Wow. That's a LOT of trouble to go through, just so the general audience don't have to risk reading something. Yikes.
Now I generally hate the Swedish subtitles that they show on movies in Sweden, since they seem to hire drunk 12-yearsolds to operate Google Translate instead of actual translators for the subtitles, but in general they are also fairly easy to just ignore. Well, unless you have the bad luck of ending up watching a 3D-movie. For some reason they have decided to place the subtitles seemingly about one foot in front of you. Hello headache!
As I understand it Inman gets all the money at the end, and then donates them to various charities (read somewhere that now that it's so much money he will add other charities as well).
Little known fact; if you don't have a parrot they will supply you with one.
And the "only the second Tuesday of every other month"-part is an urban legend. The truth is that you get your own day assigned, and you may get more as they hire new parrots - I mean police!
Hollywood may not, but you can bet your money that if the US puts something like that into law (not possible, I know), everyone else and their grandmother is going to want in on it.
Let's go crazy and assume that someone manages to make a filter that is 99% effective, and someone else waves a magic wand that makes it so that it doesn't just filter content but actual infringement.
That leaves us with just over 1000 hours worth of video A DAY that would get incorrectly targeted. And let's be honest here, it would err on the side of false positives, not false negatives, leaving us with 1000+ hours worth of video a day being taken down despite being completely legal.
How could you EVER reconcile the idea of blocking any legal speech, let alone that amount, with the idea of Freedom of Speech?
I first made that kind of guess, and actually landed on 40 billion (I made a lot of rounding). But then I realized that you don't need the judges to watch EVERY video. You could have a first level of just "regular joes" that does an initial screening. I started to try and figure out how much that would cost, but quickly arrived at the figure "humongous" anyway so...
Did you do my mistake of not taking into account that they would have to check the videos based on every jurisdiction in the world? Cause that would probably cost more.
I think "they" think that everyone that pirates a copy have to crack it themselves (ignoring the readily available cracks online), so the harder the game is to crack, the less people will crack it.
Back in the days, before Internet really took off, most game piracy was by copying between friends. They probably still think that's the case.
Now now, we don't know what the bot-writer knows or did. Perhaps this writer-person actually pointed out how silly it is, and got a "want you money or not?" reply?
Yes, I like to think that "us nerds" are a little bit better than the nutjobs that created this situation.
Actually, Google is doing an incredible job here! It's not THEIR fault that the system sucks, now is it?
I love the fact that they don't bring out the "big guns" of violations and deletion unless you repeat the alleged infringement. How many service providers do you know that actually lets you keep the post, rather than just straight up delete it, while the issue is being resolved?
On the post: You Don't Own What You Buy, Part 15,332: Cisco Forces Questionable New Firmware On Routers
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Websites Deemed 'Place Of Public Accommodation' Under The ADA; Expects Lots Of Sites To Get Sued
Re: Re: Re:
Now I generally hate the Swedish subtitles that they show on movies in Sweden, since they seem to hire drunk 12-yearsolds to operate Google Translate instead of actual translators for the subtitles, but in general they are also fairly easy to just ignore. Well, unless you have the bad luck of ending up watching a 3D-movie. For some reason they have decided to place the subtitles seemingly about one foot in front of you. Hello headache!
On the post: Charles Carreon Sues Matthew Inman... And The Charities He's Raising Money For
Re:
On the post: Charles Carreon Sues Matthew Inman... And The Charities He's Raising Money For
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
;-)
On the post: Two Men Sue Chicago Police; Claim They Were Abused And Falsely Charged For Filming Officers
Harsh punishments.
On the post: Two Men Sue Chicago Police; Claim They Were Abused And Falsely Charged For Filming Officers
Re:
On the post: How Much Would It Cost To Pre-Screen YouTube Videos? About $37 Billion Per Year...
Re: Re: They want the service?
On the post: TV Networks File Legal Claims Saying Skipping Commercials Is Copyright Infringement
Re: Re:
And the "only the second Tuesday of every other month"-part is an urban legend. The truth is that you get your own day assigned, and you may get more as they hire new parrots - I mean police!
The more you know...
On the post: TV Networks File Legal Claims Saying Skipping Commercials Is Copyright Infringement
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: TV Networks File Legal Claims Saying Skipping Commercials Is Copyright Infringement
Re: Re: About "consumer choice"...
On the post: TV Networks File Legal Claims Saying Skipping Commercials Is Copyright Infringement
About "consumer choice"...
On the post: Olympics Can't Handle An Official Parody Twitter Account, So Twitter Takes It Down
Re:
On the post: YouTube Uploads Hit 72 Hours A Minute: How Can That Ever Be Pre-Screened For 'Objectionable' Material?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Automating filtering
On the post: YouTube Uploads Hit 72 Hours A Minute: How Can That Ever Be Pre-Screened For 'Objectionable' Material?
Re: Automating filtering
That leaves us with just over 1000 hours worth of video A DAY that would get incorrectly targeted. And let's be honest here, it would err on the side of false positives, not false negatives, leaving us with 1000+ hours worth of video a day being taken down despite being completely legal.
How could you EVER reconcile the idea of blocking any legal speech, let alone that amount, with the idea of Freedom of Speech?
On the post: YouTube Uploads Hit 72 Hours A Minute: How Can That Ever Be Pre-Screened For 'Objectionable' Material?
Re: Re: Automating filtering
Did you do my mistake of not taking into account that they would have to check the videos based on every jurisdiction in the world? Cause that would probably cost more.
On the post: Crysis 3 Studio Reminds You It Still Owns Your Copy Of The Original Crysis
Re: Re:
Back in the days, before Internet really took off, most game piracy was by copying between friends. They probably still think that's the case.
On the post: Romance Author Adele Dubois Receives Takedown On Blog Post For Having The Same Name As Singer Adele
Re: Re:
Yes, I like to think that "us nerds" are a little bit better than the nutjobs that created this situation.
On the post: Romance Author Adele Dubois Receives Takedown On Blog Post For Having The Same Name As Singer Adele
Re: L vs E
I love the fact that they don't bring out the "big guns" of violations and deletion unless you repeat the alleged infringement. How many service providers do you know that actually lets you keep the post, rather than just straight up delete it, while the issue is being resolved?
On the post: Romance Author Adele Dubois Receives Takedown On Blog Post For Having The Same Name As Singer Adele
Re: Yet another reason why
I was under the impression that perjury is a VERY serious felony. Isn't it the same as lying under oath in a court?
On the post: Musicians Realizing They Don't Need Major Labels Anymore
Beholden huh?
Next >>