Of course his subscribers were all part of the ruling class in Britain.

So he was acting not as part of the press. Not a journalist reporting news to the public, but a private researcher collecting news / recent events information for an elite audience.

there is nothing that requires reporting to be done on a web page available to everyone

There is nothing that dictates a specific medium, but if the reporting is limited to small audience and carries a high cost for access, and is therefore not intended to be publicly disseminated / not generally accessible or in distribution, then that is more like private reporting - would be not a press activity and not journalism.

It is the public press in wide distribution that early founders realized is so critical and vital towards the possibility of the people staying free, and ensuring government remains for the people. The channel would be ineffective if only a chosen handful of people can even read what is published and understand what events are truly happening.

And every product advertised will be a lot cheaper. There is no free lunch

Every product advertised in the banner and video ads on the paid-access news articles seen by subscribers would cost less? Why?

If anything those clicks would be to a more targeted audience, and I would expect the advertisers end up having to spend a just as much or larger budget paying for those ads.

10 minutes of commercials .. 5 minutes of high school sports

I mean *websites* like, for example, here in Illinois; the pekintimes.com belongs to a local news agency; or foxillinois.com.

As far as I know those news stations that do "5 minutes of such and such" To a cable TV audience are not especially threatened by this step because AIs are not doing automatic video shows yet, and the people who sit down in front of their TV for news are looking for a different experience -- including recognition of a familiar news person's face on screen, that AI does not replicate.

If anything those physical news broadcast stations might be helped providing they still have a source of news After the apocalypse of web-based news.

Censorship will be the end result.
What AI isnt trained on cannot be known.

It won't just be censorship.. It will ultimately be companies paying to get content created that causes AIs to say what the companies trying to sell stuff want to be heard.

Viewers/people who consume media will crave the answers to questions they are putting to the AI, and the AI companies are going to want to make sure their AI can give plausible-sounding answers to those questions that keep people using THEIR services.

The AI companies are now in the enviable position of being the de-facto news companies without officially being news companies. That means they get all the benefits news companies have with none of the liabilities. For example all the AIs come with disclaimers, so the AI company is (for now) not liable if the results they generate are entirely false.

There's still a possibility to a change in the legal climate, and the AI companies could come crashing down at some point.
For example: Suppose the supreme court rules the CDA Section 230(c)(1) protections Do not apply to AI-generated content. And the operator of a large public AI that answers questions in a Search engine format Has the same liability as publishers for any texts output by their AI which are not identical to content submitted by a human user of their service - and that Liability can include damages caused to anyone relying on misleading statements which are not cited, and therefore implicitly backed by the publisher or speaker.

Corporate press releases will continue to exist because they are a marketing tool of those companies not news, and the AI scrapers will eat them up, since they will be one of the few kinds of news left after the general news websites stop making content - Every article they push out will be an article they were paid by advertisers to write In order for AI engines to scrape.

The real news will be items locked behind paywalls designed to keep both AIs and search engines looking at their content.

The end game of no more ads is: Congrats... You can now get your news for the low low price of a $100/Month per website news subscription. Also; while there were a plethora of choices before.. this will end up with there being only one or two news companies who can actually survive. Local news outlets will die, and 1 to 3 megacorporations will control all the remaining news.

The question is what is the new business model for news
There is no new business model for news. If they can't get people to even look at their stuff, then the whole idea of professional business of newsgathering for the public at large is not a viable business anymore. Perhaps some specialized publications would continue to exist Not for the general public, but for certain clients only: such as stock traders who need parts of the news prepared with some level of quality to inform their research and decisions, but at high cost.

The companies who currently run AI scrapers are going to eventually have to either start making stuff up out of thin air, Or figure out a new source of data to scrape - probably Twitter posts.

Well the corporation that screwed up AfriNIc'd deserve to be shown all the Goatses.
Besides the Goatse is part of the culture of this website. I wouldn't be surprised if that group turned out to be employees of whichever company owns this place.

Ya, no shit, lol. That's what I said.

No. You said PCI covers "governs security practices of storing actual customer billing information" which is false.

PCI only covers "cardholder data" - which is only a card number, and elements used with a card number. As the PCI SSC itself defines it cardholder data includes the full PAN, and any other elements that are present with the PAN, and any elements of sensitive authentication data.

That means all the billing customer's Info isn't covered, but only that add payment card form data which is just "Card number, Card name, Cvv, Expiration Date," plus any internal values they read off the card or during transaction processing.

Plus you seem to have missed the point of why the distinction is important; PCI is a specific compliance requirement, and a highly onerous one for those elements actually covered by it. But for everything outside that requirement - Unless the corporation is bound by strong privacy laws: companies generally want to keep the information as long as possible, and they will commonly share their customer's Billing information, Location data, or other personal data with data brokers or other business units in exchange for $$$.

like if Amazon bought some SaaS provider that had all their infrastructure on Azure PaaS offerings. I absolutely would expect as part of the transition a pretty rapid migration from Azure infrastructure to AWS

In this case the Windsurf editor relies on Claud's model to provide an effective product, which none of OpenAI's models are offerings are even close to capable of.

I would not expect an immediate transition in that kind of Amazon acquisition where the selling point of the company being acquired's one product relies entirely on secret sauce unique to Azure. Amazon would need to put an enormous amount of effort working on AWS service offering to build the functionality required, so it would likely take a year to two at least.

There might be an eventual transition. It would not be within 6 days of possible rumors ahead of the acquisition being agreed on -- they would need to at least sign a deal on the acquisition and engage the acquired company's staff within meetings and discussions that take months before the management decides and sees for sure If and what kind of transition and how.

Perhaps it's a "clickbait study" ? Researchers knew the reference might catch some peoples' interest, otherwise it's a dull and boring study, and they might get near zero clicks

I'm not sure it will help. The community will need to switch to the new repo for this to become a success.

My suspicion would be that a certain Wordpress CEO will be outraged by the concept and move in a direction towards actively obstructing any competing package manager from being used.

In short; I suspect this does not get far, unless that person is no longer in control of the direction of core WP development.

Imagine Amazon or Redhat were to acquire a company, and in response Microsoft would decide to send them a notice that all their Azure, Office365 services, and Windows licenses for all their direct server infrastructure terminate in 7 days; all resources and deleted will be cancelled and deleted.

"It would be odd to sell access to the rights to have Windows systems to a Linux company"

They wouldn't, but isn't it comparable to Anthropic's decisions?

Not your morning coffee.

Don't we already have laws against drinking and driving? When I used to drive regularly our cars had AM radios with a tape slot, and they were always playing ads warning you not to drink and drive, because it was illegal.

Not your shaver.

Hopefully we will have banned human driving altogether, and it will be Self-driving cars only by the time you would need to worry about a significant rate of accidents caused by holding shavers or other random accessories.

You were not supposed to do that either when driving. And holding a paper map or atlas ought to have been prosecuted the same.

Drivers should wait until you find a time and place where it is safe to stop, then pull over, in case you need to study the map.