3 ms·
Indeed; it's my computer, and I choose what software it runs and what data it receives over the internet. If Google doesn't like how I utilize the data it sends
by dleslie 3y ago
Indeed; it's my computer, and I choose what software it runs and what data it receives over the internet. If Google doesn't like how I utilize the data it sends to my Computer then they can simply stop sending it.
- lxgr 3y agoOn one hand, I really see your point – on the other, that leads us directly to DRM, doesn’t it? Only strong DRM actually gives Google full control over the video playback environment, and that comes with huge (but different) downsides too.
- Zambyte 3y agoI don't see why you would need DRM when you can just send HTTP 403
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoThat would make them less popular. Part of the point being missed by those who think it's a moral issue is that these companies _also_ have alternatives but those alternatives have downsides.
- lxgr 3y agoHow would they know when to send a 403 and when to deliver the video content?
- paulryanrogers 3y agoWhen you haven't paid for access with fiat.
- asadotzler 3y agoYou act as if we have no agency here. Google doesn't own the Internet and Google's ad needs shouldn't determine the future of the Internet. That you so easily concede Google's ultimate authority is sad to me.
- wilsonnb3 3y agoLegally you are correct of course but you are not engaging with the moral aspects of free-rider problems at all, just side stepping them with a tangentially related technical argument.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoImagine if someone said that with a straight face about ones own property.
- paulryanrogers 3y agoMany property owners compromise in non-monetary ways for the benefit of access. Consider sidewalks crossing private property, we tend them yet don't always use them ourselves. They make us all richer for a bit of inconvenience and intrusion into our space. Likewise ad supported distribution makes us richer by broadening what is available and to whom for a portion of our attention. We can disagree about how much is too much, or how careful or careless any given system is. Yet I'm thankful the model exists and has democratized video, despite it's downsides.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoThat's a complete mischaracterization of the law, at least in the US. If a trail has been setup and maintained for the public good, new owners cannot remove the public access. They are _legally required_ to maintain them. Just as they are legally required to maintain the sidewalks in front of their property.