Yea me too i am a bit wondering why. People kept saying this was the reason, but idk if they really mean that or if its just 'saying what sounds possible as a half joke' (like when people answer any question about any shady business or very expensive auctions as "its money laundering" even tho there may be other explanations. I think ppl say it half jokinly?) Idk what reason snap would do this tho? Maybe theyre planning to make a gif hosting thingy by theirself?
Snap(chat) is Gfycat's parent company. The short version is they're hemorrhaging money and have been for years so they're cutting this as part of cost saving measures.
I assume it’s entirely marketing bullshit, whether to say “look how cheap a MBP is!” or to make you think “wow, it’s only a little bit more to get the way better model, what a bargain!”
I have 16gb on my M2 Air, and 8gb on my 2014 mini. I’m genuinely surprised at how usable that mini still is. Hell, it’s running Sonoma through OCLP, but it’s only when I boot up the Win11 VM I have installed that it really starts to struggle.
I honestly just made a double pun regarding the new MB Pro with 8gb in the basic configuration and the coming Windows with the 16gb requirement - which both seem strange product decisions with lots of negative customer feedback.
I think they’re in a better position than Microsoft when they tried to make ActiveX and Silverlight a thing. They own the two most visited websites. On top of that, they own the most used web browser and the most used operating system (judged by web use).
However, they are not selling food or shelter. There ways to defeat their OS, is custom Roms for now, etc.
Other solutions will need to be developed but it seems we have some products being worked on as we speak but not mainstream ready.
It don't be easy fight but if people vote with their money and feet, we customer should win in the end. That is unless daddy Sam boxes us in, and mega corps deff lobbying for that too.
More than you think. They are also actively seeking ways to make that leverage effect more people.
They are defining web standards. They control chrome and chromium. So all of the alternative browsers that aren’t safari and Firefox are using Google’s web engine. Even Firefox and safari are beholden to Google as they fund both these web browsers through their default search deals.
Google after many failed messaging apps has taken on RCS messaging. They provide most of the supporting infrastructure through their Jibe servers. They don’t allow anyone but themselves and Samsung to make an RCS app on android. They also had a campaign to pressure apple to use RCS. It’s likely apple’s RCS will be following Google’s Jibe service closely, as they’ve already said their will work with Google on this. Google successfully got most RCS messages going through their servers, with apple on board with RCS itll see most SMS messages defaulting to RCS and most of those going through Google.
They also have deep hooks into education market with their OneDrive/Google docs products and Chromebooks.
Most privacy focused android alternatives recommend Google hardware.
I’ll call that an incorrect and generalizing statement. The adaptation of these apps differs a lot from country to country, and SMS is definitely not dead yet. Beside people still texting, it’s also being used for verification codes, order confirmations, postal tracking notices, scamming, phishing and so much more!
They are defining web standards. They control chrome and chromium. So all of the alternative browsers that aren’t safari and Firefox are using Google’s web engine. Even Firefox and safari are beholden to Google as they fund both these web browsers through their default search deals.
Yeah, it annoys me to no end. First, they tried to convince the industry that users don’t want privacy, they want security, because somehow privacy would not be just one discipline underneath security.
And now that privacy has won, that even lawmakers have understood that it’s something that users need and should be able to demand, now they’re completely flipping their messaging on its head. Suddenly, they’re all about privacy. Except, of course, that they’re fucking lying.
Take the IP Protection “feature”. They hide your IP address from individual sites while hoovering up all of the user’s data into their own servers, to use for their own ends.
Privacy hasn’t been enhanced, if anything it’s been weakened by giving one company a log of everything done through the browser. So, it’s a fucking lie
Well, with that proxying feature, I mostly meant that they’re not doing it for the privacy, but rather for those other benefits.
Much like with 8.8.8.8 for DNS and AMP for the server-side, this feature locks down the client-side, ensuring that internet traffic goes over their infrastructure.
Yes, user privacy is short-term somewhat improved, because their competitors can’t track you quite as easily anymore, but if they truly cared about improving privacy/security, there would be so many much lower hanging fruits they could pick, like end-to-end-encryption for Chrome Sync by default. They don’t pick those, because it would impact their own ability to invade user privacy.
The only solution is to break them up. There is no other way - Google will keep perverting and manipulating social trends as long as they’re allowed to hold onto their position.
The web browser is the most important piece of software in the world. It should not be under the control of a single company - especially when that company is a massive monopolist with extreme conflicts of interest.
The web (and the entire internet) was built on standards. It is time to go back to multiple parties working together on standards. Not a single, monopolistic implementation.
(Google isn’t the only company that needs to be broken up by the way, but they’re definitely the most urgent.)
It would be best to make the switch today. That has the dual benefit of a) Showing Google that they will lose users, and maybe they will change their mind (again), and b) Show every website that they do need to put actual effort into supporting and testing against Firefox.
It’s been easily avoided for years now despite alarmists saying ad block would stop working as far back as 2020. I don’t even have an ad blocker installed on Vivaldi and the built in blocking has worked just fine, even the other day when people started having issues with YouTube V just kept doing its job.
I’ll believe it when I see it, and the day it happens I’ll switch to FF. Until then I’m not going to reduce the user experience with this armchair virtue signalling that you all pretend is making a difference.
Chromium isn’t Chrome… And they work to keep the worst of what googie tries to force into the core chromium project from Chrome out of their implementation. One of the benefits of chromium itself being open source.
Man all the recent news on Microsoft products is just god awful. Ads in the OS, forced updates, pestering people when they close apps to explain why, this. Fuck sake idk how people put up with it.
from the enterprise side, half their shit still only works if you have an 'on prem' AD server. there are a ton of their products that simply do not function if you are 'cloud only'.
they are no where near prepared to actually automigrate complex directories into azure/entra.. hell thats prolly why they changed the name, the 2 products will never have parity.
Azure AD is now Entra ID. Please do not deadname the Microsoft cloud offering (even if we all think it chose kind of a dumb sounding new name 🤫).
And Microsoft is heavily pushing their cloud services of course, but you can still set up on-prem AD as an option as well as other on-prem services.
It's just that all their cross service interoperability stuff won't work as well if it's not all in the cloud. Like, all their stuff is designed to work together in the cloud and keep you entrenched in the ecosystem, like any company I guess, except I actually like using Teams/Office/SharePoint combo, it's executed well.
i know how. i do it for work, and have completely airgapped my home work life... so that windows work laptop, i honestly do not give 2 shits about the policies applied to it.. its above my pay grade.
its only used for work, so if they want outlook to look at other work related 3rd party emails whatever.. why the fuck should i care. its not my laptop, its not even technically 'my' work.
We got a security reminder at work yesterday that, in case anyone should do BYOD in a pinch, to never enter our credentials on a third party service like Microsoft Software, Google Mail or whatever. Open source clients on open source OS only. So yeah, some companies care.
We are introducing a new Game Pass recommendation card on the Settings homepage.
They are saying like they just invented something amazing, yet they are just pushing a fucking ad.
The Game Pass recommendation card on Settings Homepage will be shown to you if you actively play games on your PC.
How would you know what we actively do on our PCs, huh? Huh???
Good news is that you can turn off most ads, including app promotions in Windows 11’s start menu.
For now, but you have to be extremely naive to believe they don’t plan to change this as soons as they reach a certain number of users. They already did things like that in the past.
Yeah that slogan really captured very well the intentions at the world economic forum.
I know it’s not what they officially stated but it really captured (they since walked it back and said it only was meant to “describe emerging trends”) the intentions of what happens when they all come to Davos and divide the world between them.
But I don’t believe “as a service” models are more sustainable. They will just enable more rent-seeking behaviour meaning we will get even less for our money. The incentive to deliver will be even lower as they will get paid anyhow.
My Sibling in Christ, giving us less for our money and giving them more control over our lives is the intent of all of this. Time to seize the means of computation.
…no, I don’t want to put all my stuff in OneDrive. No, my settings shouldn’t sync across everything. No, I don’t want to log in with the same account on all devices. I already have email and do not want to use outlook.com thanks. Stop warning me that I did not agree to put all my stuff in OneDrive, it’s really not necessary. What do you mean I can’t change my wallpaper unless I activate? Are you telling me that your antimalware solution that comes bundled in the OS isn’t able to block malicious ads in the browser that also comes with the OS? Why do these applications that I never installed keep showing up in the Start menu? What’s up with all these calls to Azure-based websites in my Pi-Hole logs when I’m away from my desk? Why are my CPUs going at full blast when I’m just staring at the desktop?
YouTube Red content can only be seen with Premium, but not only does Premium not have new exclusive content, Premium features don’t work with member videos if you’re paying for channel membership
I watch a number of creators that YT has demonetized so I’m not worried about it.
YT can clearly see what people want in these apps. They simply need to provide the exact same functionality and set a price. They won’t though because they want control and data as well.
Sure, that’s fair critique. Them not implementing the features people turn to third party apps for. Absolutely.
What I can’t make sense of are the people who want control, privacy, content, and not to pay a dime. YouTube could do this better, sure, but let that be the criticism not the mere fact they have the audacity to kick off people who provide nothing and take everything.
$15 a month is on par with other subscriptions, part of that money goes to the people you watch so they can get paid for what they do, I don’t see what’s unfair about this pricing. Yes, the features they give are lackluster and could easily be done by third party apps before they killed them but I pay for premium so the people who do YouTube as a job can make a living.
Because YouTube is well known for actually paying their creators… A lot of the creators I watch get a lot of their videos demonotized for nothing really, so I’d have to become a channel member to support them, at wich point I might as well just completly switch to their patreon. And just because it’s on par with other stupid subscriptions, doesn’t make it fair. There are a ton of useless perks to me I’d have to pay for. Doest Premium still come with YT music? Yeah that kinda shit. I you use all the stuff, fair, but I certainly wont, so no the price is not fair for me
I don’t care if it’s Google, Amazon, or fucking Walmart. If the product makes sense as it is right now and the price is on par with other services, I’ll pay for it if it makes sense for me.
I’m not going to avoid something or complain about shit that hasn’t even happened yet. If you don’t like the corporations and want to avoid supporting them, fine, but I’m exhausted with people giving bullshit answers as to why xyz isn’t fair.
Google graveyard has happened. YT makes them a lot of money, so it’s not likely destined there. But, like search, they will eventually make it more about $ extraction than value for the customer.
It hasn’t happened yet. Early adopters and early leavers shape things.
Ads don’t support YouTube. Actually if you have premium that does a better job supporting both YouTube and the creators because they get paid more per view with premium than they would with ads. That’s why google pushes premium so hard and is bundling it with the services it thinks it can get away with.
What you’re describing has basically already happened and the ads are getting worse because they just don’t provide enough income.
Just 10mins ago I was thinking how great the digital age started. I liked that when I bought something I can store it anywhere, play/listen (don’t remember if digital movies was a thing) it without any internet connection etc. Then we got Netflix and eventually Spotify and we got even more options, do you want to pay a reasonable price a month and watch/play essentially anything or do you want to keep your stuff forever and pay more? But then other companies wanted that piece of pie and started their own services, neutered existing services, raise prices often, got more aggressive with drm and other limitations. My point is, when things start and they seem good in this tech world of ours, just think a bit outside of the box about how bad it can get, because believe me, you are likely correct with that. When this digital age started, people were fearful too, and most of their fears came true.
Thing is, what you’re describing is a logical fallacy. That because things got worse they’re going to continue to get worse. The slippery slope fallacy.
Yes, you used to have dozens and even hundreds of songs that nobody could take away from you. You were your own server. However, now that we have a service like Spotify where you can listen to most of the world’s music, not be required to store it, not have to buy each album, each track, but instead pay $15 and listen to anything, anytime, make nearly unlimited playlists of nearly unlimited tracks… it doesn’t make me miss the old days. I don’t feel nostalgia for the days when my disk walkman skipped because I walked too fast or the headphones on my head were $3 and I couldn’t even hear the lyrics properly. Now we have lossless compression, headphones that would cost thousands just a few years ago being only a couple hundred, devices that don’t skip, don’t lag, don’t buffer, but instead of you fronting the cost all at once you make payment plans. You take for granted the things we dreamt of and demand improvement, not stagnation, and god forbid a decline.
You can still live in the past. Download and store entire discographies from any of the dozens of pirate sites, force them onto your device, then play them as if we still lived in 2009. But the artist doesn’t see a dime for that. The pirate site doesn’t see a nickel. So you either support the people who make things you like in a system you don’t, or you fuck them over to try and stick it to the system itself. Thing is, I think the system will survive even when the things you like, don’t.
Sorry, I think I worded it poorly. I was saying that Netflix and Spotify were good, but Netflix got a bit neutered after other companies came in. Spotify is still amazing though.
I think the only problem with Netflix is that they funnel money into the wrong shows. They’d rather launch 180 new series than fund 18 really good ones. Other companies, like Disney, making new platforms to host their own content definitely hurt Netflix but I think it still has enough value to warrant buying.
I took your comment as idolizing the past and gesturing to a grim future.
Yeah let me fork over my rapidly disappearing regular people money for a service which used to be free, whose price will only keep going up, and whose features will only keep disappearing to be locked behind a higher tier of paid subscription, thus giving me less and less, for more and more payment. You meet me over there. Let me just grab my little red wig and honk my nose a few times first and I’ll be right over.
The service was never fucking free you goober it always had ads. Since the moment it expanded beyond a couple dozen 240p videos, it had ads. You know what they did though? Tried to pay the people you watch so they could make a living giving you content. But yes throw a fucking tantrum that you have to pay the website so they can stay running and pay the people so they can earn that “regular people money” you ignorant fuckwit. YouTube still, to this day, doesn’t make a profit and still comes at an expense to Google/Alphabet.
You’ve been comfortable in that red wig and nose for way too long already.
Yes, I’m the “ignorant fuckwit” who is “throwing a tantrum”. Read above and behold me being immature, for the crime of calling out the poor little giant corporation who reportedly generated $31.5 BILLION dollars last year. Clearly they’re just trying to keep the lights on, and not kowtowing to investors whose sole, stated goal, is to buy low, and cash out when line goes up. I’m the fuckwit for pointing out that this shouldn’t be the system we’re all just okay with accepting. Clearly.
Use sponsorblock then, I sure as hell do. My main goal is to get rid of as many problems as possible and creators not getting paid enough is on that list.
So I buy premium. I participate in the system because a tantrum doesn’t fix it.
They generate more money than whole countries and you want to give them more? I don’t have to pay them shit for them to make money off of me from my browsing history alone.
I would rather speed forward the enshittification to the point that all creators decide to strike and hop over collectively to another, kinder, video hosting site.
In the meantime Google benefits from my viewing data/history and sells that over and over. They’re making money hand over fist and then when you pay them for a “premium” experience you’re just handing them more. You’re already a cash cow for them with just using the site. Screw that noise.
Did you ask those creators how much money they get? Loads of them make way more from inserting advertisements themselves.
It’s also telling that you’re saying it’s about supporting those creators while responding negatively towards the person who blocks ads and gives money directly.
when I like a creator I give them a dollar instead of giving google a dollar so they can give a penny of it to the person who actually makes the thing I want
Go ahead, as the only Google service I regularly interact with, I am looking for a reason to finally ditch it, so that I can say that I no longer use any Google services at all for any reason.
I have no idea why you’re being downvoted because you’re right. You don’t really own hardly any of the software you buy. You don’t buy the software, you buy a license to use it in almost all commercial cases. It would be financial suicide for companies to revoke those licenses in most cases, but it still is what it is.
Just because software vendors legally made it that way doesn’t make it right. Also probably the main reason, many people don’t have any qualms pirating.
Sure, but I’m not making a statement about the ethics of it. I’m just stating that that’s the current reality. That’s how commercial software is sold. I’ll freely agree it’s a bullshit practice and we should actually be able to own things, but that’s a whole different discussion.
K, but conquer4 certainly seemed to be either implying it or making an irrelevant distinction, since the comment they replied to was a “should” kind of comment.
Right. This is only “right” because tech corporations were allowed to undermine the meaning of ownership without any attempt to protect customer rights. The concept of “buying a license” is fundamentally contradictory, because without the transfer of ownership, nothing was “bought”. Yet they still present this licensing process as if it was a purchase, which is deceptive.
Many take it for granted that this is just the nature of digital purchases, but the digital market simply created the opportunity for companies to redefine purchases with less resistance. Now they are trying to do the same with physical objects: physical media, technological devices, vehicles, so forth, trying to establish that people didn’t own what they bought.
And the basis of all of this is simply that they wrote some text that they said so. Can you imagine if customers tried something like this? They would be laughed out of the room. It’s a sham. The flimsiest possible pretense of legitimacy. Yet it’s treated as valid because they have the lawyers to defend it while the average customer does not, and governments often neglect their role to advocate in favor of the public.
Especially when your pirated version generally cannot be made to stop working via vendor rug-pull, and will continue to work in perpetuity at least up until it is no longer compatible with current operating systems.
That’s what it’s become. But, hear me out, what if I want the hardware without the software? Tough luck? Both are so tied together that if the company pulls the rug you don’t have reasonable access to the hardware.
You don’t need Windows to use a computer. There are tons of flavors of Linux among other options. There are plenty of manufacturers who sell Linux boxes and you can always build your own. Microsoft just pays a lot of manufacturers to bundle Windows in the cost, but not all.
Right, and the consumer protections and ownership rights for that licence are grossly insufficient compared to what you would get if you bought a physical object.
We’ve allowed ridiculous compliance requirements and forced updates to become normalized when we never should have, and we’ve accepted the undermining of user authority because we refused to fight for it.
Not OP but okay, I’ll bite: What exactly do you prefer about being locked into the MS ecosystem as opposed to being allowed to choose, including the choice to keep that very ecosystem?
So in other words you misunderstood me stating that continuing to force those applications down users’ throats is better described as “fucked up” than as “functioning”?
Made the switch last year from Gmail and I love it. I set up a custom domain and a catch all address as well, so I can give out whateveriwant@mydomain.com as an email and it gets to me. Particularly nice for finding out who’s sharing my information, as well as picking out phishing emails. Banking coming in from amazon@mydomain.com? Immediate red flag.
You should note that this was a Gmail feature that is now made available by a bunch of email providers, but you might wanna check that you do indeed get your emails delivered to plus addresses before you rush out to change your contact info everywhere. Some providers have lacking support and sometimes emails may fail to send to plus addresses even if your side does support it. Using a catchall will always work because you know, that’s just how email works.
ghacks.net
Hot