91–100 of 438 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
...there are now three seashells on every toilet (for some reason).
I'd like to think no one knows how the seashells work and the real joke is everyone just makes fun of people for not knowing (the writer didn't even know what they did and refuses to say anything other than how they came into the story)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Contrary to this, I'd like to see 3blue1brown actually get two more strikes and get deleted per YouTube "3 strikes" policy. Imagine the furor and outrage of that. One of the most popular, meaningful, and impactful channels done in by YouTube's (and the DMCA's) ridiculous policy [1]. The public outcry from this might motivate real policy changes both within Google and other FANNG companies as well as with lawmakers. U…
> Contrary to this, I'd like to see 3blue1brown actually get two more strikes and get deleted per YouTube "3 strikes" policy. Does the "3 strikes" policy apply to large channels that bring in a lot of views and ad revenue?
from https://x.com/ChainPatrol/status/1876300596182983151 " Hello! This was a false positive in our systems at @ChainPatrol . We are retracting the takedown request, and will conduct a full post-mortem to ensure this does not happen again. We have been combatting a huge volume of fake YouTube videos that are attempting to steal user funds. Unfortunately, in our mission to protect users from scams, false positives (ve…
I’m very interested how they think any of their copyright takedown claims pass scrutiny.
Sure it's possible that the company is a truly malicious actor that has a fake website and does not actually submit any valid claims, while working alongside the top brands in the industry to tear down that same industry. Personally though, I think it's more likely the company is a startup rushing to grab profits, has bad algorithms that come up with a lot of false positives, and is generally a bull in a china shop. Not that that's excusable, but being sloppy and taking shortcuts that hurt people is a bit different from being a "copyright hit company" where hurting people is the company's entire raison d'etre. The former calls for better regulation; the latter calls for being stamped out.
I don't know if you've tried to consume any crypto-related content on YouTube recently, but YouTube has a major problem with fake "live streams" from "Elon Musk" and other prominent crypto figures who promise they'll "double your crypto for a limited time" if you just send it to them within the next ten minutes. Someone's gotta fight that, on behalf of both the scam victims and the impersonated brands, because YouTube themselves don't give a shit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Contrary to this, I'd like to see 3blue1brown actually get two more strikes and get deleted per YouTube "3 strikes" policy. Imagine the furor and outrage of that. One of the most popular, meaningful, and impactful channels done in by YouTube's (and the DMCA's) ridiculous policy [1]. The public outcry from this might motivate real policy changes both within Google and other FANNG companies as well as with lawmakers. U…
> Contrary to this, I'd like to see 3blue1brown actually get two more strikes and get deleted per YouTube "3 strikes" policy. Does the "3 strikes" policy apply to large channels that bring in a lot of views and ad revenue?
I would not be surprised if Youtube has a team dedicated to keep Mr. Beast happy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, we already have YouTube channels and tiktok content that are about the same as the TV show "ass" shown in the movie.
"America's funniest home videos" got dumbed down to "AFV" and the content was mostly "ow, my balls!". They even added a warning to the viewers to submit "wows, not ows". Although to be fair,some of that happened before Idiocracy came out. With the public money used for sports stadiums, that element of the movie to have government sports teams is slowly coming true also.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sort of. They got the outcomes pretty close, but the movie was based on a premise of eugenics and equating poverty with low intelligence.
Weird, when I saw it, it was equating poverty with low access to education and corresponding outcomes.
With AI exponentially accelerating effects of Dead Internet, I think any social or content-sharing platforms will require some form of Digital ID that can't be easily created/mass-generated (e.g. maybe tie bank account to it?). That would put real consequences on users misusing platforms. Even a small fee for misbehavior would likely curtail vast swathes of bad actors. It would also make companies be less trigger-hap…
from https://x.com/ChainPatrol/status/1876300596182983151 " Hello! This was a false positive in our systems at @ChainPatrol . We are retracting the takedown request, and will conduct a full post-mortem to ensure this does not happen again. We have been combatting a huge volume of fake YouTube videos that are attempting to steal user funds. Unfortunately, in our mission to protect users from scams, false positives (ve…
This company is basically an extreme nobody and has like 1-3 likes on their posts. It is absurd how imbalanced the power is with regard to automation and copyright strikes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a good baseline might be that you need to deposit say $1M This is a license to rip off the copyrights of anyone without a million dollars in cash.
I don't think so, since YouTube is operating their extrajudicial "go the extra mile for copyright holders" copyright claim system. It isn't required by law and this is what's being abused, not plain DMCA claims. For regular claimants, the regular (and free) DMCA system would still be in effect. The bonus is that filing fraudulent DMCA claims has real legal repercussions under the law. I don't know if there's any real…
Which is way scarier than something required by law. Law can be lobbied about and changed. Law has limits. Law can be ignored when you are rich and powerful.
Lawsuits from megacorps, on the other hand, cannot.