I doubt that would be the reason for their ban. If it is a creative work then in some countries it’s automatically copyrighted, but it’s not like most would go out of their way to stop it (unlike with like people reacting to other YouTube videos, films, anime, etc).

What type of reaction content? If it wasn’t using the minimum amount of copyrighted material needed to comment or being transformative, and was distributing the majority of a work, then at any point a DMCA will nuke em. Google might not think it’s worth the risk hosting that reaction content forever.

If your hardware ain’t working maybe there’s barrier to devs working on it caused by the designer/manufacture. Or we have not paid them enough for it to be worth their time?

Relying on info gathered from the copying of info without asking is also selfish.

No I don’t think users “agreed to it” because page 165 of 245 of legalese says Reddit owns the posts. If anyone reading does then why not complain about Reddit, not the users.

Just because you are “bad programmer” does not mean you are a bad programmer.

The total number of countries on Earth is… depends on who you ask.

It’s our hardware so we should be able to select another provider or host our own. Not that I consider ad tracking a “service”.

Later or Agree
No Disagree option

A rapist mentality.

Do most technical Windows users know about Recall? Or is this the case of them not caring?

Tis but a symptom of the user’s click-rate. Faces are the “shiny keys” for humans.

Totally uncool man.

Not sure what I could have expected from it back then. I just recall it being recommended online and ended up just using Win Media player (with the cool graphical effects).

I think I tried Winamp back in the day but never really understood it.

One has to admit it’s good that they released the source code (while it was available) so users can learn what their software is actually doing on their computer. Better for yourself as a dev too: you will probably avoid including other people’s work in yours. However, wanting contributions while retaining the exclusive right to distribute the software is anti-collaborative. I’m reluctant to say it might as well be proprietary again but since it doesn’t meet the standard of software freedom then it’s equally not worth trying on my computer.

I find the negatives detract from the benefits too much, usually. Like having your arm cut off and then receiving lovemaking: I am no longer in the mood.

Every game tied to it’s own console.

Seems I missed reading the last line where you said you would respect some cryptocurrencies. I misunderstood.

You make the point that this cannot happen but surely some really have the intention to make an e-currency that has long term, legal use?

My mistake.

walled garden

(Edit, For example…) Facebook control all aspects: you can only do what they want. Mastodon can be hosted and modified by anyone, it’s freedom.

A closed platform, walled garden, (…) is a software system wherein the carrier or service provider has control over applications, content, and/or media, and restricts convenient access to non-approved applicants or content. This is in contrast to an open platform, wherein consumers generally have unrestricted access to applications and content. - wikipedia

People can only talk on platforms they’re not banned on. If you want to avoid YouTube for other reasons then sadly you have to cope with that sort of thing.