The side that wins such wars is the one that is more geopolitically advantaged. China is very much disadvantaged here, just from the point of view of the massive structural problems. Just because Shenzhen is innovative doesn't outweigh the structural inertia of almost 99% of the rest of the country.
It doesn't outweigh the fact that entire Chinese success wholly depends on US continuing to provide their shipping maritime security guarantees as started with Bretton-Woods. That's why they are in a process of a desperate lurch to build bases at the very least on the easiest artery to simply shut down for US, the oil shipments from Persian Gulf.
So even if we assume that you're correct in your claims, China is still on the side that stands to lose. Because it doesn't matter to China if US stands and blocks it off, or collapses as a state entirely. The outcome for China would be the same in both edge cases. Structural collapse due to sudden crippling of its export based economy being unable to have fast and safe access to world markets via maritime trade.
This proves that system does not work. It took big youtube names getting in contact with youtube insiders to do it.
Under youtube system, claimer has the sole ability to reject any counterclaims. Youtube will literally ignore the counterclaim if they do. Unless you get to the youtube insiders, who can get people at youtube review the thing manually. Or people with big enough following to generate so much bad PR, that claimer effectively has to back off in face of massive PR backlash.
In this case, both happened. In overwhelming majority of such cases, neither happens and channel who is claimed to be guilty is just railroaded.
Problem is, system related to actual copyright strikes appears to work closer to 1% of the time, when target gets so much attention from big public names that it can get to insiders at youtube.
Overwhelming majority of people on youtube do not have that kind of clout, and their causes are far too numerous to be picked by big stars on youtube.
In the rest of cases, target channel is just fucked.
Are you aware that people motivated by profit are motivated by increasing profit, and not decreasing it?
If you don't, I'm not sure finding common ground is possible. If you do, why do you persist in reaching conclusions that go counter to this conclusion?
Just out of interest, are you having problems with dosage of your psychotropic medication? Because these bouts of insanity of yours seem to come in really weird bursts, followed by silence for a while.
You can tell them "no" all you won't. It won't help people like Naomi Wu when she gets deplatformed. If anything, you telling then "no" hurts people like her, because your "no" is used as evidence of her wrongthink.
Because while you indeed aren't their customers, they do exert significant control over the platforms people like her use to publish their work for you, and get payment from you for their work. The story you can read in that medium article isn't even half of the story. Her account was throttled hard on youtube (and still remains throttled to this day according to her latest claims), she got deplatformed a few more times and so on.
>What about YouTube income? Very low. On October 8th YouTube suddenly throttled my account by 70-80%. No drop-off- full stop. I had many YouTube experts look at my stats, all agreed it was not organic or a result of anything I was doing. After several weeks of negotiation with YouTube, one day they suddenly let off- now it's one throttled by 40%. But it's much, much harder- all the stats are off from what they were for the past year even though updates are popular and more frequent. I can prove it, all I can do it work harder, so I am. But it means that YouTube ad income is not very much, and could disappear the minute YouTube gets pressured to defund my channel. Which is sure to happen given my track record.
In this case though, the behaviour is often overtly suggestive and is literally the point of the video, down to it being mentioned in the click bait video name. One comedy youtuber I occasionally watch openly mocked one channel that did this to an extreme degree quite a while ago. Literally girl in early teens in outfits highlighted in the video clickbait topic as "making her boyfriend jealous" doing a rather awkward attempt at acting like a porn star right before sex scene starts. Then making out with her boyfriend on camera for a few seconds.
Extremely cringy stuff, the kind I can understand early teens experiment with their sexuality and without parental control doing. Now I don't really care if that's what they do amongst themselves, as I'm not a puritan, but "what the fuck are their parents doing" wouldn't get out of my head specifically because this was on youtube. Putting that stuff on public display at that age is likely going to haunt all of the participants for a long while. Any ad revenue gained is unlikely to be worth it in a long run.
I'm very much in disagreement that this is something that youtube needs to manage though, unless those actions are specifically illegal. This is more of a "social workers, shouldn't you take a closer look at this particular family?" kind of a case in my view, as problems here are likely of a kind that will not go away just because these folks get banned off youtube.
Except that she is very vocal about the fact that she has already crossed the puritan wing of SJW movement and got deplatformed from various platforms by these puritans in the past.
The moment the same powerful cabal gets a chance to finish wiping her digital presence off the internet, they will. They already showed no qualms in doing so in the past, to her or anyone else they deem guilty of "wrongthink".
Nonsense. The rule in context of the discussion is "what is more profitable". Under no reasonable scenario is it profitable to let the source of profit die off.
Exactly the same for me. The mouse is permanently wireless in highest power mode available, because I just pop a battery every time it gives me a 10% battery remaining warning and put it into the charger, and another charged one from the same charger and put it into the mouse.
Rub your mouse down every few months with a slightly moist dish washing thingy, then wipe off what's left with a standard microfibre dust rag. It gets the gunk out very effectively.
I did the same thing when they discontinued G700s. I suspect the primary reason for discontinuing is that this mouse is almost eternal, due to the fact that it works off AA batteries. Recently logitech seems to be moving from its "quality uber alles" attitude to razer's "peripherals should break or become uncomfortable to use within two years".
And they don't get to sell you a new mouse every few years when battery dies if you are using AA batteries to power it.
This seems to be the standalone update for those who didn't install the original sha-2 support one from 2015. That one had problems, and MS did originally have a bulletin stating that if you have problems with it, you should uninstall it.
On the bright side, this story is about win7, so reasonable people already defer patching by a week or two to see what crap MS sneaked into the update this time.
Still not calling you back after fucking you in the ass for that idiotic anti-science spiel a few months ago. No matter how hard you stalk me on slashdot.
Slashdot Mirror
Of that magnitude? Apparently yes, as far as public statements seem to indicate at this point in time.
The side that wins such wars is the one that is more geopolitically advantaged. China is very much disadvantaged here, just from the point of view of the massive structural problems. Just because Shenzhen is innovative doesn't outweigh the structural inertia of almost 99% of the rest of the country.
It doesn't outweigh the fact that entire Chinese success wholly depends on US continuing to provide their shipping maritime security guarantees as started with Bretton-Woods. That's why they are in a process of a desperate lurch to build bases at the very least on the easiest artery to simply shut down for US, the oil shipments from Persian Gulf.
So even if we assume that you're correct in your claims, China is still on the side that stands to lose. Because it doesn't matter to China if US stands and blocks it off, or collapses as a state entirely. The outcome for China would be the same in both edge cases. Structural collapse due to sudden crippling of its export based economy being unable to have fast and safe access to world markets via maritime trade.
IP laws in European Union are in general more draconian than in US due to GDPR.
This proves that system does not work. It took big youtube names getting in contact with youtube insiders to do it.
Under youtube system, claimer has the sole ability to reject any counterclaims. Youtube will literally ignore the counterclaim if they do. Unless you get to the youtube insiders, who can get people at youtube review the thing manually. Or people with big enough following to generate so much bad PR, that claimer effectively has to back off in face of massive PR backlash.
In this case, both happened. In overwhelming majority of such cases, neither happens and channel who is claimed to be guilty is just railroaded.
Problem is, system related to actual copyright strikes appears to work closer to 1% of the time, when target gets so much attention from big public names that it can get to insiders at youtube.
Overwhelming majority of people on youtube do not have that kind of clout, and their causes are far too numerous to be picked by big stars on youtube.
In the rest of cases, target channel is just fucked.
Kids content?
She's in her twenties doing DYI tech stuff. This is stuff watched by mostly adult men in their 20s and 30s, her age group. What are you talking about?
You're certainly free to address why, as you appear to be arguing against GS analyst claims, not mine.
Are you aware that people motivated by profit are motivated by increasing profit, and not decreasing it?
If you don't, I'm not sure finding common ground is possible. If you do, why do you persist in reaching conclusions that go counter to this conclusion?
Just out of interest, are you having problems with dosage of your psychotropic medication? Because these bouts of insanity of yours seem to come in really weird bursts, followed by silence for a while.
You should see your MD about that.
You can tell them "no" all you won't. It won't help people like Naomi Wu when she gets deplatformed. If anything, you telling then "no" hurts people like her, because your "no" is used as evidence of her wrongthink.
Because while you indeed aren't their customers, they do exert significant control over the platforms people like her use to publish their work for you, and get payment from you for their work. The story you can read in that medium article isn't even half of the story. Her account was throttled hard on youtube (and still remains throttled to this day according to her latest claims), she got deplatformed a few more times and so on.
>What about YouTube income? Very low. On October 8th YouTube suddenly throttled my account by 70-80%. No drop-off- full stop. I had many YouTube experts look at my stats, all agreed it was not organic or a result of anything I was doing. After several weeks of negotiation with YouTube, one day they suddenly let off- now it's one throttled by 40%. But it's much, much harder- all the stats are off from what they were for the past year even though updates are popular and more frequent. I can prove it, all I can do it work harder, so I am. But it means that YouTube ad income is not very much, and could disappear the minute YouTube gets pressured to defund my channel. Which is sure to happen given my track record.
Source: her own comment with clarification on her video on https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Folks in question are not just powerful. They also hold a one mean grudge, and are more than willing to go to great lengths to push it.
In this case though, the behaviour is often overtly suggestive and is literally the point of the video, down to it being mentioned in the click bait video name. One comedy youtuber I occasionally watch openly mocked one channel that did this to an extreme degree quite a while ago. Literally girl in early teens in outfits highlighted in the video clickbait topic as "making her boyfriend jealous" doing a rather awkward attempt at acting like a porn star right before sex scene starts. Then making out with her boyfriend on camera for a few seconds.
Extremely cringy stuff, the kind I can understand early teens experiment with their sexuality and without parental control doing. Now I don't really care if that's what they do amongst themselves, as I'm not a puritan, but "what the fuck are their parents doing" wouldn't get out of my head specifically because this was on youtube. Putting that stuff on public display at that age is likely going to haunt all of the participants for a long while. Any ad revenue gained is unlikely to be worth it in a long run.
I'm very much in disagreement that this is something that youtube needs to manage though, unless those actions are specifically illegal. This is more of a "social workers, shouldn't you take a closer look at this particular family?" kind of a case in my view, as problems here are likely of a kind that will not go away just because these folks get banned off youtube.
Out of sight, out of mind, eh?
Hint: just because the spotlight isn't shining at the problem any more doesn't mean that problem went away.
Except that she is very vocal about the fact that she has already crossed the puritan wing of SJW movement and got deplatformed from various platforms by these puritans in the past.
https://medium.com/@therealsex...
The moment the same powerful cabal gets a chance to finish wiping her digital presence off the internet, they will. They already showed no qualms in doing so in the past, to her or anyone else they deem guilty of "wrongthink".
Nonsense. The rule in context of the discussion is "what is more profitable". Under no reasonable scenario is it profitable to let the source of profit die off.
Exactly the same for me. The mouse is permanently wireless in highest power mode available, because I just pop a battery every time it gives me a 10% battery remaining warning and put it into the charger, and another charged one from the same charger and put it into the mouse.
Entire operation takes about 10-15 seconds.
Rub your mouse down every few months with a slightly moist dish washing thingy, then wipe off what's left with a standard microfibre dust rag. It gets the gunk out very effectively.
I did the same thing when they discontinued G700s. I suspect the primary reason for discontinuing is that this mouse is almost eternal, due to the fact that it works off AA batteries. Recently logitech seems to be moving from its "quality uber alles" attitude to razer's "peripherals should break or become uncomfortable to use within two years".
And they don't get to sell you a new mouse every few years when battery dies if you are using AA batteries to power it.
Mx 510 was the initial legendary mouse. MX518 was basically the same mouse with some prettying up.
Stop using the mouse as a climbing rope, that should fix it.
Signed: seven years of usage out of mx518. That thing is borderline unbreakable.
Are we not talking about the context in which GS is talking about it? In that context, rules are very clearly defined.
This seems to be the standalone update for those who didn't install the original sha-2 support one from 2015. That one had problems, and MS did originally have a bulletin stating that if you have problems with it, you should uninstall it.
Fact check me on this:
https://support.microsoft.com/...
I could be reading it wrong. But it seems that sha-2 support has been in win7 ever since that patch.
It's more of a fast rewind to 2015, when the initial patch for this was released iirc.
On the bright side, this story is about win7, so reasonable people already defer patching by a week or two to see what crap MS sneaked into the update this time.
That has been the story of windows update several times now, where you had to update windows update to get updates.
Still not calling you back after fucking you in the ass for that idiotic anti-science spiel a few months ago. No matter how hard you stalk me on slashdot.