S.E. Smith, writing for The Verge:

This is not a problem unique to me: a recent Pew Research Center study on digital decay found that 38 percent of webpages accessible in 2013 are not accessible today. This happens because pages are taken down, URLs are changed, and entire websites vanish, as in the case of dozens of scientific journals and all the critical research they contained. This is especially acute for news: researchers at Northwestern University estimate we will lose one-third of local news sites by 2025, and the digital-first properties that have risen and fallen are nearly impossible to count. The internet has become a series of lacunas, spaces where content used to be. 

Gita Jackson, writing on Aftermath:

Unfortunately, this is what all of the internet is right now: social media, owned by large corporations that make changes to them to limit or suppress your speech, in order to make themselves more attractive to advertisers or just pursue their owners’ ends. Even the best Twitter alternatives, like Bluesky, aren’t immune to any of this—the more you centralize onto one single website, the more power that website has over you and what you post there. More than just moving to another website, we need more websites.

I didn’t realize how important that was until I started my own website, and I didn’t even learn it from helping to run the damn thing. When I meet people at events, they tell me that they’ve set Aftermath as their homepage. People tell me they love interacting with other people in the comments. They tell me it’s one on a small list of websites, not social media, that they check in on every day. People, it seems, actually like going to a website, and they like that we made one.

This entire article speaks to me.

I’ve recently seen similar sentiments from others, like Louis Manta:

In the last 15 years, many people (myself included) were drawn to third-party solutions for presenting ourselves. For our résumés, LinkedIn. For portfolios, Behance and Dribbble. For blogging, Tumblr, Medium, and Substack. Instead of forums, Discord and Slack. But despite each of these advertising some amount of autonomy, in reality you have very little.

By centralizing not just your content, but yourself, on these sites, you rob yourself the opportunity to be more authentically you. In addition, a peer or competitor might appear next to you. It may not be great for you to have your competitor one click away from your own profile.

As I’ve pulled (way) back from social media over the past few years, I’ve found having a place for my writing, that I control, own, and can present how I want even more appealing.

Ed Newton-Rex, writing for Music Business Worldwide:

First up, it’s worth saying that I don’t think DSPs should ban all AI music. There are clearly good use-cases for AI in music creation; if training data is licensed, these use-cases are worth supporting, at least in my book. (I do think a music streaming service will emerge that does explicitly reject all AI music, as Cara has done in the image space. And it will probably do well. But there are good reasons for most DSPs not to take such a blanket approach.)

As table stakes, DSPs should follow the example of other media platforms – Instagramand TikTok, for example – and label content that is generated by AI.

That way, music fans can at least choose what they listen to, and, therefore, what they support. Require uploaders to label AI music they upload, and introduce a post-upload moderation process for tracks that slip through the cracks. This is perfectly feasible. You hope that most uploaders will be honest – in general, people tend to prefer to be – and, for those who aren’t, there are a number of third-party systems that can detect AI music with a high degree of accuracy.

Elizabeth Lopatto, writing at The Verge:

Sometimes certain lines of business weren’t told about the revenue goals they were expected to fulfill. Meanwhile, the company’s actual accounting and expense controls were messy. For instance, Vice’s digital division had expenses from NetJets — a private jet service — on its profit and loss statement, two sources told me. (A third confirmed the NetJets account existed without saying which balance sheet it was on. Two sources took credit for eventually canceling the NetJets account. “Since at least 2021, Vice has not had a NetJets account,” according to Vice spokesperson Samira Sorzano.) One executive source alleged that the digital division was funding a production executive’s $350,000 salary — an executive who the source claims did virtually nothing. Another exec heard, to their shock, that someone had reportedly spent $24,000 on a one-way ticket from New York to London.