Thanks for sharing a link to my article! Bizarre, funny and niche is what I strive to do. Also this is my first time reading your stuff. I enjoyed it and subscribed.
There is a future where this “middle class content” you talk about is actually more accessible to readers than it is now. There’s already work going on to implement protocols to allow for payment when AI models index content during training. It’s highly likely that if those become widespread they will be expanded to when AI agents perform searches on behalf of users.
The current era of the web has had two big downsides: (1) SEO optimization and (2) ad-supported everything. The former is a constant game of whack-a-mole where you’re always fighting to surface actually relevant sites instead of engineered slop (I’d argue that scammy SEO sites are the original slop). And we all know how having to run a million ads on a site destroyed the experience of actually browsing the web.
Well, if we gain the ability for automated access to content to be gated by transactions, that will probably kill SEO spam sites since AI searches won’t surface irrelevant content (and relevance will be assessed based on more than just naive rankings like we have today). At the same time, as the rendering capabilities continue to improve, we’ll likely end up with bespoke UIs generated at query time for users — no fifteen auto-playing video ads you have to close just to read the thing you were looking for.
I don’t know if this is actually the future that’s going to happen - in a lot of ways it seems too positive for our current timeline. Still, I thought it was worthwhile to illustrate an alternate possibility to show that is not certain doom on the horizon.
Anything that reduces the prevalence of these dumbass reaction videos is a good thing in my book. It's some of the lowest quality content on the internet.
You are more of a content creator than me, would the end of search really "decimate" content creators? Isn't Substack an example of how people with writing, opinions, and art that people would pay for weren't discovered before but now can grow an audience? Substack doesn't even let you index on Google unless you work around it with your own site.
I watched "metadeception: the truth about oz pearlman" video from Baskin after listening to a Pablo Torre podcast who I only started listening to earlier this year. One takeaway from the video I had was that there are hundreds of podcasts with thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions of viewers, of which I am not one of them, but Oz Pearlman felt were wise to go on to build his brand. Everyone's got their niche interests, and while the algorithms are a little too intense for my liking (especially YouTube, it's been really weird the last week), I still stumble upon new channels and creators that I thoroughly enjoy. It's just a new evolution of the internet.
Thanks for sharing a link to my article! Bizarre, funny and niche is what I strive to do. Also this is my first time reading your stuff. I enjoyed it and subscribed.
*sees the WWE video is 2:12 long* "oh so the pronunciation is probably in the first 20 seconds, probably don't need to watch the whole thing"
A smart, (small c) conservative court would decide the Klein case based on the subjectivity bad intent, and not get into reshaping fair use law.
There is a future where this “middle class content” you talk about is actually more accessible to readers than it is now. There’s already work going on to implement protocols to allow for payment when AI models index content during training. It’s highly likely that if those become widespread they will be expanded to when AI agents perform searches on behalf of users.
The current era of the web has had two big downsides: (1) SEO optimization and (2) ad-supported everything. The former is a constant game of whack-a-mole where you’re always fighting to surface actually relevant sites instead of engineered slop (I’d argue that scammy SEO sites are the original slop). And we all know how having to run a million ads on a site destroyed the experience of actually browsing the web.
Well, if we gain the ability for automated access to content to be gated by transactions, that will probably kill SEO spam sites since AI searches won’t surface irrelevant content (and relevance will be assessed based on more than just naive rankings like we have today). At the same time, as the rendering capabilities continue to improve, we’ll likely end up with bespoke UIs generated at query time for users — no fifteen auto-playing video ads you have to close just to read the thing you were looking for.
I don’t know if this is actually the future that’s going to happen - in a lot of ways it seems too positive for our current timeline. Still, I thought it was worthwhile to illustrate an alternate possibility to show that is not certain doom on the horizon.
Anything that reduces the prevalence of these dumbass reaction videos is a good thing in my book. It's some of the lowest quality content on the internet.
You are more of a content creator than me, would the end of search really "decimate" content creators? Isn't Substack an example of how people with writing, opinions, and art that people would pay for weren't discovered before but now can grow an audience? Substack doesn't even let you index on Google unless you work around it with your own site.
I watched "metadeception: the truth about oz pearlman" video from Baskin after listening to a Pablo Torre podcast who I only started listening to earlier this year. One takeaway from the video I had was that there are hundreds of podcasts with thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions of viewers, of which I am not one of them, but Oz Pearlman felt were wise to go on to build his brand. Everyone's got their niche interests, and while the algorithms are a little too intense for my liking (especially YouTube, it's been really weird the last week), I still stumble upon new channels and creators that I thoroughly enjoy. It's just a new evolution of the internet.
Intent is a latching on point, but why should it be? Maybe because the judges know they have no actual objective rules?
the Ethan Klein lawsuit is just filled with own goals.