Latest news with #Napster
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business
- Business Insider
Is this TV's endgame? A discussion with analyst Rich Greenfield.
The TV business is not slowing down this summer: Any day now, David and Larry Ellison will finally buy Paramount, with its collection of once-storied TV networks like CBS and MTV. A few weeks later, ESPN and Fox — the last two big TV players that haven't launched their own streamers — will launch their own streamers. But on the other hand, the TV business has been slowing down for a decade: Every quarter, more cable TV subscribers cut the cord, or never sign up for a cord in the first place. The people who own cable TV networks don't seem to have any plan to deal with the issue, other than trying to sell their cable TV networks. Lightshed analyst Rich Greenfield has been chronicling the industry's massive, internet-driven change for years. I caught up with him on my Channels podcast to talk through the particular challenges — and perhaps some opportunities — facing TV right now. Here's an edited excerpt of our chat. Peter Kafka: When the music business collapsed back in the Napster era, it happened basically overnight. But TV has hung on for much longer, even though consumer behavior changed pretty significantly over the last decade. Is there something specific about the TV industry that's allowed these guys to move in slow motion? Rich Greenfield: There's very few businesses where you can raise the price on a product that consumers are using less and less every day. The brilliance of the cable TV business model was the big fat bundle. It's a pretty incredible business to put all of these channels together, even if people don't want most of them. It had everything you wanted and no alternatives, which is very different than where we are today. One of my soapboxes is when I hear people saying they wish we could go back to the cable days. And I keep saying, that was terrible. You guys forget. Everyone hated that. I think consumers are pretty adept at managing their services, and I don't hear a lot of complaints. Sometimes it's like, "Where is this game?" Or "How do I find this thing?" It can be a little confusing. But think about your cellphone. You've had one for quite a while now. Managing the apps and deleting something if you're not using it and adding something —these are all pretty easy functions. We don't give consumers enough credit. They're pretty adept at figuring out cheaper solutions and ways to manage. I want to ask you about a few specific companies. The Paramount deal is finally going to close. What do you think the new owners — David Ellison and his father, Larry Ellison — will do once they have control? Will it change overnight, or is this a slow-rolling thing? It will certainly change. The juxtaposition is sort of amazing. [Paramount, under current owner Shari Redstone, is a] financially strapped company, with challenged financial ownership. And you're moving to an ownership team that is one of the wealthiest families on planet Earth. Please help BI improve our Business, Tech, and Innovation coverage by sharing a bit about your role — it will help us tailor content that matters most to people like you. What is your job title? (1 of 2) Entry level position Project manager Management Senior management Executive management Student Self-employed Retired Other Continue By providing this information, you agree that Business Insider may use this data to improve your site experience and for targeted advertising. By continuing you agree that you accept the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . David Ellison is probably going to be running this company for 30, 40 years. He obviously has a passion for entertainment. He's moving to a much bigger stage. But this is still a financially struggling company. He can't fix the trends of what consumer behavior is changing. What he can do is invest and really build. And you saw the "South Park" deal they just cut, where they're spending hundreds of millions of dollars to move the show [exclusively] to Paramount+. I think it's a small sign of the post-merger strategy, which is that David Ellison is not just doing this to cut costs and squeeze more juice out of this existing company. His goal is to build something significant with a very long-term perspective, which is going to require a lot of investment. What does that look like? Is the new Paramount just a film studio and a streaming service and CBS — and Ellison sells off everything that's not those things? I think initially they'll say they need the cash flow from cable and will use that cash flow to reinvest. I would be shocked if you didn't see more sports on CBS. I think they will be a contender for UFC rights. You've seen David Ellison multiple times in the past year sitting in the front row, cage side with Ari Emanuel [ CEO of TKO Group, which owns UFC ], and with [UFC CEO] Dana White. And Donald Trump. I don't disagree there on politics. But I also think he likes the content. I think he's going to spend a lot of money. He understands the tech North Star — whether we're talking about TikTok, Meta, Netflix, or Spotify — it's all about time spent. I think David gets that Paramount+ needs a heck of a lot more time spent. The only way you're gonna get there is a better product and more content. Let's move to Disney. Sometime in the next few weeks, before college football and the NFL starts, ESPN will finally be something you can buy as a stand-alone streaming service. If they rolled this out in 2015, we would have said it's a really big deal. Is it a big deal in 2025? At $30 a month, I don't think this is a huge deal. My guess is it gives them flexibility to start packaging this with other services. They can probably get some subscribers. Not a lot. It's probably low to mid-single-digit millions. Not millions and millions. Remember, they're giving the new service to everybody who already subscribed to [pay TV]. So 65 million-plus ESPN subscribers are going to get this new ESPN app at no additional cost. So who is the audience for this? You're not subscribing to the big bundle. You're a pretty passionate sports fan. You're willing to spend $30 a month for sports. My guess is it's just a small number. Please help BI improve our Business, Tech, and Innovation coverage by sharing a bit about your role — it will help us tailor content that matters most to people like you. Continue By providing this information, you agree that Business Insider may use this data to improve your site experience and for targeted advertising. By continuing you agree that you accept the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . It actually makes sense to do it. But I don't think, at the end of the day, it is a huge needle-mover. What's going to matter to Disney stock is their theme park business and their cruise ship business. Those being better than expected — because of the state of the economy and what's happened with tariffs not being as problematic as feared a few months ago — is far more important to Disney than what happens with the ESPN streaming rollout. We're also close to the launch of Fox's own streamer, Fox One. The main assets there are Fox Sports — which is really the NFL — and Fox News. Do you think Fox thinks this is primarily a product for people who want to watch football, or do you think it's primarily for Fox News fans? I think this is a pretty limited offering for a sports fan. I think you'll see more uptake from Fox News viewers. In the old days, you would have said that Fox News has a very old audience. And the idea that its audience is going to stream it doesn't make sense. But maybe that's not true in 2025? Streaming's become pretty normalized. When you look at how many subscribers Netflix now has, I don't think streaming is some elitist thing. I think it's pretty normalized. I think the part you may be missing is that the Fox News audience is also widening out. And as you make it available to people on streaming, you may pick up some younger people. Maybe it's more interesting during election years. It creates flexibility. And I don't think there's a whole lot of downside. All the basic cable networks are in freefall. Everyone who owns them is trying to sell them — either directly to another buyer or, in the case of Comcast's Versant, trying to bundle it up as a publicly traded stock. Who is a buyer for cable networks? I don't think there are enough people talking about this topic. So many of the investors I deal with, or even industry executives I talk to, think you're going to see Paramount do a deal with Warner Bros. Or maybe you'll see Versant merge with some of the Paramount cable networks. But let's just step back. I think David Ellison and Larry Ellison have a much bigger plan than aggregating more linear cable networks. I would be surprised if that was the strategy. I think there's a much bigger plan that the Ellison family is probably thinking about that goes well beyond just aggregating more legacy media assets. WarnerMedia merged with Discovery, which hasn't created value. CBS and Viacom became Paramount, and that hasn't created value. Disney bought most of Fox's cable networks, and that hasn't created value. Putting legacy assets together that are in secular decline doesn't work. Maybe it might've been worse [without those deals]. But that's not compelling for a buyer. It's a reason to be a seller. As a buyer, there's lots of things you could buy and lots of places you could go. The idea that buying more of these assets so that you have more costs to cut doesn't seem really compelling. Another reason you are skeptical about big media consolidation is politics. You think that either antitrust politics, or Donald Trump's personal politics, make that unlikely. The only media mogul he wasn't complaining about was Rupert Murdoch, and now he's suing Murdoch. I think it's going to be challenging.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Time of India
Shekhar Kapur unveils AI-generated Sci-Fi series 'Warlord' featuring organic spaceships and interdimensional love story
Ace filmmaker Shekhar Kapur has stepped into new creative territory with 'Warlord', a science fiction series made entirely using artificial intelligence. The makers have released the teaser of the movie on Tuesday. Mystical crystals power intergalactic narrative The story revolves around warriors defending mystical crystals that power an entire galaxy. These crystals are fundamental particles beyond neutrinos that "create the universe" but exist for only a millionth of a millionth of a millionth of a millionth of a second," Shekhar Kapur explains as quoted in a press note shared by the makers. Written and directed by Shekhar Kapur, the series follows an interdimensional warrior who survives mortal danger with the help of his lover in another dimension. "The only time that lover can bring him to her is when he's absolutely close to death... So if the sword hits him and he's so close to death, she shifts him to a different dimension, and you might just see the sword going through him, but he's not there," he explains the concept. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like How Much Does It Cost to Rent a Private Jet - The Prices May Surprise You! Private Jet I Search Ads Learn More Undo Creators encouraged to build on 'Warlord' Shekhar Kapur's vision goes beyond the series itself. He plans to make all production design and characters open for creators to use--"a rainforest of ideas." Users can adapt elements from "Warlord" for a one-cent fee, as long as their creations remain open source for others to use in their art, as per the press release from the makers. Kartik Shah serves as composer for 'Warlord.' The project represents a dramatic departure from traditional production methods, with Kapur noting that sequences that would have taken "months and months" to create in the past are now being completed in just two weeks. AI seen as leveller in filmmaking Calling AI a democratizing force, Shekhar Kapur believes it will disrupt the dominance of big studios and streaming platforms. "The studios have followed the wrong model... AI is going to destroy the myth of budgets, destroy the myth of being big," Shekhar Kapur says, likening it to Napster's disruption of the music industry. One of the series' most striking elements is its unique design. Shekhar Kapur reveals that the spaceships are inspired by jellyfish and are envisioned as living, organic vessels. "In the distant future, we'll have materials that will heal themselves. So spaceships will be made out of living materials and organic materials that heal and live," said Shekhar Kapur as quoted in the press note. These organic ships move through space "like sails using the winds of the universe," propelled by "the force of the particles, the fundamental particles of space." 'Warlord' universe to include films, games The Warlord universe will expand into films and games, while the director plans to establish an AI-focused film school in Mumbai's Dharavi.
Telegraph
21 hours ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Google could steal the entire internet
Google has shown us what the end of the internet looks like. It calls it AI Mode. From Tuesday, instead of seeing ten blue links to third party websites when searching Google, users will see digests of information created by AI. Google says this 'lets you ask nuanced questions that would have previously required multiple searches.' Sometimes there is value in these digests – as demonstrated by AI startup Perplexity. However, the change has catastrophic economic consequences because of Google's dominant position over what we see on the web; AI mode removes the need to visit the site that created the original material. Google, it should be remembered, was found guilty of maintaining a monopoly by an American federal court last summer. An analytics study last week suggested that the top ranking site in blue link Google loses 79 per cent of its traffic after AI summaries are introduced. Other surveys suggest even more: as much as 96 per cent. This is not how the web was supposed to end. Sir Tim Berners Lee's original vision was of a rapid publishing technology, a two way conversation much like the telephone. When Google was young, it promised to get out of our way. 'We wanted people to spend a minimum amount of time on Google. The faster they got their results, the more they'd use it,' said founder Larry Page in 2004. But now Google has become like The Eagles' Hotel California – you can check in, but never leave. That's in keeping with an extractive industry which takes much from publishing but gives little back. AI makes this an order of magnitude worse. Generative AI breaks an informal social contract that has existed since the dawn of business: that a buyer should take a keen interest in the health of its suppliers. AI, though, is replacing suppliers entirely: an analogy is eating the seed corn. For having ingested everything from entire research libraries to newspapers, from YouTube to the works of every gallery, AI can create fine tuned pastiches and continue to produce them forever. Google can also punish sites that refuse to be scraped with a kind of corporate death sentence: making them disappear from Google. A former Facebook engineer, Georg Zoeller, who also advises Asian governments on AI, says generative AI is little more than piracy disguised by hype. 'Large language models are just storage, and all they are doing is compressing knowledge,' he says. 'The industry would have been murdered in its crypt if it had told the truth, and people realised that on the other side of the bot is a Napster'. The magic trick is how AI disguises the theft. Google says the old search results will still be available if you want – or can find them. Britain's Competition and Markets Authority has investigated the company's use of generative AI, but its remedies are so far very tentative, and it is soliciting views. The CMA also finds British business paying a very high toll to maintain Google's advertising dominance: UK publicly listed companies spend £10 billion with Google advertising, which the CMA suggests is far higher than it would be in a competitive digital ad market. The CMA can and should do much more to tame this predatory giant, so British internet businesses can survive.
Buzz Feed
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Buzz Feed
21 Forgotten Websites From The Early 2000s
TikTok, Instagram, and social media as a whole have definitely taken a toll on today's youth. They'll never understand the struggles of the early internet, when nothing was at your fingertips, and high-speed connections were a luxury. The internet was a weird, clunky place. Not nearly as all-consuming as it is now, but those early browsing days laid the groundwork for the kinds of communities we now see on modern platforms. Back then, followers weren't the metric for anything, mostly because no one was being followed. Technically, you were making "friends," whether it was strangers you added to your Top 8 on MySpace or people with cool Neopets you kept tabs on. Those early internet days truly shaped our online lives. In a lot of ways, they made us more grateful for the instant access we have now. Napster and LimeWire basically walked so Spotify could run, if we're being honest. But there's something deeply nostalgic about that bare-bones version of the web — messy, slow, and full of personality. I recently stumbled across a post on r/AskReddit where someone asked, 'What's an early Internet site kids these days will never know?' From pre-Google search engines to flash game havens, here are 21 of the most beloved early internet websites people are reminiscing about: "Addicting Games." "Ask Jeeves." "I remember I held out on Google for a long time because I used a site called Dogpile. Edit: Just checked and it's still running. Very cool, maybe I will have to go back to my roots." "Homestar Runner." "Geocities." "The old Cartoon Network website. Treasure trove of games. I, for one, had a blast making my own Codename: Kids Next Door ID and printing it at my mom's office. Color and all." "I still have an Angelfire site online from the mid-to-late '90s. Have no password for it, no idea how to access it. I think the page counter stopped counting." "Ebaum's World." "I really wish the old Candystand was still around. I want to play Lifesavers mini-golf again for the nostalgia. I still remember learning about it in study hall because a teacher let one of the football stars play Candystand mini-golf on the smart board. I went home and immediately pulled it up on the family PC to start my own addiction to Candystand. They had so many great games I could play that were way more fun than writing a 20-page Shakespearean tragedy." "MetaCrawler. My first was good ol' webcrawler in '96." "Napster. The original." "StumbleUpon was such a gem. I don't know if it was because the internet was smaller back then, but it was so much easier to find diverse, but quality content. These days it feels like we're stuck to platforms that provide specific types of content and little control over the algorithm." "Even after Google came out, I stuck it out with AltaVista for a long time; I was convinced it would make the long haul over Google, even though almost all my friends had been sold already. 😅" "I still remember the song, something like, 'TO STAY ALIVE I FIGHT FOR BREATH, THEN AGAIN I DIE IN STICK DEATH, I DIE IN STICK DEATH.'" " was not blocked when I worked at a call center, so that made the workdays possible." "Anyone remember JoeCartoon?" "Obvious pick: MySpace." "'You can do only limit is you. Welcome, you. YES zombocom.'" "Neopets." "Awwww I miss ThinkGeek so much, they had such cool shit" "Miniclip (still exists but looks nothing like what it used to look like back in 2008/2009). With smartphones and apps you can install directly, I somehow doubt kids are using Miniclip or websites like it. Not to mention flash games are sort of dead since the end of Adobe, from what I've understood." Do you remember any of these long-forgotten websites? Let's reminisce in the comments.
Fast Company
07-07-2025
- Business
- Fast Company
Napster is back—and it's betting big on holographic avatars
Copyright lawsuits and ethical debates have led some to say the AI industry in its 'Napster era.' Now, Napster itself is now reentering the chat with its own AI bet. Last month, the former dot-com darling launched a conversational AI platform with dozens of 'AI companions' trained with topical expertise to help users learn, collaborate, create, and problem-solve. Napster also unveiled the View, a 2.1-inch display that attaches to a laptop as a 'second screen' for two-way 3D holographic video chats. Unlike in the '90s, the file-sharing pioneer is no longer a first mover. The nostalgia-laden brand joins an already crowded field of AI agents and competing devices from both giants and startups. Napster's platform used frontier AI models from OpenAI and Gemini to develop a new 'large persona model' (LPM) trained on 30 psychometric characteristics mined from organizational psychology, says Napster chief technology officer Edo Segal. Each companion embodies some sort of profession as a topical expert, along with therapists, doctors, nutritionists are chefs, architects, engineers, and educators. Business-minded offerings help with everything from financial planning and tax strategy to legal issues and public policy. The goal is to allow users to explore endless customizable personalities, each with distinct voices, Segal tells Fast Company: 'We've made it possible to effectively explore building these endless universes of these personas.' Napster's platform is based on tech developed by Touchcast, a startup founded by Segal that Infinite Reality acquired for $500 million this spring. AI comparisons to Napster's early woes aren't lost on Napster execs. Segal says it's an apt metaphor, adding that early clashes with the music industry echo more current debates about how tech giants control consumers' content, data, and audiences. Decades later, Napster wants to be seen as an ethical alternative to Big Tech. One way it's doing that: Promising users it won't share, well, or wall off their data or audiences. 'There was a lot of controversy around what Napster did, but you can't argue it wasn't user-focused,' Segal says. 'At a time like this, with AI's profound impact on society, it's useful to have a brand with a north star that puts the user first. . . . That's the important lesson to take. Obviously, we don't want the outcome to be similar to the last time around.' Gartner expects 80% of enterprise software to be multimodal by 2030, up from less than 10% last year. However, analysts predict a third of AI video generation providers could fail by 2028 because of reputational, ethical, and legal issues. Napster's plan involves letting people create and customize new avatars or even make one in their own likeness. It's already working with London's Imperial College, where professors can create avatars for students to talk with outside office hours that come with transcripts of interactions afterward. Another early adopter is the Portuguese soccer league Benfica, which created an immersive 3D version of its e-commerce site and a way for fans to chat with an AI Companion about the team, jerseys, and related topics. 'What makes people feel heard and seen?' Napster's AI pivot is the latest in a series of attempts by various owners to ride its brand cachet during emerging tech waves. 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. Startups like Humane, Rabbit, and Bee have either flopped or at least failed to gain much traction. Giants like Meta and Google are moving forward with their AI-enabled smart glasses. (And then there are other still secret projects like whatever OpenAI's making with former iPhone designer Jony Ive.) What makes Napster think it can succeed where others haven't? Part of the strategy is charging people a low subscription fee starting at $19 per month or to bundle it with the Napster View for $199. The trick is moving Napster beyond its music legacy. Some experts are skeptical if holographic avatars are even needed. Voice and text will see adoption much faster unless there's a specific need for video, says Gabo Arora, founder and CEO of the immersive tech startup Lightshed. 'That's the crucial thing,' says Arora. 'You know it's fake, but you don't want to feel too self-aware of this. The broader thing with all this is that we are now in the intimacy economy. What makes people feel heard and seen and connected?' Despite its controversial origin story, Napster still was a 'really good brand' known for being disruptive and innovative, says Napster president and chief marketing officer Karina Kogan. Infinite Reality had spent years buying companies related to AI, virtual reality, and other metaverse-related industries. After buying Napster, it seemed like a way to unite them all under a recognizable name. '[Napster's brand] feels like an accelerant to getting us into the market versus trying to build a lot of equity into Infinite Reality,' Kogan says. 'As a marketer, the challenge is which challenge would I rather take on: Is it harder to drive awareness or change perception? . . . How do we make people experience Napster as more than a music service or more than what it was like 20 years ago?' 'We have a massive product road map' While Napster is selling the idea of customizable AI avatars as helpful, the reality is more nuanced. While some researchers have found people resist the AI broader companion category for its lack of inauthenticity, other recent findings suggest AI companions can reduce loneliness. There's still growing concern that constant AI conversation could dull critical thinking, foster dependency, provide inaccuracies, and even lead to disturbing psychological effects. When asked about its plans for adding safeguards to protect users, execs say they have bans in place against certain types of harmful answers. Chats also come with a disclaimer that says 'AI can make mistakes. Check important info.' Whether people even want an infinite array of options to choose from is a question. Companies tend to drive adoption of new tech by copying platforms that have worked in the past, says Samantha Wolfe, a professor at New York University who teaches a class on AI avatars. She thinks Napster's platform seems almost like an app store—instead of merely creating AI avatars to chat with based on celebrities or other parasocial relationships. 'It feels like they're skinning AI applications,' says Wolfe. 'It's nice having apps on your iPhone in a way that each has its own expertise. [Napster's AI Companions] are like they're all individual people-apps.' Voice capabilities could strengthen interactions with AI companions, says marketing professor Stefano Puntoni, codirector of the Wharton Human-AI Research at the University of Pennsylvania. He also notes research suggests anthropomorphic cues can influence customer responses. 'People often avoid adopting AI companions because they don't believe that these are 'true' relationships,' says Puntoni, who studies the ways AI chatbots impact on areas like loneliness and consumer habits. 'The interesting thing is that at the same time, people do acknowledge that AI can fulfill many of the concrete aspects of relationships.' Knowing if people want holographic AI experts could determine Napster's ability to find a niche through its new metaverse-minded home. It's also just one of Infinite Reality's many bets: In the past year, it's spent at least $1 billion buying companies specializing in generative AI (Touchcast), avatars (Action Face), game development (LandVault) and spatial web experiences (Ethereal Engine). The challenge will be tying it all together. 'We're putting products into the market and looking for feedback and signals,' Kogan says. 'Sometimes the thing you think is going to hit isn't the thing that hits . . . There's obviously more strategy behind our decisions. We have a massive product road map.'
