Linus Tech Tips uploaded a video showing how to block ads on Youtube. Which was removed by Youtube for community guidelines violations.

Hal-5700X@sh.itjust.works to Technology@lemmy.world – 25 points –

https://files.catbox.moe/a6111d.png / https://nitter.poast.org/LinusTech/status/1825956050685800834

If you go the video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsjHMzGl-VY. You will see it's gone. So Youtube being Youtube.

Here's a Odysee mirror of the video, https://odysee.com/@jopec:7/linus-tech-tips-degoogle-your-life-part-2-adfree-youtube:0.

181

I don't see any mention of the YouTube adblock trick, so from the vid:

Copy YouTube URL. Paste it in Bing and search. Scroll passed Bing's sponsored bullshit and click on the thumbnail for the video you searched. It will then play, still in Bing, with no ads.

So if you're on a work or government or w/e computer that doesn't allow installing adblock extensions, there ya go. No downloads or anything, just YouTube and Bing.

 

...this is the first time I've ever had any interest in using Bing, lol.

Invidious or viewtube are even better.

I run a local instance of invidious and it is…chefs kiss

A local instance can still link your IP to other Google activities, so it's not really private.

It's better to run it in a datacenter and use your instance with a few friends afaik.

There's a chance duckduckgo does something similar, but sadly I can't check at the moment.

Leaving a comment so I remember to try it later—unless anyone reading is willing to do so.

It does indeed.

Thank you.

Whenever using this trick, I'd suggest using DDG instead of Bing if possible.

Why is this lengthy process preferable to using ublock on Firefox?

It isn't. But there are situations where that isn't an option, like being on a work or government computer where downloading firefox or installing an extension will get you fired. When that's the case, YouTube+Bing is a "good enough"/"better than nothing" option.

I'd rather watch ads than this kid.

Friendly reminder that pirates didn't usually stole gold. Piracy was stealing shipping goods, then selling them for profit at some port. Digital piracy is thus defined as acquiring, and then distributing for profit, media that you don't own the copyrights of. Ad blocking is categorically not piracy.

Also, "piracy" or "copyright infringement" isn't theft in any sense.

A key element of theft is that you deprive the rightful owner of something. You now have it and they no longer do. What makes it wrong is that the person who should have it no longer does. It's not that you have it. That's why the punishment for "mischief" where someone completely destroys something belonging to someone else is similar to the punishment for the theft of that same object.

Copyright infringement is breaking the rule that the state imposed giving someone the exclusive right to control the copying of something. You're not depriving anyone of anything tangible when you infringe a copyright. They still have the original, they still have any copies they made, any copies they gave out or sold are still where they were. The only thing you're doing is violating the rule that gave them exclusive control. If you're depriving someone of anything, it's depriving them of the opportunity they might have had to make money from selling a copy.

If anything, copyright infringement is more similar to trespassing than to theft. Just like copyright infringement, trespassing involves not allowing someone to control who accesses their property. If you sneak onto someone's campground property and have a bonfire party, the person loses the opportunity to rent out the campground for the bonfire, and any money they might have received for doing that. But, if you sneak in and sneak out and leave no trace, you could argue that nobody is harmed.

Anybody who needs to be told this is either a newborn or braindead.

Of you didn't watch the full video, which is fair enough, it's a point Linus makes which the comment refers to. So Linus is either newborn or braindead? I mean ok maybe. 🗿

I'm downvoted for pointing out what Linus said in the video, why exactly?

You have watched his videos, he is not the brightest bulb in the shed. Even on technical topics he sometimes spouts really awful things. Remember when he accidentally made racists remarks because he got confused about the meaning of the words he was using?

No I don't, care to share?

Here, not only did he admit he used to call people the R word, which, nice of him to not do that anymore, but so uncool to have done it in the first place. He also didn't knew that Hard R refers to a racist slur. Which tells you the kind of background and mind space he comes from. Again, good of him to want to do better, but he has a lot to of catch up to do.

Alright, that clip was funny but he said he used the R word, not that he called people it. And it wasn't an uncommon word at all twenty years ago. There are better points to make.

It's OK. I also used to use the N word. I didn't call anyone it, I just used it. It wasn't racist, I don't use the word anymore, but I never called anyone that.

/s

Closing your eyes, walking out of the room, changing the channel during the commercial break, all piracy. Hahahahahhahaha. Fuck these corporations

Isn't he the same person who calls adblocking piracy?

I mean I get that Youtubers have no morals and it's all about money but that seems excessively hypocritical, even for a Youtube "personality".

Isn't he the same person who calls adblocking piracy?

He's also got a generally nuanced opinion of piracy, in that it's justifiable in some situations. If you call it piracy and you're okay with piracy then it's not really a contradiction.

Being willing to talk about it despite working against your interests isn't always bad depending on context.

Breaking news, people on the Internet have no concept of nuance.

I had the vague recollection of him having a small-business-owner-brain moment and going on about how it's theft, and it's taking money out of his pockets, or something along those lines.

Looks like I may have been either thinking of someone else, or misinterpreted a snippet of video of him ranting about something.

I will admit to not watching his stuff for a good number of years now, and could be totally conflating things.

They've been pretty good about playing both sides. There have been plenty of videos of how to bypass add traffic and in the same video explaining how they rely on ad traffic . I don't love everything LMG does but they do seem to be kind of Open about the house wise and why nots of ad blocking.

He directly called it bad because it hurt his revenue stream. He is ok with ad blocking as long as it isn't being done to him. That's pretty bold if you ask me. A double standard, quite the opposite of nuance. He equated it with entering a cirque due soleil show without paying a ticket, which is a false equivalence. He thinks that he is entitled to have his ads seen as a price of admittance to watching his videos. No one is entitled to have their ads watched.

Source on "he's ok with ad blocking as long as it's not done to him"? Doesn't sound like something he'd say.

The way I see it is if I'm forced to watch ads when watching something, I won't watch it. In that case, no ad revenue for you because I'm not watching your shit. Now, If I watch it with no ads, you get the same result, BUT I might tell someone to watch your shit or buy some merch. That person I told to watch it might watch your ads and that person would not have watched you without me telling them to. You're up 1 revenue.

The corporate greed is out of control. The amount of bullshit ads and tracking is insane. I'm blown away by the people that defend this shit.

You're just justifying your actions. YouTube is not free to run, and the content there is not free to create. You're a parasite.

Don't worry, I'm as well - but be honest about it. What you're doing, and many other gigabrains here, is just pathetic. There is a lot of corporate greed in this world, but this ain't it.

Isn't that essentially what it is? Getting something for free through certain means you wouldn't get for free otherwise? Which means no money goes to whoever owns the service you're using?

Exactly. Getting media without paying (either in currency or in data for ads). Which they also address and talk about plex and jellyfin to consume the newly "liberated" media. I find his opinion on this quite fair.

Piracy is distributing media you don't own. How does blocking ads equates with acquisition and distribution of media you don't own? It doesn't.

Evading advertisement is not piracy.

Pirates didn't sail the seven seas heading out gold to others.

Piracy refers to the taking, not the giving.

Say you walk up to some person giving out free samples of food. As a condition of taking this free sample, you also must take a pamphlet of advertisements from the people who are giving you the free sample. You take your free sample, and then walk away while dropping the pamphlet in the nearest trash can. That's essentially what ad blocking is. You're simply preventing certain parts of a web page from being downloaded to your device. That's why people have issues with the "piracy" label, because nothing is being "stolen". You're just refusing to take all of it.

More accurate comparison would be taking the sample but refusing the pamphlet. Dropping it in the nearest bin would be skipping the ad after 5 seconds.

But it is? Don't lie to yourself. We all do it but it's still piracy, and it's okay.

He's right that it's piracy, he doesn't go on to say piracy is wrong, and neither would I.

It's piracy to block ads, and piracy isn't always wrong, so who cares?

Is it piracy if I skip the ads on the DVD I bought?

No, the ads on the DVD you bought have already paid the company that made the DVD.

You skipping those ads has no consequences for anyone, and nobody cares if you skip them.

Let's go to the early days of "piracy"

You are claiming that fast forwarding the opening trailers and adverts on a rented VHS is piracy.

No, i'm explicitly not, those aren't tracked and nobody gets paid based on whether or not you fastforward. That makes it not piracy. The content creator gets paid.

Youtubers have no morals? What kind of idiotic generalisation is that?

BTW, adblocking is a form piracy, that I'm completely fine with.

Calling it piracy doesn't mean you think it's the worst thing in the world. I do it unless I like a service, and c'mon, it is piracy.

I've literally voted for the "Pirate Party" in my country

LTT always seemed "slimy" to me, especially after the whole mistreatment allegations ordeal

Yeah, ever since all that stuff came out just before the new CEO took over, including the video/audio of the sexual harassment meeting which was treated as a total joke, I unsubscribed and stopped viewing their content. I couldn't reconcile their fun and approachable/friendly image with how they're treating staff. Moved on to watching more from other creators like Jayztwocents. Unfortunate that people keep turning out to be shitty left and right.

Funny, considering in the past he's gone on big rants about how adblocking is no different from piracy, and is theft.

But then again, its Linus we're talking about, its not like he has a particularly big issue with theft anymore.

I think he mentioned that ad-blocking is priacy, but I don't recall he said piracy is theft or piracy is inheritly unethical.

He mentioned many time that he pirates stuff, except he would pay for them first.

I don't understand why people are all pro-piracy but then get offended when someone accuses them of piracy....

He never went on any "big rants". He's mentioned it a few times, and he's right. You're bypassing payment (in the form of watching ads) to watch the video. LTT doesn't really care because AdSense only makes up a small portion of their income, which is why he's shown many different times, many different ways to block/bypass advertising. I could make an argument about how he's "pulling up the ladder behind him" but I digress.

Regardless "piracy" is a fairly convoluted term with no concrete definition and it's a dumb argument for anyone to have.

This is correct, he both explained how ad blocking hurts creators, and how ultimately he doesn't mind because purchasing merch is way more beneficial to them then the adsense money.

All he was saying is do what you want to do but don't pretend your actions don't impact other people. Do it with open eyes if you're going to do it.

To be clear, blocking ads isn't directly denying anyone money. YouTube decides how video creators are paid and they choose to not pay if ads are blocked. You can agree or disagree with that decision, but the user has no role in it.

Personally I think it's shitty that YouTube can just refuse to pay for the content people create for them.

Linus didn't say piracy is theft to my knowledge. He pirates a bunch of games.

Do you have a source? I've watched his videos for awhile but I don't remember hearing this take from him.

No, because that isn’t Linus’s take.

I think he’s referencing a stream once upon a time where Linus discussed the arguments around streaming and it’s impact on creators, from a creator’s perspective .

But because he uttered something in favor of ads on his videos-which is how they got paid-he’s now considered ultra pro invasive ads by the user above, who professes to not actually watching Linus

No, it was most definitely Linus's take. Louis Rossman covered this a couple of years ago. Direct Linus quote from that Twitter thread:

Ad blocking is the exact same thing as piracy. Literally the exact same thing.

Linus himself covers those Twitter comments, and defends them further, in this video.

@Kbobabob@lemmy.world @A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world

And yet he never said not to adblock, so the only thing he claims are the categorization of adblocking.

I'd argue this as well. I see it in a similar way. Linus is obviously not trying to sit on some high horse and condemn piracy, he's just calling a spade a spade.

I really don't get the hate he got for that take.

Circumventing the method of payment could be argued as being a form of piracy. From that point of view, adblock is piracy.

Like them or not, YouTube is not a charity and requires the serving of ads to continue funding the service. You could argue about how they go about it, but it's a fact they need some sort of income to continue to exist.
Same goes for YouTubers. They get a percentage of that ad revenue. And they also need some form of income.

But just because he said so doesn't mean he doesn't understand why adblock is used. He didn't say "don't use adblock." He's shown how to use adblock before and since. He's also mentioned that buying something from their webshop gives them a lot more money than turning off adblock.

Saying "watching movies for free is pirating" isn't the same as saying "you shouldn't pirate movies".
Using adblock isn't engaging with YouTube on YouTube's terms.

Adblocking isnt piracy, from any point of view.

Its protection. Protection from sudden loud noises and visual diarrhea. Protection from malware and viruses from random website ads, and protection from Right Wing Extremist Propaganda like PragerU videos detailing how the black man should be grateful for the history of slavery and oppression (which has had a documented, factual effect on driving people into right wing extremist behavior, and the violent rhetoric and actions that inevitably follow)

As long as all of that exists, Adblocking will never be piracy. Adblocking is, and will be, mandatory protection.

And if Linus, or anyone else, wants to clutch pearls and cry about adblocking.. They can take their complaints to Google/Facebook/Other Ad services, because their lack of moderation and inability to policing content on their services are directly responsible for creating the necessity for adblocking.

I have no longer watched their content since the scandal.

I stopped because they are bro douchebags.

Even Luke, who I always agreed with the most and seemed the most level-headed has talked about their hiring process and said that, if you don't have personal projects, it's highly unlikely that you'll be considered for a position in LTT.

Supposedly it's because that shows a "lack of passion". Personally, I find that rather toxic. Like, dude, I do this for work and I also have a life. I literally do not have enough time to exercise, take care of my loved ones and also maintain personal projects.

Well, don't think their IT positions are competitive when it comes to salaries, compared to major tech companies. Also considering their offices are in Vancouver, you probably aren't going to work their to make bank.

It's a bit of a selection bias out of necessity..

*there

None of the things you mentioned justify having a toxic hiring policy/work culture.

I don't see the problem... having side projects will improve your chances at MANY jobs, and even applying for university if they're related to your field. Even if you have no time at all, if you're genuinely passionate about technology, I'd expect you to at least have aspirational goals for things on the side. A side project does not have to be finished or maintained to show "passion".

The entertainment company doesn't want to hire boring 9-5 drones just in it for the paycheck. Big surprise. They're allowed to be selective.

Having hobbies outside of your profession does not mean you're a "drone". Quite the opposite.

I think you're completely misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. The hobbies ARE the side projects. They don't have to be the same as your job.

But it's still sitting in front of a computer programming. I do that but not that often. I'm already programming 8-9 hours a day. My interests go way beyond that.

I have not once said anything about programming in this discussion. The side project could be knitting for all I care. I specifically said it's not important if the side projects are directly related to your job.

Then you're lacking context and have been arguing without understanding what I was referring to.

Luke at LTT works in the development side of the company (floatplane for example) and the "side projects" are public repos in github/gitlab/etc.

I've seen Luke talk about it a little, and at least during the clips I watched, Github wasn't mentioned. If he specifically says somewhere he's only looking for open source coding projects, then sure, that's a little unreasonable.

More generally though, there are plenty of hobbies you can talk to an employer about that could show "passion" without being programming. Personally I enjoy working on my own car, and I've talked about that before as a side project in interviews. If your hobbies require any skill at all, and aren't just "turn your brain off and watch YouTube", it will help you in just about any job. And from what I've heard from LTT, they're not really any different.

The dude hires people for programming positions and a lot of people use their GitHub as a portfolio, basically. He was saying that if you don't have that, you're basically not even considered for the job.

In summary, this specific case was about it being basically a requirement to program 24/7. Which is pretty toxic.

Which one?

Probably the sexual harassment one that's when I left. The billet labs stuff was bad too though.

Feels like I remember that one getting pretty good proof Linus didn't do anything, but could be wrong

Linus wasn't accused of sexually harassing anyone. His company was accused of being a hostile work environment with sexual harassment by a former worker, but the accusations weren't against Linus himself. LTT hired a 3rd party law firm to investigate - LTT said the law firm basically said there wasn't legal liability based on the documentation they could find and LTT used that to absolve themselves and threaten to sue the accuser if she said anything else.

But this was an LTT hired lawfirm and LTT themselves reporting on what the report said - and since it's confidential you kind of just have to take their word that they're accurately reporting the findings. Further there were initially some corroborators of Madison's story who retracted and apologized quickly (assumingly after being threatened with legal action - Aprime is the example). Besides that a lot of the accusations were things that happened in person that wouldn't necessarily leave a digital trail so it's possible even if the 3rd party investigation was completely unbiased that everything Madison said was still true.

In the end believe what you want but it seems slimy enough that I stopped watching.

Yeah you're correct on the accusations, I should have clarified.

But with that approach it doesn't sound like there is anything an organization could do against false accusations that would absolve them of wrongdoing. I'm all for bashing corrupt/horrible companies, but it feels like there should be at least some presumption of innocence unless there is any kind of proof. Painting all accused with the same brush just leads to devaluing the brush IMO. But like you said, people may (and will) believe what they want, and people are under no obligation to watch or support any creator unless they want to. In my case I just haven't seen any proof of wrongdoing (in this case, gamersnexus controversy was worse IMO).

What do you think a company should do in that situation, assuming it is being falsely accused? What would a "perfect" response be? I cant think of a much better one than what LTT did, given their circumstances, but would love to hear what a better response would look like.

The only thing they could have done better was have the third party release the report. I don't think they released it yet, but they had intended to at one point. Maybe the lawyers told them they shouldn't?

Hm, not sure that would be legal even? Considering it likely contained information on different employees etc. But yeah, if possible it would have been nice to see.

Not to mention the law firm they hired advertises anti-union action, so that should tell you whether they can be trusted to be fair to workers..

One of the major accusations was that they asked too much of Madison for a single person to accomplish, and fired her over not meeting their expectations. While this is not great, it's not legally problematic.

People can say nothing was done but the only info you’re going to get is going to be from the accusers. The company isn’t going to speak publicly about it and so we won’t ever know what their views are or what proof they have.

They hired an external firm to investigate themselves and they found nothing, while the accuser had zero proof. There is plenty of things to accuse them for, the gamers nexus thing for one, but I'm a bit annoyed about false accusations sticking so hard when there is little reason to believe it. If anything it makes people less likely to believe actual victims.

This was my impression. All of their scandals they’ve taken extremely seriously(it appears), done the work to fix and improve, and a lot of their issues seem to be results of fast scaling and organizational level problems that can be fixed.They haven’t just swept things under the rug where they’re able to be transparent. I just think the problem is what Luke has always said: When you open a company up to transparency, you gain criticism, and then the company has large incentives to shut down that transparency because all you use it for is to cause them problems.

Aside from that, the LTT community and outsiders seem very toxic toward them.

Okay Amber, what's the verdict on that?

I’ll be that guy. I don’t understand why LTT gets so much crap from people constantly, they seem to have a very toxic community even without the scandals. But in regards to the more recent scandal, I really think a lot of those things are fixable and I’ll be watching to see if they fix them.

As far as the sexual harassment stuff goes I can see that as a legitimate reason to stop watching. At the same time though, how should we feel with such limited and one sided information? And especially how should I feel if the problems aren’t inherent to the company and if they don’t reoccur?

Maybe someone can help clear this up for me because I’m not that informed and I’m still giving them a chance but maybe I shouldn’t be.

I don’t understand why LTT gets so much crap from people

Because their clowns. Literally. Their content is pure tech entertainment with constant immature humour and little substance. The way they present themselves is like a group of teenagers messing around.

Then there's their "expertise". They don't know tech beyond a Windows "power user".

But in regards to the more recent scandal, I really think a lot of those things are fixable and I’ll be watching to see if they fix them.

Linus showed his true colours during the Billet Labs incident. He doubled down hard, and I'm convinced that even today Linus feels like he did nothing wrong. They have zero reputation to salvage, IMO.

Yeah this is what I mean. I don’t get why people who don’t like their content bother hating them. You don’t like that they mostly exist for entertainment, cool, why bother caring? If you want deep tech dives or something else, there’s plenty of content out there. You’re upset they aren’t more knowledgeable as if everyone making tech content needs to know everything.

And yeah I did feel like they messed up with the Billet incident and it was one of the more important things they needed to address properly. They made a mistake and I do think that Linus handled it poorly to say the least. They deserved that part of the scandal. All I’ll say is I’m willing to wait and see if they improve or if they make similar mistakes. If that’s a big deal to you, I get that, but that’s not where a majority of the hate is coming from either. It’s coming from what I said before about tech people wanting different content

I don’t get why people who don’t like their content bother hating them.

Because for good or bad, they have a significant influence in the tech world. And since they are more bad, people don't like them.

Take the Linux challenge, for example. They massively misrepresented the usability of Linux for the average person and for gamers. They even concluded at the end of their challenge that Linux was unsuitable for most gamers. And the release and success of the Steam Deck shortly afterwards was quite delicious.

Then there was the bit where Linus didn't read the warning about the package manager removing the desktop environment and just hit yes, then complained that it wasn't his fault and that the system was poorly designed.

The guy literally has an issue with accountability.

You’re upset they aren’t more knowledgeable as if everyone making tech content needs to know everything.

A better statement is that I'm upset because they preach their deep and unchallengeable knowledge and act as a be-all end-all authority in tech.

But really I'm not "upset" by them. I just really dislike them and think they're insufferable.

And I don't watch LTT. And there are plenty of other, and objectively better, channels about tech. And I watch those better channels, including GamersNexus.

All I’ll say is I’m willing to wait and see if they improve or if they make similar mistakes.

Their entire channel is a giant mistake. All of their content is garbage by virtue of their proven flawed and subpar provides. A process they admitted was flawed, and from what I've seen is still flawed with the garbage corrections in the comments nonsense they promised to fix.

They're just going to go about business as usual and just be a little more careful with their public image. They don't deserve the views they get.

Thanks for sharing? Why is every Lemmy single comment section filled with unrelated iamverysmart comments.

Please kindly refer to vetting processes about what to post or not post on a community platform. Who said what?

Am leaving this site soon am done with google and youtube (Yt frontends and odysee)

I don't care for Linus these days but respect for that.

Yeah, I got tired of his videos half-assing the work and the failed reviews hurting small manufacturers while Linus doubled down after GN documented their failures.

But this I can get behind.

Doubled down? After being called out they slowed the upload cadence, are taking more time to make sure mistakes don't get through, and changed their production process. They also formed a volunteer team of "beta tester" viewers who see each video pre-release to catch any mistakes they didn't internally. I think they handled it well. Of course it would be better if they didn't have a problem in the first place, but I'd never call it "doubling down".

Not initially. Linus mouthed off as he likes to do on his own podcast before eating crow after GN reinforced their claims.

Yeah, I don't like Linus all that much but I do enjoy LTT's content overall. He tends to drastically and publicly overreact to literally any criticism, and then the rest of the team gets involved and he walks it back. Whether they legitimately change his mind or just convince him he's gotta look like he's changed his mind I have no clue.

My favorite instances of Linus are when he's an absolute idiot on the WAN show and we just get to see Luke's reaction live. The hard-r thing was absolutely hilarious.

Yeah Luke's look of "oh no bro, stop" is pretty much a staple of the WAN show.

There was an initial reaction from Linus on his forums where he massively doubled down on his stance that he had not done anything wrong with the review model LTT had auctioned off without permission (I can't remember the name of the company). He had even accused GN of not following "journalistic standards" by not giving LTT a chance to put their side forward.

This was met with another video from GN, and overall criticism over the dismissive attitude Linus was displaying. That's when they came out with a YT video, admitting their numerous faults, and Linus himself admitted that the way he responded on the forum was not acceptable.

Pretty much doubled down initially, till they realised that they're in actual deep waters.

He has a legit point that Steve did not give LTT a chance to comment. "He doesn't have to!" Maybe. But he gave the other side a ton of airtime/chances to comment. It was very one sided and while GN made some good points, it felt like a hit piece. And Linux, imo rightfully, felt a little betrayed by a guy he'd worked with in the community.

His reaction wasn't great but it was that of a guy who was defending his team and from someone he'd probably consider a 'friend' impugning his integrity and dragging them without giving them any opportunity to comment or even letting him know it was coming--two very common practices/norms.

A unflattering view of GN vid is that he felt threatened by LTT labs entering the space and he wanted to get out in front of that an expose"how unreliable" they are. He didn't give LTT a heads up or allow them to comment because he knew they'd have a solid response. He blindsided him on purpose.

All that said, GN did Linus a favor. It accelerated his transition away from CEO and forced them to review their dumb production rates and the videos that are coming out now are better than ever.

Ironically, it left a sour taste in my mouth about Steve and I haven't watched any of his videos since.

I would wager money on the suspicion that deep down, Linus probably still thinks he did nothing wrong.

And that the actual change only came about because the people around him (like his wife and executives) threatened/forced him into changing positions.

Cause we got a good glimpse into the kind of person Linus was when that whole thing started, by selling the prototype that wasnt his, then going out and lying about being in contact with the company, who he lied about forgiving him and making a deal to make up for it... Which was quickly rebuked by GN asking the company if Linus had contacted them, to which they said "No"

And the kind of guy that does that kind of shit, isnt the kind of guy that suddenly goes "Okay, I screwed Up, I did it, I'm sorry" without someone behind the scenes threatening catastrophic personal consequences.

Cause we got a good glimpse into the kind of person Linus was when that whole thing started, by selling the prototype that wasnt his, then going out and lying about being in contact with the company, who he lied about forgiving him and making a deal to make up for it...

10'000%

This is what all his rabidly loyal fans miss. He showed true colours during this incident.

Fair enough. Still commendable for taking the heat himself without ever mentioning which employee made the mistake with misallocating the review item to the charity auction.

It is, but it also genuinely isn't their fault.

He pointed to their failure at inventory management because the fact that they didn't have a functional setup for it is a systems problem, not the individual.

After being called out, this genius doubled down on his actions and defended his methods all the while inserting an ad right in the middle of a response video.

It was then that he lost my respect.

Doubled down?

Yes, doubled down. After being called out Linus made two separate long posts about why he wasn't wrong.

They also formed a volunteer team of "beta tester" viewers who see each video pre-release

So using free labour instead of just doing their jobs? If they can't "catch any mistakes internally", then they're just bad at their jobs (which they are).

I think they handled it well.

Yes, the PR team they used gave them a good corporate playbook to work with.

"Slowed the upload cadence" is just another way to say "wait for this to blow over".

I used to watch LTT, mostly because it was interesting from the "let's see what those guys have to say". I had zero interest in their technical expertise because, well, they don't really have any. They've always been clowns, but after their storage server video and their Linux "challenge" I lost all respect for any talent or knowledge they claimed to have. After the Billet Labs incident I lost any shred of respect I had for them.

They are clowns.

You live in a fantasy world if you think it's possible to catch 100% of mistakes internally. Even safety critical equipment with many layers of checks fails and kills people every now and then (medical equipment, bridges).

You live in a fantasy world if you think it's possible to catch 100% of mistakes internally.

Nice strawman. No one said anything about catching 100% of mistakes internally. But outsourcing that work to unpaid volunteers with zero verification of qualifications is the definition of "passing the buck".

The correct answer is to hire and train up a QA team.

No one said they are unpaid or have zero qualifications either.

They said they did all that. But actually Watching the videos? It's the same shit as before. Sloppy edits, errors in the comments etc.

There would be less talking over each other due to word definitions if the music industry had not convicted people that murder and stealing on boats was good way to describe unauthorized copying.

…to the surprise of absolutely no one who's been paying attention. They got rid of the coalmine canary clause like a fucking decade ago.

What the heck does complying with wiretap orders have to do with removing YouTube videos about adblockers?

Well that's a thumbnail I'd never click on

Their video about thumbnail A/B testing was quite interesting to see. Considering how they have dedicated designers to make these thumbnails I guess that works pretty well, despite your personal opinion on it, with which I agree too.

Unfortunately this is just the way it is on YT now. Post clickbait thumbnails, or miss out on hundreds of thousands of views. Because that's the way YT likes it. They don't want to positively weight long-term high-quality content, they want to promote clickbait.

That's the way that yields the longest combined watch time from the audience.

Do they go back and change thumbnails after a while? LTT does focus on a lot of evergreen content as well.

That's the way that yields the longest combined watch time from the audience.

No, that would be rewarding creators with a long history of producing high quality content.

YouTube gives a b testing for YouTubers based on watch time, so they can tune their thumbnails to the one that gets the most watch time. The audience doesn't always know the history of the chanel, they need to go off the thumbnail.

If someone cares about their view count then you shouldn’t give their content your time of day

Quite the opposite. If they didn't care about the view count the content wouldn't exist in the first place. No one makes content with the intention of no one watching it, and they certainly don't make high quality content that requires a team of people and expensive equipment.

They make them because it’s fun/they are passionate

And that makes them higher quality

At a bare minimum they make them because they're passionate about sharing with others. In which case they care about the view count. Once again, no one makes a video and uploads it to a video-sharing platform and doesn't care who watches it.

Having the time and money to dedicate to making high quality content makes them higher quality. If they have to work a 9-5 doing something else, and they record everything on a Galaxy S4 because they have no money, it's bound to be lower quality or just non-existent.

You need to spend more time around small channels

LTT is a good example of how what you’re saying is bullshit. All the money in the world but they’re still tech illiterate people making tech videos

You need to spend more time around small channels

Which would tell me what, exactly?

Any you want to recommend?

You have I have very different ideas of tech illiterate. Most of the hosts have forgotten more than I care to learn. I guess if you work very technical tech stuff 24-7 you have a higher standard.

It’s just the constant falsehoods and misleading

What do you mean? I've found their testing graphs especially to be very clear.

Building on a budget? Blow the whole budget on a graphics card and upgrade the rest of it later so we can stay under budget. “We got this part for free so it doesn’t count against the budget”. “Let me stand on the computer case to get it to fit”

ROG Ally vs Steamdeck? Make sure you use a keyboard and mouse + always have it plugged in. Recommend the Ally over the Steamdeck because it’s better in the above setup

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w5h_1Buf54I

This video, why is he saying Snapdragon instead of ARM? It makes even less sense when he opens by saying he only said positive things before because of a sponsorship…then proceeds to have an ad

Also claims people think ARM systems fall behind until Apple fixed it which Apple ARM is irrelevant. The criticism of ARM is that it’s a different architecture. None of the graphics in the video matter because some things just won’t run

When he finally gets to the point that things just won’t run he says it’s fine because you would just use a dedicated gpu anyway and it only effects gaming…which is just a lie

We have had dedicated gpus on arm machines that doesn’t fix the “they are different architectures” issue that he is trying to mislead people away from

Here’s a video on it from a year ago https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=argfZlPZKdY

Though, he couldn’t get it working with Windows

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wl5H5rT87JE

And this pattern happens in all of his videos

Misleading graphs with no knowledge of the actual issue trying to be addressed

As part of the mindless horde of sub-intellectual gremlins, i have to say that while i dont love thumbnails like that, i still click on the video because i know it'll be quality

You have to understand shit like these thumbsnails arent made for people like you and me.

They are made for the mindless horde of sub-intellectual gremlins who are incapable of rational, independent thought. The kind that run out and put sandpaper on their windshield wipers and microwave their phones to "fast recharge" them because they saw a video that said to do that.

and the sad, terrifying reality, is these mentally stunted little goblins outnumber us by margins that are too terrifying to even think about.

Username checks out

This is why I love my username.

Cause its low hanging fruit that people who can mount no actual counter point cant resist the urge to reach for.

Whether or not it's a valid counter point you continue to act superior when all you achieve is be a massive dick to people that don't mind the thumbnail or video

All of their thumbnails are unfortunately click-baity. They spoke about ut in an older video. Apparently, the click-baity images drive too much traffic for them to justify something more subtle.

Reddit is curiously silent on this matter. Their SJWs are usually all over shit like this.

Wouldn't surprise me if their new deal with Google has some influence on which posts go down the drain, and which ones go to the front page.

SJWs

Ah yes REDDIT. The website that famously does not have any safe spaces for conservatives.

Didn't he say that using adblockers in YouTube was basically piracy?

Yes, he also said that piracy can be a personal choice, and showed how to do it.

He did, and I disagree with that point. Piracy is copyright violation, ad-blocking is TOS violation. They're entirely different things.

That said, he said he understands why people do it and didn't condemn it, and in this video shows how you can do it. I think that's laudable, I just disagree with his assertion that blocking ads is in some way piracy.

The TOS are your licence to watch the copyrighted material, be it by paying a subscription or consuming ads. So if you break the TOS you're committing piracy. It's very clearly piracy, although I don't condemn it.

Ah, but what you don't know is that my TOS for when I watch a video is that if the video is bound by TOS, those employed by the company establishing the TOS are pedophiles and child abusers and I reserve the right to shoot them on sight.

This is clearly printed on my router, the megabytes can read it when they enter my room. I also have it somewhere in a doc file on my laptop that's been uploaded to my Google drive, as well as on this lemmy post that is unrestricted to the public. Google and any other entity have access to read this whenever they want.

Time to go shoot some child molesters, yeah?

Sidenote: I fucking hate people bringing up TOS. Any contract signed by one party is applicable to exactly that one single party, and my signature is vastly different from a mouse click.

What is the official reason here for removing it?

Its against YouTube's TOS to download content, and to block advertisements. Another lesser known, and less enforced part of the TOS also covers content instructing how to download content and block ads. I'm pretty sure that's the reason YouTube took it down at least.

On another note, huge props to Linus for teaching how to block ads on channel and company, with a hundred mouths to feed, majorly funded by advertisments. I know he caught a lot of shit before with gamer nexus, but they deserve props for this.

Hell yeah! Fuck the freeloaders

If someone puts up a billboard containing advertising, I have no obligation to look at it.

If there's a full-page ad in a magazine, I'm perfectly free to tear out that page so my parakeet has something to shit on.