No, I think they’re being literal. There is value that they want in your privacy.

It’s people having their battery die while they wait for an open charger.

I used Smart Audiobook Player to listen to an audiobook recently and it worked great.

If you have to try to be straight, I’ve got news for you.

He might be, but I still get unpleasant vibes from how he writes.

Yeah, I’d rather not if he talks like he writes. Again, I am fully on board with his message, but he writes like someone who doesn’t know how to have a conversation with another person.

This writer seems like a proper neck beard. I 100% agree with most of what they say, but this feels like it’s straight out of 4chann

Edit: I read a few other articles of his and watch a few of his videos/interviews. This article is an extreme side of him apparently. I still think he is extremely socially awkward, he can’t hold eye contact for longer than a millisecond and struggles to answer questions in less than twenty words.

I do fully agree with almost everything I’ve heard him say. I just don’t like the way he says it.

They should either be required to refund those purchases or they shouldn’t be allowed to remove them.

No disagreement there, but we live in a world where they absolutely can and will do this stuff and get away with it with no consequences. Until either of those two options you propose are reached, I see no moral issue with pirating a game content you paid for and can no longer play.

I’m not talking about the morality of a person who was already pirating it before, or pirate games videos not affected by this issue. Just a case where a person bought a game content from Sony, who then removed their purchase without compensation due to reasons beyond the terms and conditions the customer expected.

It kinda does add some validity to the argument. The seller can just take away a product without compensating you for it, in most situations we call that theft. If they are going to steal the content from you, morally I see no problem stealing it back.

It’s of course still illegal, but I wouldn’t say it’s immoral in this situation.

Context and nuance. Just about everything in life comes down to context and nuance.

I misunderstood your point about no ad breaks, I thought you meant no advertising at all on videos.

That said, HD was just an adjective. I can edit and remove it if you want, but the point still stands that hosting anything at YouTube’s scale is stupid expensive. Even if you cut the data load again and go down to 480p it’s still crazy expensive that requires compensation to exist.

Something like 275,000 hours of video is uploaded to YouTube daily and users watch about one billion hours daily.

The video being in SD doesn’t make it free to host. YouTube still has to pay for the servers that store the videos and for delivering the video to you. And guess what! Most people don’t watch in HD and don’t even realize it.

Is it cheaper? Yeah. Is it free, no. Delivering just the audio for billions of users would cost more than most people will see in a lifetime ten times over.

Jesus fucking Christ, did it take your only two neurons sparking from ear to ear to generate that thought?

Youtube has a cost by hosting the videos for you and a billion other users to view. If you can’t see how that costs a shitton of money, you might actually be an idiot.

That’s kinda the point YouTube is going for. People who do not pay, and who use ad blockers are actively costing them money. People don’t realize how expensive it is to host an hd video that can be streamed to millions of people. There’s a reason no one has been able to seriously compete with YouTube.

An old podcast introduced me to ‘All Day’ by Girl Talk. I thought it was the weirdest shit at first but I kept coming back to it, now I listen to it basically any time I’m doing menial/tedious work.

This looks so inconvenient. Glad you like it, but this is 'awful taste, great execution" for me.

2001 Space Odyssey.

It’s just so bad. Objectively bad. And I rarely use that term, because movies and art are so subjective.

It feels like it was trying to be a showcase of 1960’s film technology, and I’ve got nothing about that. It’s shot well, and it’s kinda cool seeing how they had to do things back then.

But the plot feels like it was written mostly during a bad acid trip that just wouldn’t end. I’m fully convinced that its one of those things that people pretend to like so they can pretentiously chortle with their film buddies about “how the common man just doesn’t have the attention span needed to appreciate it.”

It’s an hour too long and the plot is so basic yet so overly convoluted.

Might be a dumb question, but why not just offload video storage to YouTube and share the link here?