331–340 of 451 posts
It appears to have been banned when the author offered an illegal sweepstakes. Contests and sweepstakes are carefully regulated in America, with slightly different regimes in all 50 states. You should not run one unless you have gotten legal help with it!
Source? The creator's twitter doesn't mention that at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is nationalisation evil in itself? The private sector just doesn't have sufficient incentive to serve the public over their own interest. We've seen this time and time again.
> Is nationalisation evil in itself? Oh very much it is. Come to the lovely Eastern Europe and see for yourself how good national owned companies are. Full of useless bureaucrats put there to ensure voters so the ruling party can continue ruling. Also in huge debts which are paid by more taxes so the working people pay for the lazy. Unless the human race somehow chains itself to selflessness, nationalization + democr…
Privatisation of the British railways was a disaster, and the creeping privatisation of the National Health Service is a disaster in the making as well. As far as I'm concerned, when we're talking about well-understood, national-scale services, private sector almost always starves the service out of greed or is outright incompetent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. On desktop I use Thunderbird, on mobile I use something called Feeder, it is a FOSS RSS/Atom feed reader with built in Webview so you can watch the video in app if you like. YouTube and Bitchute both support RSS, also Peertube has RSS built in if you watch anything self hosted using that software, as far as all the other tube sites out there I'm not sure because I don't subscribe to anyone on those sites, but I…
> It can be a little clunky to add subscriptions I guess, but how often are you doing that? And you're saying that as a techie. How do you think the average subscriber of Markiplier, Pewdiepie or Logan Paul would feel about that? Things like peertube will always be a super small niche because there are two dozen alternatives to YouTube and they all suck if you depend on YouTube for income. As long as those oopsies do…
I don't care about them. People can do what they want. I'm not trying to revolutionize the world. I'm just trying to live life the way I want to and help people who are interested in doing things that I do.
It doesn't require you to be a techie to copy paste a URL. It's as easy as adding a contact on your phone.
I watched an interview with Jaron Lanier yesterday actually talk about YouTube recommendations, he talks about an experiment, click the top recommendation and let it play 10 times and see what you get. You have to keep in mind just because they've been helpful a few times doesn't mean they're more helpful than no curation at all. Confirmation bias exists. Remember YouTube before Google owned it? Most of the content was not as good as it is now but it was still much easier to find new interesting things. That algorithm is superior to anything that's been implemented since, and honestly every iteration makes it worse. The fundamental difference with it was that it recommended based on what other people watched, not based on some hand waving about getting to know you and your preferences.
If everything were distributed across ten platforms then viral spread of content could only occur organically. That would be amazing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The situation you just described does not match YouTube's value being in that it "provides content curation". The situation you described involves you doing the curation, and YouTube acting as a glorified RSS reader. If you can subscribe to channels on YouTube and be satisfied with that content (and not from e.g. YouTube's recommendations for stuff you don't subscribe to), then you can do those same things whether th…
Is that something an average teen with an iPhone can do, or wants to do? And apart from the subscription feed, there's recommendations based on the videos you already watched. If creators were distributed across different platforms, this wouldn't work.
Use an app that can listen to podcasts? Uh... yeah.
> apart from the subscription feed, there's recommendations based on the videos you already watched
So you're just going to ignore the context and pretend that you're saying something insightful? The comment you're responding to specifically pointed out that the original commenter doesn't cite YouTube's recommendation engine as the source of value for him/her.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. It stands to reason then that if all speech is truly free eventually some speech will be censored. America doesn't allow people to say "Fuck" on public TV broadcasts, therefore all speech isn't free. No one is harmed by a curse word. Worst case a child will learn…
Go and actually read Popper and you'll find he was close to a free speak maximalist his views on when you shouldn't "tolerate" intolerance was an incredibly high bar that almost nothing ever hits.
What Popper didn't anticipate is that the square of public opinion would become the internet, and a big question this creates is if the internet is a place where rationale debate and proportional representation of ideas is possible or not.
If the internet were to make the public square of opinion a place of irrational debate, I think Popper would be very much against it, and would want us to do something about it.
Here's a quote from him:
> as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols
So the condition he puts forward is: can we counter the intolerants on the internet by using rational arguments? If we can, than suppression (he claims) would be unwise, but if we can't, than suppression by force (he claims) might be warranted.
At least that's how I interpret Popper.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I watch a lot of lefty "news" and infotainment. I still get ads for the conservative propaganda, survival rations, prepping, etc. I think it's because I also watch a lot of firearms hobby content. Kinda silly, but it does make me chuckle that people like Ben Shapiro, PragerU, and 4Patriots are subsidizing my lefty youtube subscriptions.
What’s particularly fascinating is how there is an almost complete absence of a leftist equivalent on YT. There are some leftist channels here and there, but you’re not going to get bombarded with communist ads after watching one video like you might on the right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I watch a lot of lefty "news" and infotainment. I still get ads for the conservative propaganda, survival rations, prepping, etc. I think it's because I also watch a lot of firearms hobby content. Kinda silly, but it does make me chuckle that people like Ben Shapiro, PragerU, and 4Patriots are subsidizing my lefty youtube subscriptions.
What’s particularly fascinating is how there is an almost complete absence of a leftist equivalent on YT. There are some leftist channels here and there, but you’re not going to get bombarded with communist ads after watching one video like you might on the right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a peer-to-peer video client, with part of it's data being directly shared (similarly to torrents) and part via a blockchain. This makes it highly resistant to censorship and thus is where many people are moving their channels to.
It's worth noting that while based on LBRY (The supposedly censorship resistant blockchain protocol) Odysee is a bit more opinionated front end with restrictions on things such as pornography. By the standards of "alternative" video sites there's a pretty diverse set of content including mirrors from some well known YouTube creators (KhanAcademy, EEVBlog, GreatScott, Veritasium, HarwareUnboxed, Not Just Bikes, EposVo…
I find high curation is the only way I find a service like YouTube to be usable.
There's an endless sea of content on there. It's not important that I agree with it or not, it's important if it's quality, which the overwhelming majority of it isn't.
I'm looking at the landing page of odysee now.
* Why can't Wolverine shack up with doctor strange?
* 1 minute of Luigi in a bag!!!
* Top sleep hacks
* Guess how old this Korean actress is?
I can't block these channels or show disinterest even though I made an account.
My issue isn't the politicalness, it's quality and relevance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go and actually read Popper and you'll find he was close to a free speak maximalist his views on when you shouldn't "tolerate" intolerance was an incredibly high bar that almost nothing ever hits.
So, I should read 25 books to verify that your one sentence claim is valid? Why not back that up with some relevant quotes to support your thesis, friend? That seems a decent thing to do compared to the litany of homework you callously threw at me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go and actually read Popper and you'll find he was close to a free speak maximalist his views on when you shouldn't "tolerate" intolerance was an incredibly high bar that almost nothing ever hits.
So, I should read 25 books to verify that your one sentence claim is valid? Why not back that up with some relevant quotes to support your thesis, friend? That seems a decent thing to do compared to the litany of homework you callously threw at me.