[throw230223]

>: I'll just have an AI in my browser read / look at / watch / "experience" your content and then launder away any and all ads in its presentation to me... I can even have it make extreme edits if required, rebuilding the audio and video, to remove subtle bias your content wants to infect me with due to sponsorship deals.

Ehh sure, but then websites have no incentive whatsoever to publish content. The future you're describing is one where:

- Only the big players operate (more centralized)

- Only walled gardens, because who would publish content publicly for everyone to ingest and then modify, with no gain whatsoever?

- More arms race to create DRM to prevent ad blockers, or deals with browsers not to tamper with specific sites (so, more centralization)

What you're proposing makes no sense, and will only deteriorate things further in the long run.

[saurik]

I not only do understand that DRM is what fights against ad blockers and would inherently be expanded (and that that would suck), that was my point: remember that I was responding to someone who was anti-AI as they felt AI marks the end of ad blockers, and yet I think the opposite is true. The consequences of these wars playing out in either direction and whether you like the result is a different scope, one where I don't even disagree with much of what you are saying...

...with two (small) exceptions: you fail to analyze a world where we all end up having to just pay for content as we access it--which is what I want: I also pay for all of the electricity I use and somehow the world doesn't end in the hell people insist microtransactions would cause--and (as I detail in another comment in this thread) I think technological solutions to DRM actually will have a hard time winning vs. AR passthrough ad block technology (though I then think the DRM war continues using legal means like expansions of Section 1201 to make it further illegal to traffic in circumvention tech... which is also bad).