In the past 2+ decades, we’ve witnessed the media landscape morph before our eyes. It started with the dematerialization of print and other tangible media, then continued with the unbundling of articles from newspapers, songs from albums and videos from cable networks. Yet, just as the industry seemed to have figured it out, AI language models now stand ready to trigger yet another seismic shift.

The spotlight has shifted from search engines to conversational AI systems, prompting us to wonder: Are we on the brink of a ‘No-Web’ reality? A future governed by chat-oriented interfaces that disintegrate the “blue link” and with it, the current ad-based publishing business model we’ve grown to know and (perhaps not) love.

As we watch the scale tip between old-school search and the AI-fueled chat revolution, a set of questions arise: What are the risks and opportunities that lie ahead for publishers? Will they be able to acclimate to this brave new world? Can they find new ways to monetize content as the old regime falls apart? And will this storm extend beyond publishing, affecting other web-based services?

>Harvey_Rabbit

That's definitely part of the solution to the dilemma. It's necessary but not sufficient.

For an algorithmic recommendation engine to truly serve the interests of consumers, it has to not only be paid for directly by the end users but also:·

1/ Unbundled from the platforms.

2/ Be run locally by users instead of by a central organization.

The tech may not be ready yet but it's a potential path out of all the currently occurring manipulations.

That's precisely the issue. I'm sure I would enjoy putting AR glasses on and off for specific activities but a permanent projection and stimulation may melt down my brain :) check out this anecdotal concept

NB: This is a repost . The initial post was removed as it was missing a "submission statement".

The concept of the metaverse has gained significant attention in recent years, with many speculating about its potential to revolutionize, in the future, the way we interact and engage with the world and with each other. However, there are still questions about whether it is more hype than substance, and whether it will truly live up to its promises.

One argument in favor of the metaverse is it can offer immersive and augmented experiences stimulating our senses in a way classical settings may not be able to achieve. This makes it a good fit for certain activities such as attending live events with a sense of presence and interacting with remote friends and co-workers in a way that feels like in-person meetings.

But the key questions are:

Does it make sense for people to be in an immersive 3D world for all regular day-to-day activities?

For example, having to enter a virtual branch of a bank to make a wire transfer would not make sense. The same is true for tasks such as stock trading, booking flights, summoning a ride-sharing service, … to only cite a few.

If we consider the argument that the metaverse is not only about VR but also about a blended version of virtual and physical worlds through augmented reality (AR), will it then be more likely to get a wide adoption in the future?

There is room for augmented experiences where not completely disconnecting from reality may be more effective than fully immersing ourselves in a virtual world. For example, learning the piano could be done by using a real instrument and having visual guidance overlayed on the keyboard, showing which key should be hit next

Still, some questions remain for AR:

Do we see a future where this will be our preferred primary way of interacting with the world for all day-to-day activities?

Will our delicate brains be able to handle a permanent visual stimulation directly projected onto our eyes?

Thanks all for the input.

Interesting. Do you have links to resources with more info about the issue you mention? Thanks.