![](https://lemmy.zip/pictrs/image/7ef68b55-bfc9-4cde-a87d-45eae830535c.webp)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
IIRC the French reactors are all nearing their end of service life and’ll be decommissioned soon.
Mastadon - @[email protected]
IIRC the French reactors are all nearing their end of service life and’ll be decommissioned soon.
What definition for piracy are your relying on?
The illegitimate procurement of media.
where did you source it?
My ass.
Does DMCA even have a definition for this?
Can’t help you there, I’m not American.
I’ve not argued any of those points. Just that not watching ads on YouTube is piracy.
In the UK, piracy isn’t a legally defined term, and the way that I would define piracy as the illegitimate procurement of media.
but TOS is often illegal anyway.
Piracy isn’t only a legal thing. It’s just dealt with through the legal system.
I’m not modifying any of the content
Sorry, I was wrong. You are however circumventing YouTube’s playing ads.
I’m a pedantic asshole.
You don’t have permission to modify any of the content YouTube sends you.
https://www.youtube.com/t/terms#eb887a967c
Section: Permissions and Restrictions Point 2
circumvent, disable, fraudulently engage, or otherwise interfere with the Service (or attempt to do any of these things), including security-related features or features that: (a) prevent or restrict the copying or other use of Content; or (b) limit the use of the Service or Content;
Piracy is sharing content that you don’t have the rights to share.
I’d classify watching something on piracysite.com as piracy.
I’d also class bypassing Netflix’s login requirements to watch their catalogue as piracy. But I guess that’s more a semantics thing.
Not saying you shouldn’t block ads, just questioning the OCs comment. If you don’t pay for the service monetarily or through data then imo it’s piracy.
Isn’t it? You’re not paying for a service / product.
dismantling the brutal apartheid regime
No where does that say dismantling Israel.
If you look at every interaction with a Redhat developer in the context of them having KPIs / set work to do. The responses to non critical issues / MRs makes a lot more sense.
Not saying that it makes it any better tho.
IIRC some of the bigger banks / financial institutions use AI for fraud detections as well.
You keep saying waste, I would argue it’s a byproduct. Like whey from milk.
That is beyond what most people should be expected to do and it is beyond what people have done historically
Going to a local market to buy fresh produce has been the norm throughout history. In the past century it has changed but for billions of people, buying what you need for that day is still the norm, I know I still do it.
Complete speculation but I’d bet that the UK government is so fickle that if France sent in troops then the UK would ‘have’ to send in its own, and by that point the US MiC would be complaining that the US hadn’t sent them in.
Someone was testing a program they made that links Lemmy / Mastadon (ActivityPub) to other services, think threads or Reddit.
When they ran the program it created all the dummy accounts and published it to the Fediverse making it look like a lot of new users joined.
There have been cases [1] where vulnerabilities in software have been found, and the researcher that found it will contact the relevant party and nothing comes of it.
What they’re suggesting is that the researcher who discovered this might have already disclosed this in private, but felt that it wasn’t being patched fast enough, so they went public.
I’ve not seen any of these arguments. Though it may be all downvoted to hell and back.
My main gripe with adding privacy features to Lemmy is that the whole point of Lemmy is that all data is already publicly available and for Lemmy to continue working the way it does it’ll need to remain that way. And because of that there’s nothing that can be done to stop bad actors setting up an instance and selling all the data they collect.
At least in the EU (and UK to a lesser extent) no major corporation would be able to get away with selling that data, so the spent man hours on allowing privacy settings would be wasted time.
Because Anti-vaxxers don’t exist in other countries…
It’s more that people are distrustful of large organisations in general (governments, business, religion). There’s a rightful suspicion of faceless entities, and I don’t think that can be “fixed”.
Are your monitors all the same resolution, refresh rate and size?