"sms" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote

| >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqn3gR1WTcA
| >
| > I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what point are you
| > wanting to make.
| | Not sure why you'd be scared of Youtube link. But it's an excellent John
| Oliver piece.
|

That's an ironic comment in this context. Youtube
is owned by Google, which is famous for extensive
spying. No one has to be "scared" to want to avoid
Google tracking.

It also takes time to watch a youtube video.
In my own case, I block too many things for youtube
to work and if I want to see any video then I see no
reason not to get a copy of it, since I have to get a
copy in order to see it, anyway.

That, then, means getting one of the youtube downloaders
to work... All with no idea of what it is that I'm spending
my time on! I figure that if someone can't be bothered
to spend the time making their point, then their link is
not likely to be worth my time spent.

Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>> Am 08.05.22 um 09:36 schrieb Chris:
>>> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what point are you
>>> wanting to make.
>>
>>
>> What is your concern about Youtube-inks?
>>
>>
>
> I can read faster than I can watch a video.

That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at least
process ten times as much information.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 08.05.22 um 13:03 schrieb Chris:
> Sharing yt links is also a little ironic given the topic of this thread.

Agreed. But the solution is simple: Watch it on your stationary
equipment ...

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 08.05.22 um 13:44 schrieb Chris:
> Having watched it via Psiphon, I'm so glad I live in a country where we
> have actual data protection laws. Cambridge Analytica did something similar
> and got shat upon from a great height.
>
> The problem I see here is not that the US Government is tracking you, but
> that there's effectively no restrictions in who can track you and for what
> reason.

Absolutely typical for the Anglo-Saxon world where governments and
commercial companies are more important than the individual citizen.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 08.05.22 um 14:49 schrieb Mayayana:
> It also takes time to watch a youtube video.
> In my own case, I block too many things for youtube
> to work and if I want to see any video then I see no
> reason not to get a copy of it, since I have to get a
> copy in order to see it, anyway.

*ROTFLSTC*!

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 08.05.22 um 13:03 schrieb Chris:
>> Sharing yt links is also a little ironic given the topic of this thread.
>
> Agreed. But the solution is simple: Watch it on your stationary
> equipment ...

How does that change anything? Stationary equipment can also be tracked.

Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 08.05.22 um 13:44 schrieb Chris:
>> Having watched it via Psiphon, I'm so glad I live in a country where we
>> have actual data protection laws. Cambridge Analytica did something similar
>> and got shat upon from a great height.
>>
>> The problem I see here is not that the US Government is tracking you, but
>> that there's effectively no restrictions in who can track you and for what
>> reason.
>
> Absolutely typical for the Anglo-Saxon world where governments and
> commercial companies are more important than the individual citizen.

It's called "The American Way"™

Joerg Lorenz wrote:

>Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Am 08.05.22 um 09:36 schrieb Chris:
>>>> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what
>>>>point are you wanting to make.
>>>
>>>
>>> What is your concern about Youtube-inks?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>
>That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at
>least process ten times as much information.

Not when you suffer from tinnitus which makes it difficult to hear
spoken speech. Nor when you are proficient at speed reading and
finding key words.

Am 08.05.22 um 16:44 schrieb badgolferman:
> Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>
>> Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>>> Am 08.05.22 um 09:36 schrieb Chris:
>>>>> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what
>>>>> point are you wanting to make.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is your concern about Youtube-inks?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>>
>> That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at
>> least process ten times as much information.
>
>
> Not when you suffer from tinnitus which makes it difficult to hear
> spoken speech. Nor when you are proficient at speed reading and
> finding key words.

*ROTFLSTC*

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 08.05.22 um 16:36 schrieb Chris:
> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>> Am 08.05.22 um 13:03 schrieb Chris:
>>> Sharing yt links is also a little ironic given the topic of this thread.
>>
>> Agreed. But the solution is simple: Watch it on your stationary
>> equipment ...
>
> How does that change anything? Stationary equipment can also be tracked.

We are discussing tracking and movement profiling of hardware pieces
that are on the move. As the topic suggests. Relatively useless with
stationary equipment. We are not discussing tracking in the cyber space.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 08.05.22 um 16:36 schrieb Chris:
> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>> Am 08.05.22 um 13:44 schrieb Chris:
>>> Having watched it via Psiphon, I'm so glad I live in a country where we
>>> have actual data protection laws. Cambridge Analytica did something similar
>>> and got shat upon from a great height.
>>>
>>> The problem I see here is not that the US Government is tracking you, but
>>> that there's effectively no restrictions in who can track you and for what
>>> reason.
>>
>> Absolutely typical for the Anglo-Saxon world where governments and
>> commercial companies are more important than the individual citizen.
>
> It's called "The American Way"™

Applied by 5 countries not the US alone:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Chris wrote:

>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqn3gR1WTcA
>
> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what point are you
> wanting to make.

I have to agree with Chris that I didn't click on it since the sender
didn't even bother to give us the _title_ of that video.

All too often that subterfuge is done on purpose because it's some idiotic
kindergarten video - but I didn't look at that one for the same reason
Chris didn't.

It didn't appear that the link was sent in good faith.

Chris wrote:

> Sharing yt links is also a little ironic given the topic of this thread.

To Chris' point, there _are_ privacy aware FOSS YouTube clients...
<https://newpipe.net/>

Just not on iOS.
--
Note: As far as anyone has ever correctly stated on the iOS newsgroup, that
functionality in that product does not exist on iOS (although portions of
that functionality do exist on iOS).

Am 08.05.22 um 17:49 schrieb Andy Burnelli:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqn3gR1WTcA
>>
>> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what point are you
>> wanting to make.
>
> I have to agree with Chris that I didn't click on it since the sender
> didn't even bother to give us the _title_ of that video.
>
> All too often that subterfuge is done on purpose because it's some idiotic
> kindergarten video - but I didn't look at that one for the same reason
> Chris didn't.
>
> It didn't appear that the link was sent in good faith.

You are a smart cookie, Arlen.
If we had known that earlier ...

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Mayayana wrote:

> That, then, means getting one of the youtube downloaders
> to work...

To add value to that comment,
a. This FOSS app will download/strip any YouTube video on Windows.
<https://yt-dl.org/downloads/latest/youtube-dl>
b. This FOSS app will download/strip any YouTube video on Android.
<https://newpipe.net/>
c. This FOSS app will download/strip any YouTube video on iOS.
<>

> All with no idea of what it is that I'm spending
> my time on!

While Mayayana and I disagree on his overt racism, we do very much agree on
Chris' point and Mayayana's point, which is two or three fold by now:
a. Youtube is a privacy leak (unless you do it right)
b. BobF didn't bother to _describe_ what the link said
c. A YouTube link is inefficient compared to a one-sentence summary

> I figure that if someone can't be bothered
> to spend the time making their point,

Like Chris & Mayayana, I'll click on a link if there is some prospect of
that telling me something but the lack of effort put in on the part of BobF
(and knowledge that he's a troll, of course), put me off too.

> then their link is
> not likely to be worth my time spent.

Exactly.

badgolferman wrote:

>> What is your concern about Youtube-inks?
>>
>
> I can read faster than I can watch a video.

To that point, when I was in grade school, they had a program for the top
and bottom 20% of kids to pull them out of recess to help improve them.

At that age, I would have preferred to be on the playground, but
nonetheless, they put me on speed readers to further improve my skills.

As I recall, they'd project a blacked-out page of text on a screen and then
only one short fragment of words would show up as it sped across the
screen.

The trick was reading as fast as they could get us to read (there were
about three or four of us in the entire grade, as I recall) and then
correctly answering the questions.

In short, as with badgolferman's point, I can read faster than I can watch
a video (and, given I took typing in high school, I type pretty fast too).

Joerg Lorenz wrote:

>>>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>>>
>>> That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at
>>> least process ten times as much information.
>>
>> Not when you suffer from tinnitus which makes it difficult to hear
>> spoken speech. Nor when you are proficient at speed reading and
>> finding key words.
>
> *ROTFLSTC*

The adults will note that badgolferman responded to Joerg as an adult, and
yet, the response from Joerg is clearly that of a kindergarten brain.

Chris wrote:

>> Agreed. But the solution is simple: Watch it on your stationary
>> equipment ...
>
> How does that change anything? Stationary equipment can also be tracked.

Even easier on "stationary" stuff... since it's always in the same place.

BTW, to add value, if you use the following, they (YouTube) can't track you
as easily when you {search,watch,subscribe,download,etc.} YouTube videos:

Android:
<https://newpipe.net/>
Windows (with VPN):
<https://www.tutorialspoint.com/how-to-download-mp3-tracks-from-youtube-video-using-youtube-dl>
iOS:
<>

Joerg Lorenz wrote:

>> It didn't appear that the link was sent in good faith.
>
> You are a smart cookie

Actually, my intuition was perhaps wrong, Joerg, at least in this case.
The reason is that a John Oliver video might not be a waste of time.
I like the research his team puts into his topical reporting.
--
Intuition is almost always wrong when it comes to things like physics.

On 2022-05-08 6:21 a.m., Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Am 08.05.22 um 09:36 schrieb Chris:
>>>> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what point are you
>>>> wanting to make.
>>>
>>>
>>> What is your concern about Youtube-inks?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>
> That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at least
> process ten times as much information.
>

That might be true in general...

....but this is about information as presented in the typical YouTube
video...

....and I can read that information faster than it's typically presented.

Bob F wrote:

>>> It's the government who (of all entities) shouldn't be tracking you.
>>
>> Government agencies "track" people all the time for perfectly legitimate
>> reasons. Be it for health, crime, social, educational, financial, etc.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqn3gR1WTcA

To anyone wanting to skip to the key point of badgolferman's thread, click
on this link which jumps 975 seconds forward to the point I made long ago:
<https://youtu.be/wqn3gR1WTcA?t=975>
"the 4th amendment protection against unreasonable searches & seizures"

For the gory details of how I arrived at _that_ one sentence... follow
along with the _slow_ process of typing as I was listening (I type fast).

*Data Brokers: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)*
<https://youtu.be/wqn3gR1WTcA> 25 minutes

Computers monitor our activities more closely than we'd like.
Guy buys baby wipes - and then gets bombarded with relevant ads.
We're gonna talk about "data brokers" who make that possible.
PeekYou, Pipl, Instant checkmate, equifax, etc.
They are the middlemen of surveillance capitalism.
60% of adults feel it's impossible to hide from data collection.
It's a creepy unregulated system that is sprawling & growing.
Let's talk about how your info is collected?
A large part is "cookies".
Cookies enable web sites to remember you.
If that's all cookies did, that would be fine.
But that's not all they do.
Tech writers found 9 trackers tracking what an tech guy did.
The hufco trackers multiplied to dozens what he did.
Private doesn't mean gross.
Do they need to know you were searching for showers with pulp heads?
It's private if I care about that technology.
They gather that and share it with other data brokers.
And then they SELL it.
They say "People are fundamentally the same"
The big three Mazlow's needs of all people are
1. Respect
2. Protection
3. Finding the brands they need! (WTF?)
They create a client ID of everything they know about them.
Epsilon collects you and sorts you into groups such as
Couples with Clout, Kids and Cabernet, Boomers and boomerangs.
There is a dark side here.
Companies can narrowly target you as to your sexual preferences.
And then narrowly target you (e.g., those with serious problems).
List after list of sicknesses, pregnant women, etc.
Isn't that illegal under hipaa (your pregnancy)?
Nope. If you search for HIV or abortion, that's fair game.
It's ripe for abuse.
Epsilon would be the first to raise their hand over abuse.
Yet Epsilon lost a suit for exactly that abuse they lied about.
Did you know your apps on your phone give away your exact location.
Like a flashlight app.
Or Life360 for parents who can see where their kids are going.
Life360 sells its location data to a dozen brokers.
Who then sell the location to others.
Life360 said they de-identified the data.
But it only _sounds_ reassuring. It's not.
99.98% of Americans would be re-identified using 15 criteria.
In 2006 AOL turned over anonymized data and yet it was easy to recover ids.
Towerd@ta was tested which does website visitor identification.
They sent him an email after just doing that by his staff members.
The data brokers aren't careful of _who_ gets your location data.
CBS found out they could _easily_ find people based on that data.
That doesn't feel great, does it?
That kind of identifying information can cause huge problems.
A teacher was fired after they looked at data that he was gay.
(Skip Jesus joke.)
You could say you have no secrets to hide.
But others out there have good reasons to not want to be identified.
A stalker bought data for $45 to stalk a former classmate.
There's no regulation requiring opt-out of this data collection.
BINGO!!!!! (Chris! look here)...
<https://youtu.be/wqn3gR1WTcA?t=975>

It's a "very attractive loophole" to the 4th amendment against
"unreasonable searches and seizures".

Whew.
It took 975 seconds for John Oliver to say what I said from the start.
--
The problem with most people being stupid is they outnumber you 1000:1.

Joerg Lorenz wrote:

>>>> Sharing yt links is also a little ironic given the topic of this thread.
>>>
>>> Agreed. But the solution is simple: Watch it on your stationary
>>> equipment ...
>>
>> How does that change anything? Stationary equipment can also be tracked.
>
> We are discussing tracking and movement profiling of hardware pieces
> that are on the move. As the topic suggests. Relatively useless with
> stationary equipment. We are not discussing tracking in the cyber space.

It took 975 seconds for John Oliver to say what I said from the start.
<https://youtu.be/wqn3gR1WTcA?t=975>
"the 4th amendment protection against unreasonable searches & seizures"

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> Actually, my intuition was perhaps wrong, Joerg, at least in this case.
> The reason is that a John Oliver video might not be a waste of time.
> I like the research his team puts into his topical reporting.

I had assumed John Oliver would mention the 4th amendment, which was one of
the first things I explained to Chris was critically important in the USA.

It took 16 minutes for John Oliver to say what I said from the start.
<https://youtu.be/wqn3gR1WTcA?t=975>
"4th amendment protection against unreasonable searches & seizures"

Still, BobF could have saved me that 16 minutes by simply saying that like
I did _before_ I listened to that John Oliver video. Sigh.
--
Privacy is a basic human right.

Chris wrote:

> I'm so glad I live in a country where we
> have actual data protection laws.

I comprehended _instantly_ what the problem is.
You still haven't.

The problem, as badgolferman was kind enough to highlight with this thread,
is for the US government, buying the data is a _loophole_ to the laws...

<https://youtu.be/wqn3gR1WTcA?t=975>
"*It's a very attractive loophole to the 4th amendment*
against "unreasonable searches and seizures".

Anyone intelligent will instantly comprehend what the problem is here.
--
BTW, note people like Steve exist, who believe the laws are meaningless, in
that for them, the end always justifies the means (he said so himself).

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2022-05-08 6:21 a.m., Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> Am 08.05.22 um 12:38 schrieb badgolferman:
>>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>>> Am 08.05.22 um 09:36 schrieb Chris:
>>>>> I don't click random yt links. What does it show? Or what point are you
>>>>> wanting to make.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is your concern about Youtube-inks?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can read faster than I can watch a video.
>>
>> That is a total illusion. Using ears and eyes together you can at least
>> process ten times as much information.
>>
>
> That might be true in general...
>
> ...but this is about information as presented in the typical YouTube
> video...
>
> ...and I can read that information faster than it's typically presented.

Agree. Also there's often only a small part that's relevant. Can ctrl + F
text which isn't possible with a yt.