Your takes keep getting more and more detached from reality, it’s kind of impressive.

The internet was supposed to be something different. We didn’t need cable television like shows reproduced on the internet. We didn’t need television but with information stealing.

I said they had the same quality, they’re not the same thing. You’ll find a lot more independent viewpoints and in-depth analysis on Youtube these days than you do on anything mainstream

I would say unnecessary. And its only growing. With less profit driven motivation then we would have a better concentration of information created by people with better intentions for the content. Instead what we get is ishowspeed and hundreds of others trying to get that sweet crypto advertisers. Removing most of these creators would benefit us.

Your content preferences aren’t everyone’s, I don’t really give a shit what you find ‘necessary’. Honestly this alone invalidates your entire opinion, thinking you’re the arbiter of what should be on the internet while saying the internet should be more free is a joke. The funniest part is I don’t even know what ishowspeed is, didn’t even hear the name until yesterday, the internet [and youtube] is so big that things you consider cultural staples are completely unknown to others. if you’re getting garbage shoved in your face, may I suggest you stop watching it and telling recommendation algorithms you want more.

Again, the internet should have never been television 2.0. It should have been hostile to advertisers, data harvesting and anyone who tried to create any kind of data scarcity. Content creators are part of the mechanisms that has eroded what the internet could be.

Again, the internet [and specifically Youtube] isn’t television 2.0. And of course it wasn’t going to be hostile to advertisers, the internet costs money to run and people don’t like paying for things. And the idea that people actually making stuff others want to consume are part of the problem, good god how can you be so sanctimonious? I feel like when you’re saying content creators the only people you can think of are losers like xqc, you’re ignoring the endless amounts of thoughtful quality content that you could die without watching all of.

Anyways, I’m afraid if we continue this conversation you’ll further drift into fantasy, so I think I’m done replying.

Nah, content as it exists today did not exist outside of TV, which you also had to pay for, and which also had ads. Arguably it didn’t exist at all then, the diversity of content and viewpoints available on Youtube is staggering, and it’s on demand. Your rosy view of the past is nothing like the reality of it. If you wanna go back to high schoolers making 320p video of their dumb antics then have at it, I’ll stick with what we have now.

You paying for content isn’t benign or holy because you think “creators need to be paid” why should any of us be paid for what we do on the internet.

Is this even worth addressing, it’s such a stupid take I don’t even know how to properly respond. Mountains of content on Youtube is professionally produced and rivals TV programs in quality, it being on the internet doesn’t somehow diminish its worth.

I’m all ears for a real alternative that provides anywhere near what Youtube does, but all I’ve seen is people bitching that they can’t watch ad-supported content ad-free anymore. And while I don’t see its relevance, I don’t get paid to generate content, I work in IT. I just don’t have a weird hate-on for content creators getting money for what they do.

Well no, since Youtube Music isn’t free under any circumstances, but even setting that aside I do actually appreciate that the content I enjoy wouldn’t exist without creators getting money for it. Since I also don’t like ads, Youtube premium is a no brainer, especially given that it pays out more than ad revenue, and even pays out for limited monetization content, which is very good during times of war.

I’m a grown ass adult, I don’t need to pretend there’s any inherent moral imperative or superiority to not paying for stuff. Video hosting and platform development costs money, not to mention the cost of content creation, so until someone actually offers a viable solution to the money problem or an alternative to Youtube I’m going to continue getting the best experience I can on it while still sending some money in the direction of the creators I enjoy.

Stop trying to appeal to emotion when there’s enough suffering to go around. Nothing I said justified the killing of babies, in fact quite the opposite, you even bringing that up in response to me means you have no actual argument, you’re just falling back on reactionary buzzwords.

I’m no fan of the media’s response to the Israel conflict, but is the former press secretary who hosts the show supposed to not talk to the current secretary of state? I’m not 100% sure why Brennan was there, but as the former director of the CIA he’s not completely out of place either.

This is more an indictment of the MIC’s presence in government, not media.

Living for decades under constant suffering and oppression leads to radicalization, this is old news and should be expected given how horrifically Israel has treated Palestinians. It doesn’t excuse the killing of Israelis of course, but similarly their actions don’t excuse or justify Israel’s ethnic cleansing.

Enjoy paying the rest of your life (or until you’re done with YouTube) a subscription to remove ads

Will do. I pay monthly for services I use a lot less than I use YouTube, I get to easily support creators I watch and I get YouTube Music on top of it.

If they change the deal then I’m free to change my mind, it’s not like I’m forced to stay subbed if they add back ads, but as far as today goes I’m not gonna get all twisted up over a hypothetical.

In fairness, I don’t have to worry about any of this with Windows.

In fairness there was no confrontation in those states. Texas likely got the bonk because of requiring the disclaimer being a bridge too far, but the ruling explicitly blocks the age verification portion as well so it could be used as precedent against the other states now.

Vaxxie is not the insult you think it is.

The proof is NCTA and Gilead pausing ad spending. This isn’t some crazy conspiracy theory, hate groups have always been on Twitter and musk’s gutting of the moderation and safety teams certainly didn’t make that better. There’s literally no logical reason to think cnn would lie about this, I’m honestly confused why y’all are being weirdly defensive and contrarian over this.

No confusion, they’re just willfully lying so they can trick people into legitimizing their instance. Nazis know no one likes Nazis, and they’re not principled enough to publicly use the term despite that. Easier to get young lonely people in the pipeline if they pretend to be something else first.

I think you’re missing the point. Ousting Shokin wasn’t Biden blocking corruption investigations, it was him literally doing the bidding of the Obama administration, and was supported by the IMF and the entire G-7. That’s why he was proud of it, because it was an example of him doing his job exceptionally well. Also Shokin liked to open investigations then leave them open as blackmail, which is exactly what he did to Burisma, so this isn’t some smoking gun.

Nah this is a new low even for us, especially since the timing makes this look like it was retaliation for Biden humiliating her with the viral campaign video where she basically said a bunch of good stuff about Biden thinking they were bad things for some insane reason. So her response is revenge porn of his son on the congress floor.

I think what I’ve come to realize is that Biden is a good public servant but not a great president. He’s actually shockingly good at getting things done, he’s had a much more successful term than I ever expected, but he’s such a behind the scenes guy that almost no one knows. In my opinion the president needs to be front and center with their accomplishments, their successes need to be constantly pushed to people and they need to make a point of setting the tone for the national conversation around important issues. Biden hasn’t been particularly stellar at that and it’s why people think the strongest economy in the G7 is in the shitter and why this commenter thinks he screwed the rail workers, among myriad other things.

I mean I don’t hate the idea in theory, I just don’t know how a phone like my Fold4 can exist while complying with this legislation. We’ll see in a few years I guess.

You need to be able to open it with commercially available tools or ones provided by the manufacturer. This isn’t to bring back swappable batteries, only replaceable ones.

Always possible, and given the choice between a phone without a replaceable battery vs [functionally] the same phone with one I’ll always take the latter, but consumer battery tech has moved at a glacial pace compared to screen tech. Samsung plays in both industries though so maybe this’ll light a fire for them to speed up battery development.

The flip is possibly doable, but as someone with a Fold4 there simply isn’t room in the device to start incorporating screws in the half with a screen on both sides. Only way I can see it working is putting the whole battery on the side with a normal back, but there isn’t enough room for the same size of battery. It’d probably also throw off the balance in the hand when open.

I don’t care hugely about aesthetics, my concern is non-standard form factors. I don’t know how a phone like the Z Folds can be made with removable batteries, one of the 2 batteries is literally sandwiched between 2 screens. Implementing this would take it from feeling like a brick to being literally the size of a brick. Hopefully tech improves enough by 2027 to negate my concerns but I don’t see how.