Is it any surprise to anyone that Black Cube is an Israeli Firm founded by Israeli intelligence officers. I wonder when they are going to send agents to goad the Reuters journalists into making anti-zionist or anti-Israel comments like fellow Israeli Spy company NSO group of Pegasus Spyware fame did to AP/UofT journalists at Citizen Lab so they could discredit them as antisemites.

I mean Black Cube is the company that was hired to defame the woman who accused the rapist Harvey Weinstein and the journalists who were reporting on that case.

Linus Tech tips also had a special unique to them contract since they had been simulhosting since the early early days of twitch.

It’s just a poor country thing. How are you gonna prioritise crime happening in other countries when you barely keep up at home.

It’s kinda like when third world countries get criticized for poor women’s rights or LGBTQ rights, when a third of the country lives in absolute poverty. The former things are important, but the latter causes suffering on a whole different scale.

Go where? The only companies that can afford to do unlimited video forever for everyone are the likes of Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, etc. Meta tried to steal VOD watchers from YouTube years ago, they failed. Amazon tried to get into VOD via Twitch, they gave up. Microsoft tried to come after Twitch with Mixer, they failed. Moreover, a lot of the things we hate about youtube like poor content moderation, the copyright system, demonetization, etc arent youtubes fault. The broken copyright system is just a result of what copyright law is, it’d probably be worse on a different site since they wouldn’t have the special agreement YouTube has with major copyright holders to serve as an intermediary. Instead of content strikes, or an ad revenue claim, that youtube has the special power to do, you’d just default to DMCA takedowns for everything immediately. And yeah content moderation and demonetization is bad but Youtube never wanted to do this right? They were happily showing ads on ISIS videos, its advertisers that forced them, which is how we ended up with a system that randomly pulls ads from videos if there is a hint of something an ad agency would object too. I mean it’s either this or advertisers don’t advertise at all, which fucks everyone, instead of a few people.

Look this is different than pirating a game or bypassing a newspaper paywall. Watching content on YouTube simply costs money to YouTube. It’s not like torrenting a game or movie, where while you haven’t paid for the content, it didn’t cost anything to the owner other than theoretical revenue. And it’s not like bypassing a newspaper paywall, either, where the cost to the newspaper to serve you the story is practically negligible and the real costs are fixed and not related to how many people actually read the story.

Hosting video costs money and nobody can replace YouTube’s massive library or realistically replicate their business model. I mean just look at image/gif hosting sites, they constantly go bust like Photobucket because storing everyone’s pictures forever and for free isn’t not a real business model.

YouTube needs to be paid for its gonna go the way of Photobucket.

Reminder that YouTubers control how many ads are on a video and until last year or so you could even host video and have it served to millions with zero ads. Now the minimum is one skippable pre roll but like shit costs money to serve 20 million people an hour log 4k video.

Yeah except y’know YouTube servers cost money and watching through Invidious doesn’t actually pay either YouTube or the creators. Like I don’t want to shill for a corp but on the other hand mass hosting video for free and letting anyone watch is a business model that can only work at YouTubers scale and nothing can replace YouTube because any service that tries will run out of money in a week. Seriously video hosting is literally the most expensive thing to do on the internet.

Things can be done a lot quickly if you are given an unlimited budget. Consider how quickly NASA got from nothing to landing on the moon, vs how long it is taking now with their much more limited budget.

Dutch company that is heavily pressured not to sell the machine to China by the US government. All the countries you listed are close allies of the US. You can’t fault the US from trying to stop China but let’s not pretend this is a free global market.

Making a lithography machine that’s on par with ASML is just an engineering challenge. One that’s been solved once already by ASML, whose to say it can’t be solved again by someone else, especially if they can copy bits of the design.

Yeah but if you don’t sue, a legitimate infringer in the future might use not enforcing on the trademark there to argue there own case. Trademark law really doesn’t leave trademark holders in a good position. Though I imagine that a lawsuit when those laws were written weren’t nearly as prohibitively expensive.

It’s usually done to basically pay to increase companies own stock price. They often do it because CEO and executive pay is based on achieving certain goals such as stock price. However, every penny thrown at investors in a buy back is money that could have been used to weather a downturn, or increase employee pay or simply reinvested in the company itself. This often leads to companies then requiring government bailouts to continue functioning when say a global pandemic hits. The Plain Bagel has more detailed video on the ups and downs of stock buybacks on YouTube.

Because they aren’t doing it to control the package repo, they are doing it to score nationalism points.

This is 100% a nationalism thing. They want to be able to say we make our own operating system. That’s it. It’s going to be a disaster when they inevitably fuck up because they are doing g it for the wrong reasons.

Because it gives powerful people permission to do whatever they want, everyone else be damned.

Both of the two major Longtermist philophers casually dismiss climate change in their books for example (I have Toby Ord’s book which is apparently basically the same as William Mckaskils book but first and better, supposedly). As if it’s something that can be just solved by technology in the near future. But what if it isn’t?

What if we don’t come up with fusion power or something and solving climate change requires actual sacrifices that had to be made 50 years before we figured out fusion isn’t going to work out. What if the biosphere actually collapses and we can’t stop it. That’s a solid threat to humanity.

They fr read Foundation and missed the fact that Hari Seldon’s preditctions fell apart very early on and he had the benefit of magical foresight.

A major problem with longterminism is that it presumes to speak for future people who are entirely theoretical, who’s needs are entirely impossible to accurately predict. It also depriorites immediate problems.

So Elon Musk is associated with Longterminism (self proclaimed). He might consider that interplanetary travel is in best interest of mankind in the future (Reasonable). As a longtermist he would then feel a moral responsibility to advance interplanetary travel technology. So far, so good.

But the sitch is that he might feel that the moral responsibility to advance space travel via funding his rocket company is far more important that his moral responsibility to safeguard the well being of his employees by not overworking them.

I mean after all yeah it might ruin the personal lives and of a hundred, two hundred, even a thousand people, but what’s that compared to the benefit advancing this technology will bring to all mankind? There are going to be billions of people befitting from this in the future!

But that’s not really true. Because we can’t be certain that those billions of people will even exist let alone benefit. But the people suffering at his rocket company absolutely do exist and their suffering is not theoretical.

The greatest criticism of this line of thought is that it gives people, or at the moment, billionaires permission to do whatever the fuck they want.

Sure flying on a private jet is ruinous to the environment but I need to do it so I can manage my company which will create an AI that will make everything better…

Some also have terrible CRI. Nothing like giving everything a subtle green or purple tint.

No but a previous history of making shit up and falsifying data along with a failure to replicate?

The guy behind this paper has the exact same issues as Schon. Plagiarism in his PhD thesis, faked data, retracted papers, etc.