skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The videos are usually sponsored with the ads pushed by the streamer themselves. They’re getting paid just fine. YouTube freely steals my data so they’re doing just fine. I’m just being gaslit into thinking I’m a thief.
It goes flying out the window or back to the store, depending on mood.
Or better yet WASM was a first class citizen and we could abandon JS once and for all.
Very cool! What tool did you use to simulate this? What does the code/query (if any) look like?
How does YouTube steal your data? What do they do with it?
“As an enthusiast am I supposed to be motivated by the page counter on my site?”

If you bothered to put a counter on your website, wanted to attract like minded individuals, or get enough people to sponsor you to continue work you otherwise couldn’t do, yeah probably. Or we can go with the unrealistic idea that enthusiasts as a whole don’t have egos or motives beyond shouting into the void to express their pure love of <insert thing>.
I won't mind if this change drives fundamentalists away from the platform.
The ad blocker problem is less people explicitely blocking ads on Youtube, than people blanket blocking ads everywhere. They'd need to white list Youtube to disable it for that specific case.

So the question is whether they really _want_ to pay for Premium or not, the ad-blocker will probably stay on either way.

> Switching profiles is already considered an inconvenience

I'm not following. For instance I have a work profile, my main profile on my phone (mostly due to paying for Google One + apps + a bunch of services on that specific account), and other profiles on my other devices (home laptop + ipad)

I absolutely do not want my work account to share my personal algorithmic recommendations, or my main account getting killed because of anything happening on other devices, including facturation issues.

Funnily enough, even as those accounts are separate, there's still cross-contamination of the algorithmic recomendations, probably because they share the same IP or geoloc.
Watching MOON like it's a documentary.
I actually think this is what prevented Google from deploying generative AI before. If the search engine, which existed to direct searchers to websites, becomes an answer engine, which does not direct people to websites, it will take some time, but large quantities of the sites Google consumes will cut them off.

The trade is info to Google for visitors. It's not hard to guess how sites will react when that trade stops.
>I have to admit that all of my testing of its grammar-explaining ability was done last December. I have repeated a few of those tests now with GPT-4, and it did fine [1].

A tale as old as time in this space! I appreciate you checking it again. They are improving so fast.
With their default model it did extremely badly with my question to build this script. It wasn't even close to right.

When I changed it to "Use Best Model" it gave a very good response but I'm pretty certain it was just piped to OpenAI GPT-4.

My prompt:

Write a python script for me that deletes AMIs from AWS that I own which have the tags role=bento-remote and bento_image_type=profile. It should bucket the AMIs by another tag called profile. It should delete images older than 14 days but always keep the 10 most recent even if they are older than 14 days. It should print the name of the AMI it is about to delete. It should run the deletes in parallel so it is fast.
Not necessarily pure peer-to-peer, but I'm pretty sure some federated thing could absolutely work.

We just need this country/world to collectively remember what a library is.
Because that's what the doctor ordered.
Not sure about the Fold 3, but the Flip 3 has been surprisingly durable for me. Dropped it multiple times getting out of Uber, fell off desk onto hardwood floor, etc. never with a case on and most recently without even the plastic screen protector.

I thought for sure when I first bought it I'd have to be super careful about the hinge but by now I'm constantly opening it and closing it during the day (though not quite jerked around like an old school flip phone).

I'm amazed at how perfectly it still works almost 2 years later for me, I made a point of keeping my old pixel phone instead of trading it in when I made the upgrade because I was so worried the Flip wouldn't last.

Definitely going to be getting another Flip when I do upgrade again, unless maybe Google launches its own version of that configuration.
So don't watch it then. Serving video is not cheap and you're increasing costs for everyone else. I don't get to jump the fence at a music festival just because I wouldn't have gone if I had to pay.
I see what you’re getting at, calling out a No True Scotsman. It’s worth remembering that some people aren’t actually Scotsmen.

SF is essentially a single party system. Everyone has to run Democrat, even the conservatives. It continues down to liberal hypocrisy in the citizenry, which mirrors the conservative hypocrisy. Every abortion is immoral except the one I need, everyone deserves affordable housing except in my neighborhood.

The end-to-end government in SF, which would include the state and federal, is not meaningfully progressive. It’s extremely progressive on visible, local issues. But it’s to such a point it’s absurd. This is how you end up with a very conservative tax system while petty property crime is de facto legal.
Need? No, not particularly. Deserve? Yes, they are providing a service.
It means splitting the country politically so that it is impossible to generate opposition to the leadership.

It's pretty clear that that is the modus operandi.
It's a fantastic interview. To clarify, his position boils down to something like "the risk is very real, the chance the risk materializes is quite significant, it's not a foregone conclusion that we are all definitely going to die from it, so there is some hope, but it's likely the default outcome and there aren't many people who take it seriously or who are working on it." I would say he's net bearish on it, which is why he spends time working on trying to mitigate the X-risk, or attempting to at least.
> the only reason to pay for it is because you want to support Youtube

Or, and stick with me here, you want to support the creators. Because the creators get most of the money from premium subscriptions.

As per the creators, who see how much they get for premium views and ad views (they already know how much they’re getting from everyone else).
Looks great, but not very realistic. The real Win11 start menu doesn't open immediately, it glitches in various ways for 3-4 times before actually working. Realism 7/10
I've been doing the same for years and I'm really happy with it.

But the one big annoyance is events - I've never found a satisfying way of writing a JSdoc that says what events a class emits, or what parameters the events have. Do you have a way of handling this?
YouTube Premium pays content creators based on the amount of time that Premium subscribers watch their content.

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6306276?hl=en#zipp...

From what I've seen creators say, they get more revenue from a Premium user than they would have if the user had just watched some ads.
I do not know how San Francisco might solve its many other problems, but homelessness is just a game theory problem gone bad. To solve it, one does not need empathy, or pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps paternalism. We don't need a return to 1980s style mental-illness-warehousing, or for people to be less greedy.

No municipality can fix this problem, regardless of the local politics, because to be the first city to solve it would mean that they'd find out they have so many more homeless people in the coming weeks and months. The homeless aren't stupid, and they aren't chained to the ground where ever it is they have to be right now. If they heard of a magical place where homelessness was solved, they'd hitchhike there, or panhandle for a bus ticket, or if no other options just hoof it the whole way.

Suddenly, this city finds out that they allocated the funding for 100% of their homelessness needs... but now they have twice as many. Five times as many. Is there even an upper limit?

And cities and townships everywhere else are getting bright ideas like that they can be rid of their homeless too, if they're willing to splurge on a bus ticket for them.

If you were mayor of this city, the city where you could get the bill passed to fix homelessness, would you do it? It must be in the back of your mind that any attempt to fix it will result in this embarrassing calamity. Whether you are Democrat or Republican (or anything else). Maybe it'd be better to just not bother. And so you don't. If you're on the left, you pretend to be really empathetic, if on the right you just give a really stern speech about how everyone needs to take care of themselves. Then you let it go.

This remains true, no matter what the details are for your fix for homelessness. There might even be many possible fixes, but none of them can be tried (and if some unclever local politician does try, they'll just end up making it look like it failed when it does backfire).

The solution is quite simple, cheap, boring, and unobjectionable to anyone who might hear it. But being those things, it also elicits a reaction of "how could it be so, people have been trying to solve this for years!". If anyone can find me a city manager or city council or mayor who'd listen for 15 minutes, they could be a hero that goes down in the history books.
Nothing to do with "influencers", but yes I haven't really used it. My opinion was formed from watching other people's phones who have this and deciding I don't like it, and I'm not prepared to change phones to give it a try on the off chance that I mind not find it an issue.
Youtube Premium is effectively a donation, frankly.

It's not in the legal sense, you do get a "product" for it. But it didn't take me long to realize that even paying for Youtube Premium, I was better off not logging into my account and just using NewPipe.

I really think the only reason to pay for Premium is if you want to donate money to Youtube.
Thanks, I'll have a look into that!

My biggest beef with Shorts is that it's the equivalent of having the shelves full of lollies and junk food if you're trying to be healthy; it's far better not to have any available if you want to stay lean.

I love long form YouTube videos as much as I loathe the short form, whose promotional algorithms are skewed towards content that's rubbish for the brain - and society.

Edit: On Samsung Internet, could browse to the mobile app and indeed hide the shorts for 30 days (little X in top right of Shorts content panel, not a setting). Furthermore, if I disable "open links in apps" under settings/useful features, I now get the YouTube icon to open the current video in the app - this lets me browse for videos without being bugged by Shorts, and I can then open in the app if I want some of its features such as play in background etc. Thanks again, great tip.
I'm enjoying how simple some of this actually is.

Here's the full implementation of VS Code for example: https://github.com/yashash-pugalia/win11-svelte/blob/main/sr...

It's just 44 lines of code - it works by opening a window with an iframe that points to https://stackblitz.com/github/yashash-pugalia/win11Svelte?em...
Next.js very literally does by running React on the backend too!
Good to hear! I've worked with Steve B who took on maintainership of Jim Tcl, and have worked pretty extensively with some Linux based embedded systems that he developed that use it extensively. I was surprised to see (way back when I first looked into it) that you had started it, having been familiar with Redis at the time! We eventually started using Redis in some of those systems (control for satellite tracking antenna systems) as well, to share status and config information between different units on the same antenna.
I have never seen grug before. This is fantastic.
NewPipe is great. I haven't tried ReVanced in a few months because it was a bit buggy. Has it improved?
YouTube has cache boxes at ISPs like Netflix.

YouTube Premium Family is worth every penny.
Austin is becoming bad. They're trying to make it like Houston. It used to be super walkable but now they're expanding the streets into the central area and ripping out the sidewalk. It makes me sad :( I think I'm done with American cities. They're all made for cars with maybe the exception of NYC.
How many times can you fold that screen before it cracks?
Yeah not sure, I thought the article used the word girl and so I used it, but looking back, I don’t know where I saw it. It did feel weird using it
Thanks for sharing this, OP. I enjoyed The Switch by the same author so I just bought the kindle version of this. For those that didn’t see the chapters of McDonald’s earlier book posted serially here, it is a sort of pre-history of the computer focusing on electromechanical switches in the phone network.
the Family sharing of YouTube Premium is worth every penny I pay for it times 5. easily.
Ok, work with me here… It’s incognito mode, the mode created such that it explicitly doesn’t carry over cookies from regular mode, or between sessions.

What exactly are folks expecting here? Google to break out of the explicitly requested sandbox?
I just checked it's $15.99, which is a no go for me at the moment. If they offered a lower cost tier without YouTube music I would do it. However I use pandora (plus), I have for over a decade and have all my stations setup how I want them so I have no need for YouTube music. I mostly use the app anyways on my phone or tablet, so I still get ads. So it's not a big deal, but I do feel that $15.99 is to much at least for me at the moment, considering I pay for pandora and a few other streaming services.

Edit: Just realized I was viewing through the app with the Apple tax markup. However $13 is still more then ideal when I'll never use YouTube Music
YouTube Premium means you are paying YouTube for content made by someone else than YouTube, while YouTube generates lots of ad revenue from non-Premium users. Makes me feel I’m compensating the wrong person. I wish a higher percentage of my fees go directly to video makers and that they indicate clearly how much I gave each creator.
Barry Webb!
Google shares a portion of their YT premium revenue with creators. In general a view from a YT premium user will earn a creator more money than a view from someone using YT for free and viewing ads.

(But any info I can find seems anecdotal, I don't think youtube publishes any numbers -- and earnings will depend on where in the world those viewers are, etc...)
No, it's because we users no longer trust BigTech like Google to not be greedy and know that it is all about bait and switch.

They made "free" the norm on the internet as it increased the barriers for their competitors. Then started to show ads as nothing can be free for ever. And we users accepted that as a reasonable compromise with the belief that the ads will be limited. What happened? Bait and switch - from one to two to three banners in a page, from text ads to display ads to video ads, there was suddenly more ads than content on a web page. And the ads used more bandwidth than the content. Next came the assurance that our privacy wouldn't be compromised. Google pledged to "Do No Evil". What happened? Bait and switch - suddenly Google (or other BigTech) claimed that they just can't survive without personalised ads that need to be very privacy invasive. Now we are the products.

The bait and switch in Youtube (or any other streaming platform) is quite obvious - get us to pay for "ads free" video, and then suddenly introduce ads in the paid tier. Then offer another "ad free" tier for a higher price. No thanks, Google. We are not going to be fooled. Go ahead and introduce the anti-ad blockers - there is no way you are going to get me to pay to watch videos full of ads. Google's greed also needs limit. Especially when the user experience of most Google products have become worse.
If someone offered you $5000 to change the email address you've used on every website for a decade, would you? All of your banking and financial accounts, your phone and utility bills, your doctor. Could you even identify every place you've ever used it?

That sounds like an awful lot more than $5k worth of work to me
Get into the quadcopter hobbyspace, you will learn more than you ever wanted about battery chemistries.
>... you have to be honest that you just want a free experience.

No, I want an experience that commits to showing the ad(s) up front and not interrupting the video with more ads in the middle.

I use YT primarily for music. I don't mind letting ads play at the beginning. It's when they inject them into the middle of a song and, suddenly, when I'm jamming out, RIGHT at the peak of the track when I'm having the most fun, two more ads suddenly start blaring, and I'm forced to let the first one ride for 30 seconds.

There is some music that you just can't easily access anywhere but on YT for a variety of reasons. It's what keeps me using YT, but that approach of ad injection is bullshit.

Edit: Concert videos, too. Their algorithm will slap ads in the middle of a song, rather than in between them. I absolutely would not mind an ad here and there between songs, but noooooo.
This is one of those all too common misunderstandings of how engineering works. There's some idea that once designs and theory are done, that engineering is some kind of straight forward act of stamp collecting and that the best thing is always to wait until the problems are worked out on paper before we start to build.

But in fact the engineering itself is exploratory. And often times, to understand something, you just have to start building.

That's what ITER is about. When the project started, we had gone about as far as theory and design could take us. You can see the same thing with other unproven fusion designs getting underway as well including the one at Lawrence Livermore.
Lots of great technology like indoor plumbing and electric lighting started as playthings for the rich. Early adopters serve a useful purpose for everyone.
I'm really curious about the demographics of these cheapskates. Are they just young rebels without a cause? Are they couch surfing Marxists? Are they affluent but entitled?

I mean, anyone who's had a job/career for a number of years should realize that they get paid for bringing value to the world, and that the folks behind YouTube (both platform and content) are bringing value to the world and need to get paid. Of course only about 60% of working age adults actually have jobs (in the US) so I guess the other 40% have a hard time grasping how money works.
Then unsubscribe if or when they do. It’s not a contract with your soul on the line, it’s a monthly payment.
YouTube premium downloading does store the video in the browser data store I think, yes.

I use yt-dlp for videos I want to keep a copy of, which are few and far between, and I use YT premium's download feature to queue up stuff I want to watch on my phone later when I know I'm going to a poor coverage area.

there's room for both solutions in my world.
Already better UX than the original
only-for-big-companies distributors like Allied and Newark.

Huh? I'm strictly a hobbyist and I order from Newark all the time, and have never had any issues with them. If anything they are my first "go to" site to check for parts, or possibly it's a "1A / 1B" thing with them and Mouser. Nothing about my interactions with Newark have ever given me a "only for big companies" vibe, FWIW.
I'm not sure yet whether to be concerned about this particular example or not.

I am concerned about DEI being used as a sort of backdoor for bad ideas being accepted and enforced in the workplace or university. There's a real chance, in my mind, for DEI to justify actions that we normally consider unethical: suppressing or compelling speech, unjustly firing people, excluding people who don't think like us from positions of power.

But I'm not sure how often this happens. I do see plenty of headlines that make bold, negative claims about DEI, but they seem to fall apart under scrutiny.

So I'm curious: what specifically are we concerned about with this article? And is anyone aware of a list tracking egregious but solid examples of DEI-run-amok?
Dunno if they'll become ubiquitous, but I think various foldable forms will at least stick around as a viable market segment. Most early-ish adopters I know from the zFold and zFlip 3 generation are planning to get another when it's time to upgrade. Granted that's a biased sample of like 5% of the people I know IRL, but still it's not too common to see that much agreement after a year+ of use for a product that's just a gimmick.
Is it valid to assume a normal distribution here?
If Google removed the useless YouTube Music + exclusives and lowered the price it would be a lot more popular.

I pay for YouTube premium and for me it's worth it to remove the ads with the family plan. But paying for extra stuff you don't want sucks.
You don’t have to be snarky.

I want the app to keep a single boolean flag in memory: user is authorized to not see ads.

They don’t need to know who I am, just that I don’t need to see ads.

That seems imminently doable.
I just meant that the conference is not the features. The conference is about the features, but they're different things. Much like the Magritte painting is not a pipe, it's a painting of a pipe. The analogy was not very good.
> Or, and stick with me here, you want to support the creators. Because the creators get most of the money from premium subscriptions.

I already brought this up above. The creators won't get money unless you sign into Youtube Premium and watch videos using that account, and that is a straightforwardly, almost universally worse experience than just using NewPipe and uBlock Origin anonymously.

Youtube Premium is more valuable to creators than ads, but part of the reason for that is because ads pay basically nothing to creators. The payout structure for Youtube Premium is weird and not really healthy for an ecosystem (since it works off of view percentages which discourages more professional projects in favor of spam). It's still not a lot of money, and it's ultimately a kind of bad system for funding creators. If you do want to support creators (and you should), donate to them directly when possible.

It doesn't make sense to purposefully make your viewing experience worse so that creators can get a fraction of that subscription revenue. You're supporting Youtube with Premium; but you'll help actual creators much more by using Patreon, Twitch subscriptions/donations, buying merchandise, or just donating directly if they support it.

Even if Youtube Premium was giving a comparable payout to direct support (which it's not), most creators on Youtube don't want to be reliant on Youtube for their revenue. Direct donations allow them to have more agency over the stuff they make, and subscriptions/purchases outside of Youtube allow them to stress out less about the fact that Google controls their entire livelihood.
According to many creators, YT premium views are extremely lucrative for them.
Amphetamines have a calming and focus-enhancing effect on nearly everyone. The idea that those who have ADHD have a unique experience in becoming calmer and more focused after taking amphetamines is an internet-born bro-science myth.
Many Patreon creators allow you to see how many patrons they have.

The most popular Patreon creators have something like ~50,000 patrons.

Anyone able to pull in that many patrons is likely to have millions of viewers on YouTube.

The proportion of viewers that pay is tiny.
By doing what exactly? Selling spades because you also figured out how to put a stone on a stick? If you believe such things should be illegal, do we agree that you don’t follow the force is only justified in response to force principle?
Instagram Deleted Disable Button
Instagram deleted disable button as far as I know.