I don't support giving money to companies that I don't support and I don't support google. They killed all other search engines then turned their search engine into a propaganda machine.
I'm not a rightist. I'm a rare ron paul libertarian hold over from the pre-2010 era that never capitulated to hard rightist zoomer/boomer influx.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I don't support giving money to companies that I don't support >lolbertarian
of course
it's moronic
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
everyone who is right was ron paul lolbertarian at one point, until they realized that their fantasies can't ever be quenched unless they actually place a demographic in charge that can actually facilitate it, and then protect it. Otherwise it all falls apart.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yeah it's kind of redundant but lolberts are just the downies of conservatism. If you think for more than two seconds about rightism, you realize that its only principle is one person gaining power over others. It just doesn't work long term.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
kingdoms are instances of hierarchy where 'one person gained power over others', and was the predominant form of government for thousands of years, in many cases even being persistent across these countries.
The people who follow the NAP and etc are just hoping that the predominant authority doesn't just one day decide to abuse everyone else when they reach a point of being untouchable to anyone who doesn't support their regime.
Ultimately the power runs with the people who run these institutions and organizations, and not the lust for money or power. It's just modernized tribal warfare
Atifician barriers are not "paying for a product"
They are trivial to circumvent, and no it isn't theft, the data is available on the open web
If you're going to be a b***h, be the whole b***h
Login-wall the site like Elon did with Twitter
Or go the Onlyfans route
They won't because it would kill the site to drastically change the business model, but squeezing the current business model is a copium and a signal of a failing business
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>circumvent
So you admit that taking something when the expectation is that you pay for it is theft. Glad we agree.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
No, the expectation established by the last decade is that you don't have to pay to block ads
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Nope, never has been. At least
Yes, it's theft, and theft is based
admits he's a thieving Black person.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yes, it's theft, and theft is based
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Give it back, Jamal
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
How exactly dies someone give back the many hours you wasted making a shitty video I watched completely for free, or the months if not years that went into making a movie I just pirated?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
You can't. So we have to ask, why are you spending your precious time watching shitty videos?
My bandwidth, my computer, my eye balls my property. I'll allow what I want to be seen and nothing else. If a business wants makes it's money off assuming people can't shut their eyes or install and adblockers, they are free to do so.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Is this like the morons who say they're "sovereign citizens" to claim immunity to laws when they're apprehended by police officers?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
That's just an irrational form of nihilism. Governments do not recognize it, but they will recognize the person as being a nitwit and act accordingly.
I'm actually surprised that corporations aren't going after adblocking companies at this point like they currently do with seeders/sharers. Google doesn't need to since they're making a run at controlling the web through marketshare/V3 manifest changes.
They don't have a legal case against adblocking.
Whereas they do with Copyright.
The Constitution gives Congress the ability to secure "for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
To make adblocking illegal, you'd need at least an Act of Congress (good luck with that).
And even then it may not survive in the Courts on 1A grounds.
So you might even need an Constitutional Amendment to make adblocking illegal.
Rightists are capitalists and are easily manipulated by money. If a corp like alphabet wanted to make it a law, they probably could, but it's also difficult to enforce (much like copyright, easier to go after those providing the tools/content). It's better and cheaper for them to eliminate adblockers on their own browser since they have 65% marketshare.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
No it isn't isn't as simple as you think.
The Constitution explicitly allows Copyright Law.
Forcing Advertising Viewership, meanwhile, falls under compelled speech, hence 1A violation.
There are already other laws on the books that Google can freely utilize.
Namely, unauthorized access hacking laws.
However, Courts have repeatedly ruled in favor of scraping (although "soft-paywalls" are still somewhat a legally gray area, "hard-paywalls" are clearly protected by hacking laws).
Since a scraper never agreed to a TOS, Google would need totally change its business model and loginwall the site like Elon with Twitter.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I don't think it's as simple as you're thinking here
Why don't you just pay.
It's $14 a month.
If you spend longer than 30 minutes b***hing about it every month, it's cheaper to just work for one hour and pay it.
Is your time worthless, anon?
very opposite, i'm a capitalism and i OWN everything on the user side. while (YOU) israeli bootlicker can only exist with with authorized goyim tax i make the API requests i want and dont get ads >google will ban you biggot!!!
google is free to ban me since its their service but i still own the user side code and i can strip down things i dont want to see >B-BUT AAAAAAAAA-CK
Seems they have again fricked up something with RSS or maybe started rate limiting the feeds aggressively, so the subscriptions are failing, at least if there are lot's of them.
works for me on troonyfox
same. never had any issues on arch, cutyourdickofffox, and ublock origin
same here, troonfox + aCKarch and hormoneblock origin just werks
as a fully hetreo man with a big set balls, I can confirm that troonyfox is indeed code for chrome users
No, Master Yodeler, it is only the beginning.
works on my youtube premium subscription
t. nonpoorgay
>gibbing money to gooble
I thought rightists loved capitalism. Literally what's wrong with paying for a product or service?
I don't support giving money to companies that I don't support and I don't support google. They killed all other search engines then turned their search engine into a propaganda machine.
I'm not a rightist. I'm a rare ron paul libertarian hold over from the pre-2010 era that never capitulated to hard rightist zoomer/boomer influx.
>I don't support giving money to companies that I don't support
>lolbertarian
of course
it's moronic
everyone who is right was ron paul lolbertarian at one point, until they realized that their fantasies can't ever be quenched unless they actually place a demographic in charge that can actually facilitate it, and then protect it. Otherwise it all falls apart.
Yeah it's kind of redundant but lolberts are just the downies of conservatism. If you think for more than two seconds about rightism, you realize that its only principle is one person gaining power over others. It just doesn't work long term.
kingdoms are instances of hierarchy where 'one person gained power over others', and was the predominant form of government for thousands of years, in many cases even being persistent across these countries.
The people who follow the NAP and etc are just hoping that the predominant authority doesn't just one day decide to abuse everyone else when they reach a point of being untouchable to anyone who doesn't support their regime.
Ultimately the power runs with the people who run these institutions and organizations, and not the lust for money or power. It's just modernized tribal warfare
Atifician barriers are not "paying for a product"
They are trivial to circumvent, and no it isn't theft, the data is available on the open web
If you're going to be a b***h, be the whole b***h
Login-wall the site like Elon did with Twitter
Or go the Onlyfans route
They won't because it would kill the site to drastically change the business model, but squeezing the current business model is a copium and a signal of a failing business
>circumvent
So you admit that taking something when the expectation is that you pay for it is theft. Glad we agree.
No, the expectation established by the last decade is that you don't have to pay to block ads
Nope, never has been. At least
admits he's a thieving Black person.
Yes, it's theft, and theft is based
Give it back, Jamal
How exactly dies someone give back the many hours you wasted making a shitty video I watched completely for free, or the months if not years that went into making a movie I just pirated?
You can't. So we have to ask, why are you spending your precious time watching shitty videos?
Boredom mostly
My bandwidth, my computer, my eye balls my property. I'll allow what I want to be seen and nothing else. If a business wants makes it's money off assuming people can't shut their eyes or install and adblockers, they are free to do so.
Is this like the morons who say they're "sovereign citizens" to claim immunity to laws when they're apprehended by police officers?
That's just an irrational form of nihilism. Governments do not recognize it, but they will recognize the person as being a nitwit and act accordingly.
>giving money to jeets and israelites
you're so lost. you need to find your way back to the light.
Youtubelocalbros, we just can't stop winning!
I have no counter-signed and notarized contract stating that I agree to their ToS/AuP. They are free to terminate the account I never had.
Huh
is brave a communist browser? what are the shields for? blocking capitalist functions?
Brave is ass with all this Web3 bloatware (also chromium) but I can't come up with better alternative
We have this thread every fricking day.
To the right of the post ID is a leaning pyramid of Gaza. Click on that and click Hide.
Too poor for premium?
Now it's the google services dialog. How am I supposed to past that? It gets dark and I can't see shit
I always remove it from the html page
If adblocking is theft, why are there no laws against it?
Injecting ads is peeing on my feet. Surely there is a law against that.
I'm actually surprised that corporations aren't going after adblocking companies at this point like they currently do with seeders/sharers. Google doesn't need to since they're making a run at controlling the web through marketshare/V3 manifest changes.
They don't have a legal case against adblocking.
Whereas they do with Copyright.
The Constitution gives Congress the ability to secure "for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
To make adblocking illegal, you'd need at least an Act of Congress (good luck with that).
And even then it may not survive in the Courts on 1A grounds.
So you might even need an Constitutional Amendment to make adblocking illegal.
Rightists are capitalists and are easily manipulated by money. If a corp like alphabet wanted to make it a law, they probably could, but it's also difficult to enforce (much like copyright, easier to go after those providing the tools/content). It's better and cheaper for them to eliminate adblockers on their own browser since they have 65% marketshare.
No it isn't isn't as simple as you think.
The Constitution explicitly allows Copyright Law.
Forcing Advertising Viewership, meanwhile, falls under compelled speech, hence 1A violation.
There are already other laws on the books that Google can freely utilize.
Namely, unauthorized access hacking laws.
However, Courts have repeatedly ruled in favor of scraping (although "soft-paywalls" are still somewhat a legally gray area, "hard-paywalls" are clearly protected by hacking laws).
Since a scraper never agreed to a TOS, Google would need totally change its business model and loginwall the site like Elon with Twitter.
I don't think it's as simple as you're thinking here
Same reason taking a fistful of ketchup packets isn't illegal
If taxation is theft, why are there no laws against it?
You breathing on my planet is theft.
I have literally never seen this
literally or figuratively?
Me neither. It must be an AdGuard advertisement.
Why don't you just pay.
It's $14 a month.
If you spend longer than 30 minutes b***hing about it every month, it's cheaper to just work for one hour and pay it.
Is your time worthless, anon?
What's the message? For every 10,000 pay pigs there is one incel who refuses to pay? Damn, that's powerful.
>just pay up goyim
i'm anti semite
https://freetubeapp.io/
so you're anti-capitalist, aka a commie
yea. what you gonna do about it you fricking american pig? oink oink i think a see a shekel on the ground for you.
Me personally? I'm going to send another 60 billion to Ukraine.
very opposite, i'm a capitalism and i OWN everything on the user side. while (YOU) israeli bootlicker can only exist with with authorized goyim tax i make the API requests i want and dont get ads
>google will ban you biggot!!!
google is free to ban me since its their service but i still own the user side code and i can strip down things i dont want to see
>B-BUT AAAAAAAAA-CK
Seems they have again fricked up something with RSS or maybe started rate limiting the feeds aggressively, so the subscriptions are failing, at least if there are lot's of them.
I don't watch videos in my browser and I haven't had Play Services installed on a phone I use daily since 2011.
works on my machine
Everytime I see this message I just don't use youtube for a couple-three days. Send a message right back to them.
I quite literally only use Brave and it just works.
entirely a skill issue
huh
>the company has to convince you it's worth continuing to pay them
>the service doesn't speak for itself
huh
Don't speak to me, poorgay.
$700 richer than you
they're throttling adblockers like crazy. One single tab crashes on a 32g system.
Ad blocking works on my machine (Win 10 + Vivaldi + Ublock)