• Yawnder@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    People on here are just out of touch. They call others immoral, yet don’t see the irony of using other people’s resources and time without proper compensation and not calling it immoral.

    • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Youtube makes money off of adblocked users.

      They send your watch habit aggregate data profiles to the number crunchers at alphabet hq, to sell off.

      They make fuckloads of money off the free video content theyre given as well as the nonstop data stream of demographics data. Thats why alphabet bought it in the first place.

      The ads are just bonus cash. They dont want to miss an opportunity to score more money by selling ad space in their data profile mines.

      They are being fully compensated by me logging in and feeding them either free labor as video content or free money as data profiles. They can easily keep the lights on off that alone. They dont need more free cash.

      • Yawnder@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s not for you to say if it’s “fully compensated” or not. They say “here is the service we provide, where is what we want from you”. If you reject any part of what they want from you, it’s immoral even if it’s not illegal.

        • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am not obligated to sit dutifully with the volume up when ads play on my tv.

          Nor am I obligated to allow ads to load within my browser.

          They send the data they want me to display, down to every element on the page. It is fully within my rights to choose which elements are allowed to load on my computer.

          And I wont be fuckin guilt tripped that the billion dollar company will make a fraction of another billion less dollars this quarter over my decisions to do so.

          • online@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t the typical terms of service or privacy policy even mention that you, as a user, have the power to reject tracking cookies, tracking pixels, etc. via your browser configuration and third party tools? As far as I know, the YouTube ToS and Privacy Policy also mention these things. I just tried to read it but they seem to have broken it up into a sprawling multi-site multi-page document where I can’t find the legalese to ctrl+f and pore over.

            Can anyone find these documents, so I can read through them please?

            Edit:

            I found it: https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en#intro

            There are other ways to control the information Google collects whether or not you’re signed in to a Google Account, including:

            • Browser settings: For example, you can configure your browser to indicate when Google has set a cookie in your browser. You can also configure your browser to block all cookies from a specific domain or all domains. But remember that our services rely on cookies to function properly, for things like remembering your language preferences.
            • Device-level settings: Your device may have controls that determine what information we collect. For example, you can modify location settings on your Android device.
          • Yawnder@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            Has anyone said you have to stay there with the volume up? Or even watch your screen? You’re just full of bad faith.

            Also, I didn’t say illegal, I said immoral, which is what you accused them of being. You’re not following their ToS, and you’re trying to make yourself feel better about it.

            • 9bananas@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              TOS are neither the law, nor are they vetted for legality by anyone working in law enforcement.

              TOS very often contain straight up illegal clauses; they are largely meaningless.

              • Yawnder@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                My argument for that is “yesterday I ate some salad”. It’s just as relevant to what you just said because once again, it has nothing to do with what’s being said.

                • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Thats such an incoherent response.

                  If you think it had nothing to do with the convo, maybe you shouldnt be chiming in on adult conversations until you can follow them.

                  • Yawnder@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    The whole chain of conversation is about immorality, and you talk about illegality. They are orthogonal concepts. They have nothing to do with one another.