The irresistible force (movie/recording studios) versus the immovable object (the US government's support for AI).

Finally, the studios seem to have met their match.

This can't end well for anyone.

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.

Counter to science is currently the government policy. I agree with the second part. People were fired for not following government policy. That has nothing to do with science. Well actually it has everything to do with science, just that it's the polar opposite.

That's why the government blocked every grant from every study related to LGBT, except for one. One single study got the government approval to continue, and that was a study on post transition regret.

That is policy. Science doesn't come into this government. Government policy is to have a narrative not science.

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.

Why destroy meat by cooking it though?

Endless growth is entirely possible when it is predicated on the idea that the population contributing to the economy grows. The problem here isn't that growth stopped, it's that it has stopped while there are more people than ever contributing to it. There isn't some fundamental rule of the universe driving the recent trend, that is an actual set of policies that are causing economic efficiency and output to go backwards.

But in any case what you are writing about isn't even relevant here. It's not some correction in an underlying system we're talking about. The actual drop in output can be linked causally to specific policies in various governments (not just America, though recently they are definitely the biggest contributor).

You'd be surprised how much raw data goes into processing a usable piece of data in this field. You'd also be amazed at how much downtime is required between jobs. The satellite isn't measuring continuously. It does its thing, then moves to the next job, needs to be setup, verified, and then takes many hours at best to produce a result, then rinse / repeat.
Remember it's most detailed camera is 40mpxl and on a really bright object takes a couple of hours to generate data that ultimately fits in under 100MB. Most of the rest of the instruments come in at a fraction of the data size. Also most of the objects aren't bright. Look to the image released a few weeks ago of the gravitational lens. That was just a single instrument recording on the JWST and it was fixated on one object for 120 hours producing just 10x 4mpxl 16bit results from each of the NIRcam sensors.

Even in raw bandwidth terms it isn't surprising. It's been up there working for a bit over 1000 days. If it were continuously recording the entire time, was continuously transmitting data at its absolute maximum bitrate without pause, you'd still only have 60TB of data by now. But it can't do that either.

1.5TB is a lot of data for an instrument that takes a long time to acquire data that ultimately isn't very data dense in the first place.

If you read the newspaper for the experience of holding a large piece of paper you colossally missed the point.

Thanks for exposing your bias. Clickbait journalism exists, but burning down the entire field because you don't like a clickbait headline is not the solution that is in anyone's interest.

The protestors were called insurrectionists by the president. Clearly they will all be pardoned because that's the norm now.

Maybe you should look up the laws regarding *who* is allowed to legally call in the National Guard. If you were in charge of New York City and called in the National Guard that would be perfectly fine. If on the other hand you were the president of the USA and sent in the National Guard to the explicit protest of the Governor of the state, that is unlawful.

The distinction is incredibly important as it is one of the checks and balances we have for defending democratic institutions. Now combine the deployment of the military against state wishes with the desire to eliminate due process in the courts and those 3rd world shithole countries in Africa are looking downright lovely in comparison to the hellhole the USA has become.