4 ms·

It's not just a privacy frontend. You're accessing content and services without helping the freely provided stuff be monetized. I get that you want to protect y

It's not just a privacy frontend. You're accessing content and services without helping the freely provided stuff be monetized. I get that you want to protect your identity. Then don't use these services or data. It's not public and not free - nor should it be. Privacy is not piracy. This is piracy.

monkaiju 3y ago
Seeing as how this is hurting usage to the point that monetization is hurt, maybe they should actually just let the privacy-concious users be...
2Gkashmiri 3y ago
RSS by its very nature is designed to not be restricted to the "way of presentation and ad earning of the producer". Producer produces content and RSS syndicates it that can be read by clients IN WHATEVER MANNER OR FORM THEY DESIRE. That's the whole idea of internet. Now, you go ahead and lament how this is piracy. Its not. YouTube provides RSS feeds. Same do other platforms so as long as they do, we can do whatever the hell we want with the feed
- kelnos 3y ago
  But that's only if the producer wants to provide an RSS feed. While annoying, it's perfectly within their rights not to provide one. > That's the whole idea of internet. I think it's very hard to assert that anything is "the whole idea of the internet". If you want to go back to its roots, the "whole idea of the internet" was to have a reliable military/government communications system in the case of nuclear war. These days the internet means different things for different people, and no one person can credibly assert that any particular purpose is valid or invalid.
  - bobmaxup 3y ago
    They surely meant the "world wide web", which is often used interchangably, and (to some) incorrectly, with "internet"?
- charcircuit 3y ago
  >That's the whole idea of internet. No, the idea of the internet is to create a global scale network of computers. >YouTube provides RSS feeds. Which links you to a webpage that includes ads to monetize the video, the RSS feed, and the rest of the site.
- gochi 3y ago
  The article highlights several front ends most of which do not rely on the official RSS feeds provided by the service.
  - 2Gkashmiri 3y ago
    So if they only use RSS would you be fine with sponsor block and ad striping and proxy frontends and downloads and not paying?
kelnos 3y ago
"Piracy" is a bit of a strong denouncement. If someone puts something on the internet, and their server responds to your request for data with... y'know... the data, then the you can display that data however you want. Certainly the server owners can try to do tricky things to make it so you can only display the data in ways they want you to display it, but there's no natural right that makes it morally or ethically wrong for you to display things how you want.
prmoustache 3y ago
No it is not.
oaththrowaway 3y ago
Surveillance capitalism is one of the most immoral things I can think of. Privacy and piracy are not only ethical but necessary

monkaiju 3y ago

Seeing as how this is hurting usage to the point that monetization is hurt, maybe they should actually just let the privacy-concious users be...

2Gkashmiri 3y ago

RSS by its very nature is designed to not be restricted to the "way of presentation and ad earning of the producer". Producer produces content and RSS syndicates it that can be read by clients IN WHATEVER MANNER OR FORM THEY DESIRE. That's the whole idea of internet. Now, you go ahead and lament how this is piracy. Its not. YouTube provides RSS feeds. Same do other platforms so as long as they do, we can do whatever the hell we want with the feed

kelnos 3y ago
But that's only if the producer wants to provide an RSS feed. While annoying, it's perfectly within their rights not to provide one. > That's the whole idea of internet. I think it's very hard to assert that anything is "the whole idea of the internet". If you want to go back to its roots, the "whole idea of the internet" was to have a reliable military/government communications system in the case of nuclear war. These days the internet means different things for different people, and no one person can credibly assert that any particular purpose is valid or invalid.
- bobmaxup 3y ago
  They surely meant the "world wide web", which is often used interchangably, and (to some) incorrectly, with "internet"?
charcircuit 3y ago
>That's the whole idea of internet. No, the idea of the internet is to create a global scale network of computers. >YouTube provides RSS feeds. Which links you to a webpage that includes ads to monetize the video, the RSS feed, and the rest of the site.
gochi 3y ago
The article highlights several front ends most of which do not rely on the official RSS feeds provided by the service.
- 2Gkashmiri 3y ago
  So if they only use RSS would you be fine with sponsor block and ad striping and proxy frontends and downloads and not paying?

kelnos 3y ago

"Piracy" is a bit of a strong denouncement. If someone puts something on the internet, and their server responds to your request for data with... y'know... the data, then the you can display that data however you want. Certainly the server owners can try to do tricky things to make it so you can only display the data in ways they want you to display it, but there's no natural right that makes it morally or ethically wrong for you to display things how you want.

prmoustache 3y ago

No it is not.

oaththrowaway 3y ago

Surveillance capitalism is one of the most immoral things I can think of. Privacy and piracy are not only ethical but necessary