nelly_man

joined 1 year ago
[–] nelly_man@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Ah, ok, so "control" and "backspace" don't actually function as control or backspace keys. Then that makes more sense.

[–] nelly_man@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Wouldn't a split spacebar be two different keys that both individually can be used to type a space? This keyboard requires that both keys be pressed together to insert a space because each individual key has a different function. Given the common occurrence of spaces, that seems needlessly difficult.

[–] nelly_man@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Looking at a map with the current polls (and focusing on the toss-ups), it seems that the most viable path to victory for Harris is to pick up PA, MI, and WI. If she drops PA, she'd need MI, NV, WI or AZ, and GA or NC, but that seems like a big ask. If she wins PA, she could lose WI if she picks up AZ, GA, or NC and she could lose MI if she wins GA, NC, or AZ and NV. But winning PA and losing both WI and MI would require winning AZ and either GA or NC.

So there are a few paths to a Harris win, and a few don't seem very farfetched, but none of them seem likely enough for comfort. Definitely not how I was hoping to be feeling at this point in the election.

[–] nelly_man@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The ask that YouTube manage their system better. Currently, they assume that a copyright claim is valid unless proven otherwise, and it is difficult for content creators to actually get them to review a claim to determine if it is invalid. So, a lot of legitimate users that post videos without actually violating anybody's copyright end up being permanently punished for somebody illegitimate claim. What we want is for YouTube to, one, make it more difficult or consequential to file a bad claim, and two, make it easier to dispute a bad claim.

However, that's not going to happen because the YouTube itself is legally responsible for copyrighted material that is posted to their platform. Because of that, they are incentivised to assume a claim is valid lest they end up in court for violating somebody's legitimate copyright. Meaning that the current system entails a private company adjudicating legal questions where they are not an impartial actor in the dispute.

So your concern is legitimate, but it's ignoring the fact that we already are in a situation where a private company is prosecuting fraud. People want it to change so that it is more in favor of the content creators (or at least, in the spirit of innocent until proven guilty), but it would ultimately be better if they were not involved in it whatsoever. However, major copyright holders pushed for laws that put the onus on YouTube because it makes it easier for them, and it's unlikely for those laws to change anytime soon. That's what I'd say we should be pushing for, but it's also fair to say that the Content ID system is flawed and allows too much fraud to go unpunished.

[–] nelly_man@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (3 children)

You're talking about the court system. They are talking about Content ID. YouTube makes it easy to submit faulty copyright claims with little repercussions if they fail, so there are more fraudulent claims than you'd see in the actual court system. They want YouTube to penalize the abuse of their system more strongly so people that upload videos don't have to deal with so much shit.

[–] nelly_man@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

For digital copies of written works in the public domain, projectgutenberg.org is a good source.