This is the difference between a normal racist and a high functioning racist that knows a failed state can’t effectively oppress the people.
This is the difference between a normal racist and a high functioning racist that knows a failed state can’t effectively oppress the people.
What changed in their admissions procedures as a result of the court ruling? Is it as simple as just not asking race on the application so they couldn’t hold spots open to fill racial quotas? Or is it more complex than that?
Their game is just to try to make the ISPs liable; they don’t actually want it enforced. In fact, failure to enforce is the feature. They paint the ISP as complicit in the piracy then sue the ISP for hundreds of millions in damages hoping for a no-fault settlement. That’s a much better revenue stream than suing someone for 10k who can’t pay it.
It’s not even that simple. If you skip ahead during an ad, the YT servers could just keep streaming you the ad content anyway. Their servers can ensure that the next 30s of packet data you receive is an ad no matter what, so the only way you can skip it is to wait it out and close your ears and eyes. Basically the same concept as ads on broadcast TV. Which means we’ll have to do a TiVo for YT… Gross.
/s, hey, you dropped this
It’s pedantic, but you are not your computer. They don’t collect (according to them) PII other than phone numbers.
I work on web software professionally and this is a pretty minimal list that is completely justifiable for maintaining operations. If you can’t answer basic questions like “what are users doing with the app?”, you can’t make intelligent decisions about how to improve it.
There’s a lot of the same stuff here: https://legal.lemmy.world/privacy-policy/
I don’t know anything about this app or company so I’m not going to defend them, but there aren’t any real red flags here. If this amount of data collection bothers you, you really should stop using the internet in general.
Because administrative penalties are a thing. Your right to a jury trial only applies to crimes, and not everything is a crime. SCOTUS effectively ruled that if something could be a crime, even if you’re not being charged with a crime, the government can’t issue a non-criminal fine for it instead.
They’re bots
Just in case anyone thinks you’re being cheeky… https://prospect.org/justice/police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-public/