![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/d3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
By this metric youtube is not enshittification to some extent. They are a household name and not some weenie startup.
It being ineffective is a necessary part of it, in my opinion.
By this metric youtube is not enshittification to some extent. They are a household name and not some weenie startup.
It being ineffective is a necessary part of it, in my opinion.
This does not apply to this argument.
You are not supposed to have relation between the words. This password is vulnerable to a dictionary attack. If you are not a high value target you should still be OK.
Itt: Use Linux Spam. This is not feasible for most users. Not all applicatopns are posted to Linux and some explicitly do not work. In particular for people that play games socially this just does not work. That being said they are unaffected by this change.
This is physically implausible. Also self proclaimed advances without 3rd party proof are less than worthless.
To discern if an add blocker is in use you are processing information not essential to your service.
You could, eg. Not start the stream until the add is over if it wasn’t blocked without violating this. In the end whether or not the user uses an add blocker is not relevant to your ability to stream a video.
How is that relevant? Just because some foreign entity has different laws doesn’t mean you cannot have yours. We shouldn’t always repeat us policy as gospel. Just look at their social policy nightmare.
Yes
YT does not pay like shit. A lot of the time sponsorships are much more targeted and interesting than YouTube ads.
That being said I mainly dislike bad ads. Good, well targeted ads that don’t destroy your eardrums for products that interest me seem nice. But they don’t tend to exist.
Then don’t watch the content. But in lieu of a open source, non profit, market dominating video platform thus means not watching videos.
Even if that open source platform existed it would require it to be more or equally profitable for creators to reach a point where people upload to both platforms.
This is misleading : a substantial part is distributed to the content creators. Traditionally the YouTube cut is alleged to be rather low.
Video serving can cost a lot of bandwidth. Hence it could be sensible.
Cars are great, if there are few. Can’t have everyone in one when you live densely.
Yes, but they are not gaming devices. They are meant to efficiently compute things. When used for that purpose they use little energy compared to other devices doing the same thing.