LoreSoong @ LoreSoong @startrek.website Posts 2Comments 52Joined 1 mo. ago
I genuinely hate that Im considering searching "heil hitler by kanye" to see if this shit is real. Right before this post I was genuinely fooled by an onion headline because shit is just idistinguishable to me.
damn... you got me. Heres my degen card.
Agreed, but i was just speaking in general after mentioning specific examples. Sorry for the lack of clarity.
But to build on your point, You could make the argument that anything that has been uploaded to the internet cannot be scrubbed. most normal people use the internet completely differently than we do. Removing something from Steam, or Epic for most normal people its gone forever. I know for example my parents would never be able to find a movie/show again if its removed from Netflix or HBO.
Obviously just do a southpark ezpz https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/southpark/images/5/5b/Disclaimer.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20100911004506
I agree, but the issue is that theres already so much taboo content out there ready for the public to "enjoy". Alot of modern crime content heavily idolizes and even sexualizes actual muderers and r*pists. Game of thrones has incest and child murder in the first episode (i almoat dropped the show based on this alone). The dahmer tv show was outright denounced by the victims and yet still many people "enjoyed" the non-consentual actions of a disgusting man. I agree with censorship when real people are being exploited or hurt. Thats a no brainer. But where do we draw the line? The original ben-hur movie has a actor die gruesomely on film. Do we censor that? Bottom line, humans are gross. I think its best if we just look away from whatever theyre doing in the dark corners of their minds. (assuming they arent hurting anyone mentally or physically)
Lets see how many oldies are here. No repeat users
DIE MONSTER!
Damn totally forgot about "all your base are belong to us" what a trip. But i was going for viral normie memes since i mainly remember these memes taking popularity outside of the internet. People were singing the hamster song at parties when i was little so i think its influence as a meme was way more than even dancing baby. And then later 2003 or 4 the badger song. And after a while that duck song took off and my little sister wouldnt stop asking "got any grapes"?
Obviously I disagree with the content. But this just reminds me of the whole "hatred" debacle. the game probably sucks (like hatred did), and its content was very taboo but honestly if some sicko wants to "enjoy" these games i dont think they should be censored. I really hate the idea of people not liking something and it being scrubbed from the internet.
Like if I decided to make a oligarch assassination game with popular figgures as targets. id expect a strong reaction but pulling it from public availability is just plain stupid. And id expect most of the people who think that non-consentual game should be removed would advocate for the murder simulators right to exist. We cant just pick and choose what to censor imo its gotta be all or nothing.
Again, dont care about these games in particular. just playing devils advocate.
The first? Idk about that, im 27. And am well aware of memes prior to my existance. The oldest i can think of is the dancing baby meme.
Or more relavent to this would be the hamster dance
An open source adverts market acutually sounds like an insane, yet viable solution ive never considered. Not only would it be benefitial to users. But the adverts themselves would save money based on the fact that large corps fake advert data to bolster the price on their platform. curious did you come up with that or was this an idea thats been floating aroud?
I agree with every single point youve made. Except
There's not really any serious competition, people would still watch it.
If youtube stared pulling a reddit and implementing changes that users felt offended enough by many people would probably do what we are doing now. And find a decentralized platform like peertube or lemmy. Obviously reddit and youtube are not going anywhere but its still competiton even if its not "serious". a few hundred thousand users is alot in terms of profit.
Just because they've been dumb with privacy laws, doesn't mean they have to do that to find adblockers.
Google has all of the cards. like you said forced logins, drm, in stream adverts are all 1000% in our near future. I just think that before we actually get there we shouldnt roll over and take the abuse.
Genuinely appreciate the discourse on this, but im slightly frustrated that i simply implied that it "seems illegal" and I have multiple people explaining that its not illegal, they dont need to x and y to detect adblock, and that google has all the power. IM AWARE i just wish we could hold them accountable for the MANY infractions on privacy that theyve been guiltly of in the past, and continue to be, and see little to no repercussions.
I think youre locked into percieving this as a user who has a google account who has agreed to google's terms and services. I can go on youtube with no account and watch content with an adblocker on a completely fresh system and IP adress and have the same experience. From what you are saying by simply visiting the website you are agreeing to be tracked and marked as a adblock user. (This obviously happens all the time but lets not let google get away with it) Regardless of the detection method.
I think this would be fine if google forced you to click agree to terms to veiw content. But they dont, so in essence they are collecting data about you and your terminal without your consent which should be illegal. Obviously im bias against google, but i genuinely think it sets a bad precedent. Especially with how shitty and ad flooded the internet has become.
Hanff first reached out to the European Commission about the use of ad blocker detection tools in 2016. In response to his concerns, the commission confirmed that scripts used to detect ad blockers also fall under Article 5.3 of the ePrivacy Directive, a rule that requires websites to ask for user consent before storing or accessing information on a user’s device, such as cookies. “Article 5.3 does not limit itself to any particular type of information or technology, such as cookies,” the commission wrote at the time. “Article 5(3) would also apply to the storage by websites of scripts in users’ terminal equipment to detect if users have installed or are using ad blockers.”
https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/7/23950513/youtube-ad-blocker-crackdown-privacy-advocates-eu
Tldr:Just googled it and this came up. wasnt sure if it was illegal (its not). in the EU theres a guy named Alexander Hanff who very much thinks it should be and I agree.
They are monitoring traffic and scripts and storing information about the user without consent. In other words spyware. And from what you said "many adblockers arent even add ons" isnt that worse? The Pihole for example being detected and a corp like google storing that your ip has one. Makes me very uncomfortable.
please no replies with "youtube is providing a serivice that needs to be paid for, ads are a nessecarry blah blah blah." It doesnt justify spyware.
Websites dont have the ability to see what addons you are using. Youtube must be tracking and storing local traffic data to accomplish this.
Seems illegal