This isn’t the solution people think it is. The only thing Google needs to do now to make it legal is to force a prompt asking for your consent where if you disagree you are completely blocked off from the site. That is, assuming Alexander Hanff, the one carrying on this narrative since 2016, is correct and interpreted the response correctly. In Article 5 of the 2002/58/EC there is a second paragraph that states the following:

Paragraph 1 shall not affect any legally authorised recording of communications and the related traffic data when carried out in the course of lawful business practice for the purpose of providing evidence of a commercial transaction or of any other business communication.

I’m no lawyer, but I tell you who has them in droves, Google and YouTube, whom I’m sure have already discussed whether their primary means of business revenue, ads, could be construed as a commercial transaction for which evidence is needed. I’m not sure how a two page reply from the EU commission to his request telling him Article 5 applies really helps the guy out if Article 5 also includes the means by which YouTube is allowed to run scripts that provide evidence that ads have been able to be properly reproduced.

Still, assuming Alexander Hanff is right, Google just needs to add a consent form and begin blocking access to all content if users disagree, so it seems to me his claim is damned if he is right, and damned if he isn’t right.

This right here. Hamas should have just owner up to it, Israel was already doing a good job of damaging its intervention, all the hospital issue has done is shift a lot of the protests and discussions onto a very shaky platform surrounding it, which will just disengage people who would have otherwise criticized it and make those still protesting because of it more radicalized into fictional narratives. Hamas, once again, has played itself at the cost of Palestinian lives, this time by giving Israel an excuse to gaslight what they are doing with the presence of a false narrative.

They can still move to whatever substitutes it, like the fediverse, but that also likely means more pressure to make it better, too.

Please do it and convince Steve Huffman as well. The fediverse always welcomes more users.

Not really, they are just busy lobbying and promoting troll farms to keep combustion engines and their high maintenance part replacement income going.

Israel has never needed permission before. The US isn’t going to criticize one of, if not its only, core ally in the Middle East, at least any more than it has to, for something it isn’t going to be able to get it to stop and would only break diplomatic ties. But it is clearly pressuring Israel to tone it down. It’s odd how the criticism against the US keeps going from “its getting to involved in everything” to “its not doing enough”.

It probably would be easier for public pressure to coerce US imperialism in the zone if there wasn’t Ruso-Chino imperialism also trying to influence through Syria and Iran, with North Korean weapon imports to boot. They can both be condemned, but one losing is clearly going to favor the other, so it’s hardly going to fix the problem, it’s just moving it elsewhere.

If it were in Europe, sure. As it is, Europe largely cares because of the game US-imperialism and ruso-chino-imperialism play with the Middle East. Otherwise, it would be like your typical random country where this shit happens - international condemnation and no action.

Seems like you can replace anti-Semites with any populist reactionary in this quote. But in terms of an argument, I have seen far too many just end up with replies that ignore most of it and just stick to whatever crumbs they still see as an opening, specially when they know they can intimidate and disconcert by number.

Very few ever “fall silently”, as this quote portrays, it is either a forced silence by the conversation being closed by moderators who are either complicit or getting bombarded with intimidation and alarmism themselves, or by branching out into gaslighting far outside of the discussion. Getting the last word is worth shit, much like silence itself. But with so many thinking silence indicates rightness, is it a wonder that so much of the word is addicted to the most permanent form of silence, death? History is written by the victors, upon the body of corpses.

I can tell you this: Trump isn’t the sort who will ever fall silent.

Yeah, Israel should only have gone as far as putting Palestinians into concentration/re-education camps with a healthy side-dose of black market organ trading and forcing Palestinian families to live with an Israeli supervisor, if CCP’s example is to be followed.

At least China is making it clear where it is on the lines being drawn in the global geopolitics. What I don’t get is social media like YouTube still sucking up to them and censoring things like 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. It’s very easy to support Palestine against Israel, but what Palestinians really need is support that isn’t built up on bad faith (a.k.a. the people also supporting Hamas and their terrorist acts or countries that clearly don’t really give a sh-t in other circumstances). As it is and because a lot of it is being built on that bad faith, it’s allowing neozionists in Israel to get away with far more than they would normally be getting away with.

That’s bullshit. Whataboutism is what you did, trying to use what Israel does to excuse Hamas doing it. The response to whataboutism is always the same, you can criticize both of those things, which is what sab did, what a comment admitting defending Palestinian claims while condemning Hamas does, and is what people are generally doing with Israel and Hamas. Stop gaslighting.

Oh, and regarding the “Update”, most of those are still relying on YT hosting, and the independent exceptions aren’t dealing with even a fraction of the bandwidth or moderation costs, never mind actually paying content creators for their content. Yes, this is a piracy community, I just tend to mind it more when the content creators being affected aren’t Hollywood.

It only seems like a bad deal because everything we’ve been getting has been free so far and the content isn’t coming from major Hollywood producers. It’s about on par with Netflix and Disney+, except we consume a lot more of YouTube. I’m pretty sure they are also taking into account that some people will continue adblocking. They need a lot more moderation than Netflix of Disney+ and they have a lot more load on their servers and consumption per user.

As an aside, people can downvote all they want, but if they are really going to push for this, they might better spend their time searching for alternatives that won’t domino alongside YouTube if this is countermovement is really going to be a thing.

I mean, I saw the warnings, but still could close them and keep watching them. Still, I ended up getting Premium to support YT streamers I watch without ads. It’s either that or that YouTube dies with a domino effect on the industry of small time streamers. I watch it far more than Netflix or Disney Plus, and have payed zero cents for the convenience of adblock. I’ll still keep it installed to use with other Google accounts, but I have no problem paying.

I can understand the people that are angry because a service that has been free for so long begins charging, but don’t be disingenuous and begin saying that the service doesn’t cost anything to maintain, or worse, that the whole business model is nonviable when it’s asking about the same for premium as other streaming services that have been having no problem existing, specially when the money coming out of those services should be in recent memory considering it was one of the major points regarding the writer’s strike (getting a cut from streaming).

deleted by creator

Oh, cool, so when does he sacrifice himself for the good of the universe?

I’m thinking of both. 6% of X revenue is too little, and X not making a positive net profit suggests that Musk wouldn’t even care about it because it ends up requiring just a fraction of his wealth to maintain it for the objective he has for it. That it might not be profitable and he’s still twerking around with it heavily suggests that he doesn’t care about revenue either.

It’s a stain on government agencies that haven’t left it yet, honestly. Specially considering the federated alternatives. People should just leave and stop giving it legitimacy, leaving only the hate speech and the ability to prosecute it as such.

Well, they don’t want to do the one thing needed to make it successful: transparency. Maybe it can’t be.

Until populism gets a beef with it and begins appealing to the crazies, who will happily egg and throw paint bombs solar panels. But at least we haven’t reached that point in the timeline yet.

Is 6% of X revenue enough to disincentivize him? Is X even making positive net profit? EU needs to get its teeth on and begin doing things like blocking their apps in the regional app stores.