What’s being proposed is that the extension would modify the page to add a Lemmy frame for commenting. This frame is autonomous in the sense the user must provide his Lemmy login information for it to work, which is different from Google login information. Google is not even aware the page is being modified by an external comment section, and even if it could detect it, it wouldn’t be able to track individual users.
I read a variation of this news in the past where there was some major controversy about Google accounts that have active YouTube channels with videos uploaded to it. The solution is that Google would not delete inactive accounts if they have uploaded YouTube videos on it. I just don’t know of this policy still stands or if they changed their minds.
How did Huawei get it’s hands on a Snapdragon chip? If I recall correctly, they’re under US trade sanctions.
Maybe they won’t kill it within 3 years because they have plans to license this technology to other companies (language apps?).
Perhaps it’s a little too late for YouTube to ride this trend. TikTok is even pivoting to long videos, as they know where the money is.
I used a seedbox some time ago to download a specific big torrent (at the time). I payed using Paypal, as I don’t consider seedboxes a low-hanging-fruit for rightsholders to persecute at the moment.
There’s too much redundant data on these services, so if they takedown one user’s data, there’s still lots of the same torrented data on other user’s. I don’t think rightsholders are willing to play wack-a-mole for such infractions.
They’d rather invest their resources on more centralized file sharing, such as big public torrent sites and cyberlockers.
Maybe this comparison is an exaggeration, as the Steam Deck GPU is also widely compared to a GTX 1050 in horsepower, which in turn seems substantially more powerful than a SD 8 Gen 2.
Jack Ma being a Chinese national sure didn’t help him avoid persecution.
Moral of the story: it only took one social media site to start being more lax on cersorship for the other ones to follow suit. Maybe this is indicative that spending a lot of money on censorship measures is useless.
Chill, dude. The first thing I did was upvote that comment. And I guess you didn’t get the reference. 😶
This is informative, and unfortunate.™
They should put the gift card through a scanner and send the image. If it’s that easy, charging for it is asshole-ish for sure.
I’m baffled Google is so uninterested in making a serious effort in combating this practice, in their own add-on store no less. The suggestions outlined by this developer seems like a good start, and are not too hard to enforce.
It doesn’t preclude being sued, but at least it saves face for now.
I guess what he meant is that, at the moment, Reddit Gold revenue goes 100% into Reddit’s pockets. But if they start funneling part of this money into contributor’s pockets, it means Reddit is effectively paying them from a money pool that was previously exclusively theirs. Thus, Reddit is “paying them”.
This is extremely true for modern social media sites. Normal news sites used to push their apps too, but I guess this fad has passed.
So the text of the law is not even publicly known yet, but it was approved nonetheless? Wtf?
The WhatsApp Business stuff is a more recent development. When FB bought them they had very little to work with.
Maybe you’re right, but I’d be hesitant to say WhatsApp user’s contacts list would be worth US$ 20B.
My theory is they bought WhatsApp just because it was organically growing to be the dominant messaging app, and Facebook didn’t want to lose this marked and bought them to squash the competition.
If the company’s private, which means its stocks are not tradeable anymore, what’s the point in measuring the company value at this point?