Croatia has extended its digital nomad visa from one year to up to three years, allowing non-EU residents and their close family members to live and work remotely in the country. CNBC reports: A digital nomad visa is a short-term permit that allows individuals to stay in a country for an extended period and work remotely. The length of time a nomad can stay varies from place to place but most countries allow for six months to a year -- unless you have your eye on Croatia. Recently, the Balkan country announced it an update its digital nomad visa, which will allow non-EU residents to stay for up to three years. The visa also permits close family members of a digital nomad to join them.

Croatia's digital nomad visa website states that close family members also include partners or non-married couples who have been together for longer than three years without children, or for less time if they do have children together. Madrid Sartoretto believes that Croatia's expansion of its digital nomad program is a sign that the country is trying to attract more talent and compete with neighboring countries and their offerings.

"I think they are competing with other countries that are in the same region, like Estonia and Romania, that also attract a lot of digital nomads. If you give more benefits to people to come to your country, then you attract more talent. It's all about competition now," she adds. For those looking to apply for Croatia's digital nomad visa, Dr. Madrid Sartoretto says the country offers a low cost of living but still needs to improve its infrastructure, like more reliable internet speeds. "If you compare internet speed and reliability to countries like Romania, which has one of the fastest speeds in the world, Croatia needs to improve its infrastructure," she adds.

To apply for Croatia's digital nomad visa online, applicants must provide proof that they work outside of Croatia. Additionally, they must provide a copy of a valid travel document, proof of health insurance, proof of address in Croatia, and a minimum monthly income of 3,295 euros or $3,855 USD. For proof of income, applicants can submit a bank statement showing the total amount required, a bank statement demonstrating regular income, or pay slips for at least six months. Applicants must also send evidence that they have not been convicted of criminal offences in their home country or the country in which they have resided for more than a year immediately before arriving in Croatia.

New data from Digital Content Next shows Google's AI Overviews are linked to notable drops in publisher referral traffic, with surveyed sites seeing year-over-year declines between 1% and 25%. From a report: Digital Content Next (DCN), which counts the New York Times, Conde Nast and Vox among its approximately 40 member companies, checked in with 19 of them between May and June to see what was happening to their Google search referral traffic. The upshot: Google AI Overviews is indeed harming publisher traffic. Organic search referral traffic from Google is declining broadly, with the majority of DCN member sites -- spanning both news and entertainment -- experiencing traffic losses from Google search between 1% and 25%. Twelve of the respondent companies were news brands, and seven were non-news.

Over eight weeks in May and June 2025, the median Google Search referral was down almost every week, with losses outpacing gains two-to-one. For the seven non-news brands in the survey, the downward slope was steady and unbroken. Across the eight weeks, the median YoY decline in referred traffic from Google Search was -10% overall, -7% for news brands, and -14% for non-news brands, per the results.

Jason Kint, CEO of DCN, stressed that these losses are a direct consequence of Google AI Overviews, as many publishers claimed in their responses. The latest data offers a "ground truth" of what's actually happening, cutting through Google's vague claims about "quality clicks," made in its latest post, he added. "I think all publishers are ignoring Google's post. But this probably helps ground that," added Kint. The findings come shortly after a recent Pew survey of 900 U.S. consumers found that AI summaries are making users less likely to click through to links. The U.K.'s Professional Publishers Association (PPA) also found that AI Overviews and AI Mode are steering users toward zero-click results, reducing visits to source sites, and expanding into Google Discover where sources are relegated to citations. Evidence from members shows click-through rates falling 10-25% year-over-year despite stable rankings, with examples including a lifestyle publisher's CTR dropping from 5.1% to 0.6% and an automotive publisher's CTR falling from 2.75% to 1.71% despite increased visibility.

Rising subscription costs, shrinking content libraries, and regional restrictions are pushing viewers back toward piracy. Once seen as nearly dead, piracy has resurged through illicit streaming platforms as the fractured, ad-laden streaming market struggles to deliver convenience and value. The Guardian reports: According to London-based piracy monitoring and content-protection firm MUSO, unlicensed streaming is the predominant source of TV and film piracy, accounting for 96% in 2023 (PDF). Piracy reached a low in 2020, with 130bn website visits. But by 2024 that number had risen to 216bn (PDF). In Sweden, 25% of people surveyed (PDF) reported pirating in 2024, a trend mostly driven by those aged 15 to 24. Piracy is back, just sailing under a different flag.

"Piracy is not a pricing issue," Gabe Newell, the co-founder of Valve, the company behind the world's largest PC gaming platform, Steam, observed in 2011. "It's a service issue." Today, the crisis in streaming makes this clearer than ever. With titles scattered, prices on the rise, and bitrates throttled depending on your browser, it is little wonder some viewers are raising the jolly roger again. Studios carve out fiefdoms, build walls and levy tolls for those who wish to visit. The result is artificial scarcity in a digital world that promised abundance.

Whether piracy today is rebellion or resignation is almost irrelevant; the sails are hoisted either way. As the streaming landscape fractures into feudal territories, more viewers are turning to the high seas. The Medici understood the value linked to access. [The 2016 historical drama series tells of the rise of the powerful Florentine banking dynasty, and with it, the story of the Renaissance.] A client could travel from Rome to London and still draw on their credit, thanks to a network built on trust and interoperability. If today's studios want to survive the storm, they may need to rediscover that truth.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from NPR: Boston Public Library, one of the oldest and largest public library systems in the country, is launching a project this summer with OpenAI and Harvard Law School to make its trove of historically significant government documents more accessible to the public. The documents date back to the early 1800s and include oral histories, congressional reports and surveys of different industries and communities. "It really is an incredible repository of primary source materials covering the whole history of the United States as it has been expressed through government publications," said Jessica Chapel, the Boston Public Library's chief of digital and online services. Currently, members of the public who want to access these documents must show up in person. The project will enhance the metadata of each document and will enable users to search and cross-reference entire texts from anywhere in the world. Chapel said Boston Public Library plans to digitize 5,000 documents by the end of the year, and if all goes well, grow the project from there. Because of this historic collection's massive size and fragility, getting to this goal is a daunting process. Every item has to be run through a scanner by hand. It takes about an hour to do 300-400 pages.

Harvard University said it could help. Researchers at the Harvard Law School Library's Institutional Data Initiative are working with libraries, museums and archives on a number of fronts, including training new AI models to help libraries enhance the searchability of their collections. AI companies help fund these efforts, and in return get to train their large language models on high-quality materials that are out of copyright and therefore less likely to lead to lawsuits. "Having information institutions like libraries involved in building a sustainable data ecosystem for AI is critical, because it not just improves the amount of data we have available, it improves the quality of the data and our understanding of what's in it," said Burton Davis, vice president of Microsoft's intellectual property group. [...] OpenAI is helping Boston Public Library cover such costs as scanning and project management. The tech company does not have exclusive rights to the digitized data.

Legal scholar Victoria Haneman argues that U.S. law should grant estates a time-limited right to delete a deceased person's data so they can't be recreated by AI without their consent. "Digital resurrection by or through AI requires the personal data of the deceased, and the amount of data that we are storing online is increasing exponentially with each passing year," writes Haneman in an article published earlier this year in the Boston College Law Review. "It has been said that data is the new uranium, extraordinarily valuable and potentially dangerous. A right to delete will provide the decedent with a time-limited right for deletion of personal data." The Register reports: A living person may have some say on the matter through the control of personal digital documents and correspondence. But a dead person can't object, and US law doesn't offer the dead much data protection in terms of privacy law, property law, intellectual property law, or criminal law. The Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADAA), a law developed to help fiduciaries deal with digital files of the dead or incapacitated, can come into play. But Haneman points out that most people die intestate (without a will), leaving matters up to tech platforms. Facebook's response to dead users is to allow anyone to request the memorialization of an account, which keeps posts online. As for RUFADAA, it does little to address digital resurrection, says Haneman.

The right to publicity, which provides a private right of action against unauthorized commercial use of a person's name, image, or likeness, covers the dead in about 25 states, according to Haneman. But the monetization of publicity rights has proven to be problematic. Haneman says that there are some states where it's theoretically possible to be prosecuted for libeling or defaming the deceased, such as Idaho, Nevada, and Oklahoma, but adds that such prosecutions have declined because they tread upon the constitutional right to free expression. [...] A recent California law, the Delete Act, which took effect last year, is the first to offer a way for the living to demand the deletion of personal data from data brokers in one step. But according to Haneman, it's unclear whether the text of the law will be extended to cover the dead -- a possibility think tank Aspen Tech Policy Hub supports [PDF].

Haneman argues that a data deletion law for the dead would be grounded in laws governing human remains, where corpses receive protection against abuse despite being neither a person nor property. "The personal representative of the decedent has the right to destroy all physical letters and photographs saved by the decedent; merely storing personal information in the cloud should not grant societal archival rights," she argues. "A limited right of deletion within a twelve-month window balances the interests of society against the rights of the deceased."

"What happens when cybercriminals stop thinking small and start thinking like a Fortune 500 company?" asks a blog post from Koi Security. "You get GreedyBear, the attack group that just redefined industrial-scale crypto theft."

"150 weaponized Firefox extensions [impersonating popular cryptocurrency wallets like MetaMask and TronLink]. Nearly 500 malicious executables. Dozens of phishing websites. One coordinated attack infrastructure. According to user reports, over $1 million stolen." They upload 5-7 innocuous-looking extensions like link sanitizers, YouTube downloaders, and other common utilities with no actual functionality... They post dozens of fake positive reviews for these generic extensions to build credibility. After establishing trust, they "hollow out" the extensions — changing names, icons, and injecting malicious code while keeping the positive review history. This approach allows GreedyBear to bypass marketplace security by appearing legitimate during the initial review process, then weaponizing established extensions that already have user trust and positive ratings. The weaponized extensions captures wallet credentials directly from user input fields within the extension's own popup interface, and exfiltrate them to a remote server controlled by the group...

Alongside malware and extensions, the threat group has also launched a network of scam websites posing as crypto-related products and services. These aren't typical phishing pages mimicking login portals — instead, they appear as slick, fake product landing pages advertising digital wallets, hardware devices, or wallet repair services... While these sites vary in design, their purpose appears to be the same: to deceive users into entering personal information, wallet credentials, or payment details — possibly resulting in credential theft, credit card fraud, or both. Some of these domains are active and fully functional, while others may be staged for future activation or targeted scams...

A striking aspect of the campaign is its infrastructure consolidation: Almost all domains — across extensions, EXE payloads, and phishing sites — resolve to a single IP address: 185.208.156.66 — this server acts as a central hub for command-and-control, credential collection, ransomware coordination, and scam websites, allowing the attackers to streamline operations across multiple channels... Our analysis of the campaign's code shows clear signs of AI-generated artifacts. This makes it faster and easier than ever for attackers to scale operations, diversify payloads, and evade detection.

This isn't a passing trend — it's the new normal.
The researchers believe the group "is likely testing or preparing parallel operations in other marketplaces."

Amazon Web Services has struck a deal with the U.S. government to provide up to $1 billion in cloud service discounts through 2028. CNBC reports: The agreement is expected to speed up migration to the cloud, as well as adoption of artificial intelligence tools, the General Services Administration said. "AWS's partnership with GSA demonstrates a shared public-private commitment to enhancing America's AI leadership," the agency said in a release.

Amazon's cloud boss, Matt Garman, hailed the agreement as a "significant milestone in the large-scale digital transformation of government services." The discounts aggregated across federal agencies include credits to use AWS' cloud infrastructure, modernization programs and training services, as well as incentives for "direct partnership." Further reading: OpenAI Offers ChatGPT To US Federal Agencies for $1 a Year

Digital Foundry, the gaming hardware analysis publication known for its technical console breakdowns, has separated from IGN ownership as of today, with founder Richard Leadbetter purchasing the outlet and its complete archives. Leadbetter, who retained 50% ownership since selling half to Eurogamer in 2015, acquired an additional 25 percent from IGN while investor Rupert Loman, Eurogamer's original co-founder, purchased the remaining quarter.

The five-person team will operate independently, maintaining its YouTube channel with 1.5 million subscribers and Patreon support generating approximately $200,000 annually. The publication plans to develop a full website for its written content and expand coverage while keeping most content free.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The Library of Congress today said a coding error resulted in the deletion of parts of the US Constitution from Congress' website and promised a fix after many Internet users pointed out the missing sections this morning. The missing portions of the Constitution were restored to one part of the website a few hours after the Library of Congress statement and reappeared on a different part of the website another hour or so later. The Constitution Annotated website carried a notice saying it "is currently experiencing data issues. We are working to resolve this issue and regret the inconvenience."

"Upkeep of Constitution Annotated and other digital resources is a critical part of the Library's mission, and we appreciate the feedback that alerted us to the error and allowed us to fix it," the Library of Congress said. We asked the Library of Congress for specific details on the coding error, but we received only a statement that did not include specifics. "Due to a technical error, some sections of Article 1 were temporarily missing on the Constitution Annotated website. This problem has been corrected, and the missing sections have been restored," the statement said.

The deletion happened sometime in the past few weeks, as an Internet Archive capture shows that the text was still on the site until at least July 21. The deletions were being discussed this morning on Reddit and in news articles, with people expressing suspicions based on which parts of the Constitution were missing.

In a report published Monday, Cloudflare accused Perplexity of deploying undeclared web crawlers that masquerade as regular Chrome browsers to access content from websites that have explicitly blocked its official bots. Since then, Perplexity has publicly and loudly announced that Cloudflare's claims are baseless and technically flawed. "This controversy reveals that Cloudflare's systems are fundamentally inadequate for distinguishing between legitimate AI assistants and actual threats," says Perplexity in a blog post. "If you can't tell a helpful digital assistant from a malicious scraper, then you probably shouldn't be making decisions about what constitutes legitimate web traffic."

Perplexity continues: "Technical errors in Cloudflare's analysis aren't just embarrassing -- they're disqualifying. When you misattribute millions of requests, publish completely inaccurate technical diagrams, and demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of how modern AI assistants work, you've forfeited any claim to expertise in this space."

AI meeting transcription software is inadvertently sharing private conversations with all meeting participants through automated summaries. WSJ found a series of mishaps that people confirmed on-record.

Digital marketing agency owner Tiffany Lewis discovered her "Nigerian prince" joke about a potential client was included in the summary sent to that same client. Nashville branding firm Studio Delger received meeting notes documenting their discussion about "getting sandwich ingredients from Publix" and not liking soup when their client failed to appear. Communications agency coordinator Andrea Serra found her personal frustrations about a neighborhood Whole Foods and a kitchen mishap while making sweet potato recipes included in official meeting recaps distributed to colleagues.

Disney scrapped plans to use a deepfake of Dwayne Johnson in Moana and an AI-generated character in Tron: Ares due to concerns over bad publicity and legal ownership. Ultimately, the studio decided the potential PR and copyright risks weren't worth the convenience. Deadline reports: Disney is working on a live-action remake of Moana, where Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson will reprise his role of Maui. In a recent report from The Wall Street Journal, the studio came up with the idea to digitally clone Johnson and use a body double for some shots. "Disney would work with AI company Metaphysic to create deepfakes of Johnson's face that could be layered on top of Reed's performance in the footage -- a 'digital double' that effectively allowed Johnson to be in two places at once," WSJ said (paywalled). Although the Black Adam star approved the idea, the studio "worried" that they "ultimately couldn't claim ownership over every element of the film if AI generated parts of it." The film studio and the AI company were seemingly unable to come to terms, and the footage was scrapped.

Disney's upcoming Tron: Ares revolves around AI and the real-world implications of it. According to WSJ sources, "executives pitched the idea of actually incorporating AI into one of the characters in the sequel to the 1980s hit movie Tron as a buzzy marketing strategy." The AI-generated character would be a sidekick to Jeff Bridges' character, but the idea was ultimately scrapped because "executives internally were told that the company couldn't risk the bad publicity."

Longtime Slashdot reader SonicSpike shares a report from TechCrunch: Sarah Murray recalls the first time she saw an artificial model in fashion: It was 2023, and a beautiful young woman of color donned a Levi's denim overall dress. Murray, a commercial model herself, said it made her feel sad and exhausted. The iconic denim company had teamed up with the AI studio Lalaland.ai to create "diverse" digital fashion models for more inclusive ads. For an industry that has failed for years to employ diverse human models, the backlash was swift, with New York Magazine calling the decision "artificial diversity."

"Modeling as a profession is already challenging enough without having to compete with now new digital standards of perfection that can be achieved with AI," Murray told TechCrunch. Two years later, her worries have compounded. Brands continue to experiment with AI-generated models, to the consternation of many fashion lovers. The latest uproar came after Vogue's July print edition featured a Guess ad with a typical model for the brand: thin yet voluptuous, glossy blond tresses, pouty rose lips. She exemplified North American beauty standards, but there was one problem -- she was AI generated.

The internet buzzed for days, in large part because the AI-generated beauty showed up in Vogue, the fashion bible that dictates what is and is not acceptable in the industry. The AI-generated model was featured in an advertisement, not a Vogue editorial spread. And Vogue told TechCrunch the ad met its advertising standards. To many, an ad versus an editorial is a distinction without a difference. TechCrunch spoke to fashion models, experts, and technologists to get a sense of where the industry is headed now that Vogue seems to have put a stamp of approval on technology that's poised to dramatically change the fashion industry. Amy Odell, a fashion writer and author of a recently published biography on Gwyneth Paltrow, put it simply: "It's just so much cheaper for [brands] to use AI models now. Brands need a lot of content, and it just adds up. So if they can save money on their print ad or their TikTok feed, they will."

An anonymous reader shares a report: The Indian IT sector has operated for decades under the dominance of major firms TCS, Infosys, Wipro, and HCLT. The historical growth of these companies was tightly coupled with the U.S. economy through a strong "multiplier effect," where Indian IT export growth significantly outpaced US GDP growth. This reliable growth model is now under pressure.

The multiplier has weakened considerably, falling from a peak of 4.1x to a projected 1.6x. This is contributing to a prolonged slowdown period for India IT exports. A primary factor in this slowdown is a clear shift in client spending priorities. While overall enterprise technology spending remains strong, clients are now allocating a larger portion of their budgets to core digital infrastructure, such as cloud platforms and SaaS platforms, over traditional IT services.

The firms are facing challenges on multiple fronts. Global corporations are increasingly establishing their own global capability centers in India, with projections indicating an accelerated pace of 120 new centers being added annually in fiscal years 2024 and 2025, up from some 40 six years ago. This insourcing trend diverts revenue from traditional IT vendors and creates direct competition for skilled technology talent.

Disney "cloned" Dwayne Johnson when filming a live-action Moana, reports the Wall Street Journal, using an AI process that they were ultimately afraid to use: Under the plan they devised, Johnson's similarly buff cousin Tanoai Reed — who is 6-foot-3 and 250 pounds — would fill in as a body double for a small number of shots. Disney would work with AI company Metaphysic to create deepfakes of Johnson's face that could be layered on top of Reed's performance in the footage — a "digital double" that effectively allowed Johnson to be in two places at once... Johnson approved the plan, but the use of a new technology had Disney attorneys hammering out details over how it could be deployed, what security precautions would protect the data and a host of other concerns. They also worried that the studio ultimately couldn't claim ownership over every element of the film if AI generated parts of it, people involved in the negotiations said. Disney and Metaphysic spent 18 months negotiating on and off over the terms of the contract and work on the digital double. But none of the footage will be in the final film when it's released next summer...

Interviews with more than 20 current and former employees and partners present an entertainment giant torn between the inevitability of AI's advance and concerns about how to use it. Progress has at times been slowed by bureaucracy and hand-wringing over the company's social contract with its fans, not to mention its legal contract with unions representing actors, writers and other creative partners... For Disney, protecting its characters and stories while also embracing new AI technology is key. "We have been around for 100 years and we intend to be around for the next 100 years," said the company's legal chief, Horacio Gutierrez, in an interview. "AI will be transformative, but it doesn't need to be lawless...." [As recently as June, a Disney/Comcast Universal lawsuit had argued that Midjourney "is the quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism."]

Concerns about bad publicity were a big reason that Disney scrapped a plan to use AI in Tron: Ares — a movie set for release in October about an AI-generated soldier entering the real world. Since the movie is about artificial intelligence, executives pitched the idea of actually incorporating AI into one of the characters... as a buzzy marketing strategy, according to people familiar with the matter. A writer would provide context on the animated character — a sidekick to Jeff Bridges' lead role named Bit — to a generative AI program. Then on screen, the AI program, voiced by an actor, would respond to questions as Bit as cameras rolled. But with negotiations with unions representing writers and actors over contracts happening at the same time, Disney dismissed the idea, and executives internally were told that the company couldn't risk the bad publicity, the people said...

Disney's own history speaks to how studios have navigated technological crossroads before. When Disney hired Pixar to produce a handful of graphic images for its 1989 hit The Little Mermaid, executives kept the incorporation a secret, fearing backlash from fans if they learned that not every frame of the animated film had been hand-drawn. Such knowledge, executives feared, might "take away the magic."
Disney invested $1.5 billion in Fortnite creator Epic Games, acccording to the article, and is planning a world in Fortnite where gamers can interact with Marvel superheroes and creatures from Avatar. But "an experiment to allow gamers to interact with an AI-generated Darth Vader was fraught. Within minutes of launching the AI bot, gamers had figured out a way to make it curse in James Earl Jones's signature baritone." (Though Epic patched the workaround within 30 minutes.)

But the article spells out another concern for Disney executives. "If a Fortnite gamer creates a Darth Vader and Spider-Man dance that goes viral on YouTube, who owns that dance?

Napster's latest AI pivot "is the latest in a series of attempts by various owners to ride its brand cachet during emerging tech waves," Fast Company reported in July. In March, it sold for $207 million to Infinite Reality, an immersive digital media and e-commerce company, which also rebranded as Napster last month. Since 2020, other owners have included a British VR music startup (to create VR concerts) and two crypto-focused companies that bought it to anchor a Web3 music platform. Napster's launch follows a growing number of attempts to drive AI adoption beyond smartphones and laptops.
And tonight the Washington Post re-visited the legacy of Napster's original mp3-sharing model, arguing Napster "inspired successive generations of entrepreneurs to risk flouting the law so they could grow enough to get the laws changed to suit them, including Airbnb and Uber." "Napster to me embodies the idea that it is better to seek forgiveness than permission," said Mark Lemley, director of Stanford Law School's Program in Law, Science & Technology. "It didn't work out well for Napster or for many of the others who got sued, but it worked out very well for everyone else — users, and eventually the content industry, too, which is making record profits...." [Napster co-founder Sean] Parker later advised Spotify, and Napster marketing chief Oliver Schusser is now Apple's vice president for music.

Although many users saw Napster as an extension of rock-and-roll rebellion, that was not the company's real plan. First Fanning's majority-owning uncle, and then venture capital firm Hummer Winblad, wanted the start-up to leverage its knowledge of individual music consumers to make lucrative deals with the labels, according to internal documents this reporter found in researching a book on Napster. They warned that if no agreement were reached and Napster failed, more decentralized pirate services would take the audience and offer the labels nothing.

But settlement talks failed. The litigation blitz also took down a Napster competitor called Scour, which a young Travis Kalanick had joined shortly after its founding. Kalanick later created Uber, dedicated to overthrowing taxi regulations.
The article concludes that "Now it is Microsoft, Meta, Apple and Google, among the largest companies in the world, bankrolling the consumption of all media.

"They, too, have absorbed Napster's lessons in realpolitik, namely to build it first and hope the regulators will either yield or catch up."

"Did Craigslist drive the downfall of print classifieds?" That's the question asked in a new article from the nonprofit Poynter Institute for Media Studies: "I've always wondered about that," Newmark said in a Zoom interview July 1. "I think it had an effect." But portraying him and the list as torpedoing an otherwise great business model is way overblown, he still believes. Citing an influential essay by Thomas Baekdal, Newmark contends that the root of newspapers' trouble was the loss of readers. "TV hit hard. ... (And) l'm like the folks on 'CSI,' I follow the evidence. That goes back at least to the '60s."

Bad in itself, the loss also took away newspapers' dominant share of local audiences and ability to charge premium classified ad rates. The slide in circulation looks even worse, Baekdal pointed out, when compared to continued increases in the number of households over the years.

Still, Craigslist came to symbolize the shift. Dozens of other vertical digital sites cropped up, before and after, all offering a deadly competitive pairing of an effective and much cheaper service than newspaper classifieds. Even if Craigslist was just one of many, though, it was arguably Newmark who put a face on the massive disruption... By the early 2000s, newspaper executives had a dawning awareness of the business challenge from Craigslist and similar sites. They took minimal action to meet it...

The biggest response was that three big companies — Knight-Ridder, Tribune and Gannett — bought a copycat of Monster called CareerBuilder... By the time newspapers acted, online classifieds had a full head of steam... By 2010, 70% of the newspaper industry's print classified business was gone. Reliable statistics are no longer kept, but the trend continued over the last 15 years... Newspapers continue to do well only with paid obituaries and legal notices, though the latter is now also under threat by digital startups.
The article cites a 2019 analysis from Peter Zollman, whose AIM Group consultancy has followed the classified business for 25 years. "Craigslist has often been blamed for killing newspapers, but that's a gross canard. It just isn't true." American newspapers stumbled while several well-managed counterparts in places like Scandinavia found ways to prosper, he argued.

"Digital storefront Itch.io is reindexing its free adult games," reports Engadget, "and is talking to its partnered payment processors about plans to gradually reintroduce paid NSFW content..." In a statement included in the Itch.io update, Stripe said it hasn't closed the door on the possibility of being able to support adult content again in the future. In the meantime, Itch.io says it is talking to its other payment partners about accepting the card payments Stripe is currently no longer able to process.
Itch's founder told the gaming news site Aftermath that it was a notice from Visa that led to the sudden deindexing of so many games. But Aftermath notes that Visa and Mastercard have now "both released statements effectively washing their hands of the situation but also, paradoxically, justifying any actions they might have taken."

- Visa: "When a legally operating merchant faces an elevated risk of illegal activity, we require enhanced safeguards for the banks supporting those merchants..."

- Mastercard: "Our payment network follows standards based on the rule of law. Put simply, we allow all lawful purchases on our network. At the same time, we require merchants to have appropriate controls to ensure Mastercard cards cannot be used for unlawful purchases, including illegal adult content."

Aftermath's take? The part where the two companies act as though their hands have been tied by the long arm of the law is, frankly, bullshit. None of the games removed from Steam or Itch were illegal. They depict actions that are perfectly legal in other mediums. To re-quote Mike Stabile, director of policy at the Free Speech Coalition: "The stuff [companies] are talking about is entirely legal. It's legal to have in a book, it's legal to have in a game. They are making decisions based on their brand, based on public pressure from anti-porn groups, and that can be reversed."
Meanwhile, gamers are still pushing back: It's difficult to say just how many people have spent the past several days tying up the lines of card companies and payment processors, but the movement has made itself visible enough to gain support from larger industry bodies like the Communications Workers of America [the largest communications/media labor union in America] and the International Game Developers Association.

It's a cultural milestone. Fiverr just released an ad mocking vibe coding.

The video features what its description calls a "clueless entrepreneur" building an app to tell if an avocado is ripe — who soon ends up blissfully singing with an avocado to the tune of the cheesy 1987 song "Nothing's Gonna Stop Us Now." The avocado sings joyously of "a new app on the rise in a no-code world that's too good to be true" (rhyming that with "So close. Just not tested through...")

"Let them say we're crazy. I don't care about bugs!" the entrepreneur sings back. "Built you in a minute, now I'm so high off this buzz..."

But despite her singing to the overripe avocado that "I don't need a backend if I've got the spark!" and that they can "build this app together, vibe-coding forever. Nothing's going to stop us now!" — the build suddenly fails. (And it turns out that avocado really was overripe...) Fiverr then suggests viewers instead hire one of their experts for building their apps...

The art/design site Creative Bloq acknowledges Fiverr "flip-flopping between scepticism and pro-AI marketing." (They point out a Fiverr ad last November had ended with the tagline "Nobody cares that you use AI! They care about the results — for the best ones higher Fiverr experts who've mastered every digital skill including AI.") But the site calls this new ad "a step in the right direction towards mindful AI usage." Just like an avocado that looks perfect on the outside, once you inspect the insides, AI-generated code can be deceptively unripe.
Fiverr might be feeling the impact of vibecoding themselves. The freelancing web site saw the company's share price fall over 14% this week, with one Yahoo! Finance site saying this week's quarterly results revealed Fiverr's active buyers dropped 10.9% compared to last year — a decrease of 3.4 million buyers which "overshadowed a 9.8% increase in spending per buyer."

Even when issuing a buy recommendation, Seeking Alpha called it "a short-term rebound play, as the company faces longer-term risks from AI and active buyer churn."

Atlassian laid off 150 employees via a pre-recorded video. "While not specifically outlined, the affected staff seem to be from the company's European operations, with The Australian saying that Cannon-Brooke's overshared that it would be difficult to axe its European staff due to contract arrangements, but that the company had already begun moving in that direction," reports CyberDaily. While the company claims the cuts weren't directly caused by AI, it has simultaneously rolled out AI-enhanced customer service tools and emphasized automation as a key part of its digital transformation strategy. From the report: Atlassian CEO and co-founder Mike Cannon-Brookes sent the video titled "Restructuring the CSS Team: A Difficult Decision for Our Future" to staff on Wednesday morning (30 July), informing them that 150 staff had been made redundant. The video reportedly did not make it seem that the decision was difficult, but rather said it would allow its staff "to say goodbye." The video itself did not announce who was leaving, but it told employees they would have to wait 15 minutes for an email about their employment. Those who were terminated had their laptops blocked immediately. They reportedly will receive six months' pay.

"AI is going to change Australia," [said former co-CEO and co-founder Scott Farquhar]. "Every person should be using AI daily for as many things as they can. Like any new technology, it will feel awkward to start with, but every business person, every business leader, every government leader, and every bureaucrat should be using it." He also said that governments should be implementing AI more broadly. [...] Commenting on the termination, Farquhar said the mass termination was due to the customer service team no longer being needed in the same capacity, as larger clients required less complex support following a move to the cloud.