221–230 of 438 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Taco Bell won the franchise war and is the only restaurant remaining. When I saw that movie when I was small, I thought that was literally Taco Bell, McDonald's, and Burger King, et al fighting with tanks, etc. Taco Bell emerged victorious after a bloody struggle.
I am okay with this timeline. At least it has better conversation topics than most of our current timeline.
The year is 2030. After the AI bot wars, FaceBook and Google have been crippled. They let AI automation control their content and it was deleted after OpenAI GPT10 discovered vulnerabilities in automated copyright strikes. Taco Bell won the franchise war and is the only restaurant remaining.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. In the movie, President Camacho recognized the smart guy was smart and wanted him to help because he was smart. We don't have leaders with that kind of wisdom and good intentions.
> No. In the movie, President Camacho recognized the smart guy was smart and wanted him to help because he was smart. We don't have leaders with that kind of wisdom and good intentions. Also, Joe seemed genuinely interested in helping everyone, and didn't seem to neglect the needs of significant portions of the population to achieve some ideological goal or another. Maybe there's such a thing as being too smart to ha…
That being said, it is a society who elected the smartest guy in the world president, and then when a smarter guy came along elected him as the successor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is where headcanon [1] can be a lot of fun. Just accept that they really did fight a war. It's not like it doesn't particularly fit the milieu... [1]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/words-were-watching...
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From their home page, it looks like their stated goal is to remove brand impersonation materials. Lookalike websites, social media compromises, malicious links, etc. They allege to work with registrars, contribute to blocklists and take down scam content. True brand impersonation of this ilk almost always includes copyright infringement. Sure it's possible that the company is a truly malicious actor that has a fake w…
And copyright doesn’t give the ability to fight any of that is the point. This all sounds like abuse of DMCA process.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your analogy doesn't match my statement. I am saying there should be a canonical location for what you create that is on a URL that you own. Everything else is distribution. You built a house on someone else's land, and then they tore it down. Build a house on your own land, as small as that land may be. From there you can create roads, bridges, tunnels to other people's land. On the web land is infinite. You can mak…
Again, I am not against backups but that doesn’t solve the actual problem. The problem isn’t losing the files, it is losing a reliable source of income. Putting the videos on Vimeo/S3 bucket/some random website doesn’t solve that problem. People create videos as a full-time job, which is only possible because of the traffic YouTube brings. Also I think the analogy is pretty solid because it clearly illustrates the em…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't have the reply from ChainPatrol: 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 (very) occasional…
How is this failing the most fundamental check: upload date ?
A copyrighted video might not be uploaded to YouTube, in which case you'd have to fall back on the video creation date, which would have to be manually added in their DB (e.g. Hollywood produced movies).
You can also have leaks of videos before their official release. Admittedly a rare scenario that should can be accounted for in other ways (i.e. skip this check if before upload).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't have the reply from ChainPatrol: 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 (very) occasional…
Abusing the DMCA to take down videos stealing user funds seems... questionable.