Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "David B." Newsgroups: uk.comp.sys.mac Subject: You are indeed a very wise owl :) Thanks once again for a most interesting article. Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 10:06:46 +0100 Lines: 49 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: boaterdave@hotmail.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net eSJJ0tE+G5bJD68fxAUQPgtp6035Wf0bAdXQTOL02pBdHpxc6P Cancel-Lock: sha1:FD4wEyI8+SJf8iADdX6tMnd6+po= sha256:6VOsHKkiO4BQBbqq8XtMhmeofUqG5B8niGbrcG6WrLo= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com uk.comp.sys.mac:181493 On 27/07/2025 09:11, David B. wrote: > Today's Blog by Howard Oakley is well worth reading! > > = > > When The Economist publishes two articles, one of them a leader, about > the same issue you know it needs to be taken seriously. In its edition > of 19 July 2025, one of its leaders is titled To survive the AI age, the > web needs a new business model, and a longer article in its Business > section states AI is killing the web. Can anything save it? Both are > well worth the effort of creating an account to read them. The leader > states crisply that “the danger is that, as answer-engines take readers > away, they are removing the incentive for content to be created,” > concluding that “if nothing changes, the risk is of a modern-day tragedy > of the commons. The shared resource of the open web will be over- > exploited, leading to its eventual exhaustion.” > > The problem lies in what it so appropriately refers to as Google’s > change from being a search to an answer engine, a subject further > explored by the Pew Research Center’s timely report of their study > summarised here by humans. That demonstrates that Google “users are less > likely to click on links when an AI summary appears in the results”. > > These themes are central to my previous account of PageRank and > plagiarism. As with others who publish original work on the web, I’m > used to sites that copy entire articles, such as MacMegasite. Within an > hour of its publication here, for example, that had stolen the whole of > Friday’s Mac article, word for word. > > More at ..... > > https://eclecticlight.co/2025/07/27/last-week-on-my-mac-🦉-no-ai-content/ > > I posted this as a comment, but I doubt it will appear:- > > "An excellent article, Howard, which I will share with folk I hope will > read it. Thank you. I have no doubt that everything you say and do is > done so in good faith. > However, you have used and have recommended a product called EtreCheck, > made available by a 'Will 'o the wisp' character that you know > absolutely nothing about. I think you have been too trusting in that > regard. Perhaps it is now time to take a closer look at the developer of > the product." Sadly, *MY* comments are not reproduced! Why IS that?