4 ms·
Louis Rossmann: We've started a foundation to bring back ownership [video]
- Morizero 1y ago[flagged]
- gr_norm 1y agoHe wants to reach as large an audience as possible, and being perfectly principled isn't the way to go. Self-hosted platforms are great if you want to preach to the choir.
- Morizero 1y agoI'm not saying there aren't benefits or that it doesn't work. Sometimes people have to buy self-help books about not shopping or eat more food to lose weight. It's still ironic.
- cdman 1y agoThat's were most of the eyeballs are.
- bryanrasmussen 1y agoit doesn't seem like they care very much about owning videos, the irony would be more if they rented a tractor to drive up to your house and explain the issue.
- dinkumthinkum 1y agoHe's primarily about "right to repair" physical things, not so much self-hosting videos. I think its an important message and he has really spent an enormous amount of time and resources on it and I don't know if he has gotten much benefit from it other than, arguably, publicity.
- francislavoie 1y agoHe's involved with https://grayjay.app/ https://grayjay.app/ btw. Of all people to criticize for using YouTube as a platform, he's the last.
- oldpersonintx2 1y ago[dead]
- jeffbee 1y agoWhat's ironic about using a reliable, free platform to reach your 2.2 million subscribers with what would otherwise be a difficult and expensive to distribute video?
- Morizero 1y agoI don't think you understand irony. Announcing a campaign for ownership via an outlet you don't own is ironic. Read the definition. Irony is not a comment on the campaign's actual or potential efficacy.
- jeffbee 1y agoIt would not be ironic to distribute your ownership-promoting materials through the mail while not owning the post office. There is nothing about YouTube that reduces a creator's stake in their video.
- Morizero 1y agoThere's some key differences there. 1, the post office doesn't keep your material on hand so people can visit and consume it. 2, you have to pay the post office each transaction. 3, the post office is taxpayer subsidized and administered by elected officials. Again, I did not say what they are doing is bad, wrong, or whatever.
- bsder 1y ago[flagged]
- Morizero 1y ago"Appeal to accomplishment" fallacy and you have no idea what I've accomplished in my life.
- lurk2 1y ago[flagged]
- bsder 1y agoA fallacy is only relevant when you are trying to establish "truth" or, more likely, "falsity" from a well-formed premise. You have established neither a well-formed premise that can be falsified nor any particular expertise that your opinion has any relevance at hand. Thus, the fallacy (in addition to being an "informal fallacy") you claim is moot.
- simion314 1y agoHe is talking about owning the things you purchase with your money. LIke say you buy a device but you are not allowed to repair it or upgrade it, you "buy" a piece of software but you do not actually own it or have any rights on it.
- mieses 1y ago[flagged]
- popalchemist 1y ago[flagged]
- lwo32k 1y agoIn the Attention Economy, the biggest Attentions whores win.
- popalchemist 1y agoIn game theory, the selfish destroy the world for everybody.
- wordofx 1y ago[flagged]
- evbogue 1y agoI've applied to multiple offerings from these folks and never hear back.
- ksec 1y agoThe first thing in my view is reliable storage medium. The professional CD you bought ( likely not the one you burn with CD-R ) 20 - 30 years ago would still work in a CD player today. The same going with Gaming CD / DVD / Cartridge. But Network has completely taken over and we loss that. Even Nintendo Switch 2 Game Card is now only going to be a Game Key. I am not entirely sure we could solve that with technology. Network has gotten so cheap, and will continue to get faster and cheaper that I think may be in a way there is no point competing. And if we cant do that. Let say we cant make a write once / a few times 128GB NAND product that last 50 years and cost less than a dollar to make. May be then the only solution is a law to protect consumer that the digital things we buy would still be available for us to download for at least x number of years. Especially when considering hosting it and the bandwidth is so cheap it isn't really a big risk for companies. It is getting ridiculous that both Google, Apple thinks they own everything I paid for. They think they are merely renting out their tech to me, both hardware and software.
- Y_Y 1y ago> May be then the only solution is a law to protect consumer than the digital things we buy would still be available for us to download for at least x number of years. Especially when considering hosting it and the bandwidth is so cheap it isn't really a big risk for companies. Why rely on the original publisher? Let me download it and then share it. I think it's a much simpler requirement that the product be functional without "phoning home" and when the original prosper stops selling it then libraries abd torrents and archive websites step in. ”real men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it ;)” - Linus Torvalds
- makeitdouble 1y agoTo play the devil/right holder's advocate, the next turn in that game is to never "sell" anything, so you won't have "bought" the content nor have any standard codified right to it. We're already there in many places of course, and many stores have already replaced the "buy" action with more ambiguous wording. Next turn to that being people turning to the seventh' seas, and then we have again an iTunes Store/Steam moment, and the cycle goes on.
- Sniffnoy 1y agoI notice that there's a comment on video from Ross Scott (Accursed Farms), who started the related Stop Killing Games (https://www.stopkillinggames.com/ https://www.stopkillinggames.com/) campaign; it's not mentioned in the video itself but you may want to check it out.
- g0db1t 1y ago[dead]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]