn't seem terribly surprising, a human can quickly look through a grid of shirts to find one they like. ChatGPT would be guessing what they might want and the human would probably get a bad experience there with some regularity.
dude250711 10 hours ago|
They have a solution and are trying to find a problem.
firefoxd 14 hours ago||
The experience is a lot like when you are talking with a friend, then they decide to ask siri or google a question using voice. The result is always imprecise. Meaning they either have to repeat their query, or end up typing it anyway.

If you want to buy a Walmart product, the easiest way is to go to Walmart. Why add an imprecise middle man in between?

epsteingpt 9 hours ago||
Stores converted better than eCommerce for a long time and adoption was slow.

The next generation will shop in a different way, if it's better, and the change will be gradual as well.

Adoption takes time.

bigfishrunning 9 hours ago|
That was only true because the internet wasn't completely saturated -- many people didn't get online until the late 2000s [0]. This was a major barrier to entry keeping brick-and-mortar stores ahead.

The only thing holding back "Agentic Purchasing" is convenience. It's much easier to do a conventional search and click "Buy" then it is to have a conversation with some chatbot. If I walk into a store, most of the time I don't want to talk to a salesperson, I just want to grab the thing I came for and leave; this is also true for online shopping. The chatbot is another barrier to the purchase.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage

asimpletune 12 hours ago||
Isn’t there already a much older rule that predicts this?

Your product has to be a 10x improvement over the incumbent to be competitive.

In AI speak it would be the “extra-bitter” lesson I guess?

You need to add 10x resources to beat a product that’s already solved with mature tech.

blitzar 11 hours ago||
is 3x worse like a 300% decrease?
phyzome 9 hours ago|
Yeah, unclear what they mean. 1/3 the conversion rate, maybe?
zmmmmm 12 hours ago|
> Walmart will embed its own chatbot, Sparky, inside ChatGPT. Users will log into Walmart, sync carts across platforms, and complete purchases within Walmart’s system.

The enshittification is upon us.

netsharc 12 hours ago|
Hah, Clippy's cousin Sparky: every once in a while after ChatGPT answers a question it'll say "Looks like you still have stuff in your WalMart cart. Would you like me to complete that checkout for you? Also, WalMart-brand diapers is on offer this week, shall I add that to your cart?"
DANmode 6 hours ago||
“You are an unfit mother.”

https://youtu.be/lajnHjRp9Z0

More comments...