That doesn’t preclude taking a moment to write such a letter.

If anything, it serves to challenge the pretense of dignified and harmless “opinions” that fascists like to leverage. I’d argue that is much more productive than the way discourse has occasionally evaded calling out the cruel, sadistic, violent, bigoted assholes and enemies of human progress and dignity as just that.

As Russel notes, there is no reasonable discussion to be had with someone so openly endorsing violence beyond reason, whose entire worldview is so diametrically opposed that there is no common ground to found a discussion on in the first place.

Giving fascists the “Eh, just opinions” benefit normalises their hateful views as permissible. For anyone valuing freedom, tolerance, progress and justice, opposing these rhetorics is not just sensible, but even crucial to combat the spread of this ideological cancer.

There can be no peaceful disagreement with an ideology that, given the chance, will suppress all disagreement violently.

You guys read dialogue?

“I hate bigotry” is quite a strong opinion

I’m guessing the point wasn’t to express mere disinterest, but active resentment of the opposing viewpoint: “Not only have I no desire to converse with you, which may be taken as a hesitation to engage with your views, but I believe such a conversation to be utterly worthless because I despise your entire world view” with a dash of “You’re a bigot and I want nothing to do with your kind.”

“No thank you” just doesn’t drive that home.

Probably to make the patient squirm and see what excuse they come up with so the job isn’t as drab?

More seriously, they need to know the circumstances of any accident to be aware of potential other complications or risk factors. That’s just a standard question they have to ask.

I was thinking a similar thing earlier. Instead of publically marking an arbitrary demographic as undesirable, an actually undesirable demographic marks itself

Is a middle name mandatory for you?

Two years isn’t particularly long to grieve a beloved friend and companion. I’m sorry for your loss.

I mean, your counterexample is already the epitome of exploitation, so I’m not sure citing it would exonerate Paradox here :D

I mean, your counterexample is already the epitome of exploitation, so I’m not sure citing it would exonerate Paradox here :D

Yeah, you’re right. I got hit on a sore spot, responded impulsively and was a dick about it.

Sorry I was trying to match the level of insulting tone of your reply, I guess I went too mean.

Eh, I’d be a hypocrite to point fingers for that. All good.

Technology Connections actually has great CC and Transcripts as I believe Alec adds them directly after proofing an as aired script after his final edit.

I don’t know this specific creator, or many YT tech creators really, since YT isn’t really my main haunt (I’ve tried to explaing that elsewhere, but it boils down to “I rarely have the mental ability to sit and watch them”) and I genuinely prefer articles.

The video having good CC doesn’t solve most of my problems, unfortunately. It’s a good thing to have, don’t get me wrong, just doesn’t help me a whole lot.

it’s about a crappy ‘news’ site generating a two paragraph summary of a YouTube video and screencaping images from said video in order to generate ad revenue with minimal effort and dubious ethics

I’ll grant the dubious ethics point. That subtext didn’t parse for me. My focus was on the fact that the article, being a textual medium, is more useful to me.

I’m mostly upset at the prevalence of video content and the tendency to push people away from text, like “This guy has a great video” is a useful response to “I’m looking for an article”. This topic set me off, but my frustration is independent of the specific context. I’ve had it happen often enough to make it a sore spot, but that isn’t strictly the original comment’s fault.

If you’re so interested in the subject and want to learn more about the subject why not look for one, or even just ask?

It’s not a deep interest so much as a passing “stumble across something interesting”, so I wouldn’t necessarily seek out content on the topic. But if I were offered an essily digestible format, I’d be curious enough to consume it.

I agree that it would be better not to post cheap ripoffs, but they fill a market gap that I’m the audience for. The solution isn’t to complain about the moochers filling the gap, but to fill the gap yourself. I’m not defending sloppy AI text specifically, but the concept of converting content to a different medium.

If the content creators don’t want to cater to those who prefer that other medium - perfectly fine, that’s their prerogative. But to then complain if someone else adapts your content to a medium you didn’t want to, that’s what rubs me the wrong way.

Also, you’re a dingus.

Fair enough. My phrasing was harsh and born of a frustration that I didn’t really convey.

In my experience, YT would still end up loading a section of the video along with previews of suggestion. Maybe that has changed.

Because we have forgotten the pain of our grandparents and great grandparents, if we ever knew it. Because we’re taught hollow, neutered versions of the chronology in history class, without ever examining the social dynamics, the psychological mechanisms of propaganda and the causes for this ideological cancer. Because a good chunk of our people are in misery in some way and have never been given the tools to actually figure out why, so when the next round of grifters came by and gave them an enemy to blame, a golden past to glorify and an easily digestible reason for why their lives are bad, they fell for it just like our ancestors did.

Maybe other parts have it better, but looking back at my own schooling, we didn’t learn from history because we never learned the whole history.

If it can make accurate transcriptions, sure. I’d enjoy the option of sending a link to an autotranscriber and get a conveniently readable version out of it.

And a good day to you too. Not sure why you felt the need to be insulting, but anyway.

A transcript of the video

Would you happen to have one handy? Or are these autogenerated these days. Are they better than the autogenerated CCs?

Also there’s a source listed in the description, guess what it is? An article.

Yeah, which would require me to click on YT in the first place, which is already what I want to avoid due to a limited mobile data plan and YT being a wonderful drain on that.

I’m just trying to push the point that “just watch the original video instead” isn’t as great a solution for everyone as some people make it out to be.

No, it’s about me not being able to arbitrarily sit down and watch a video due to various issues like attention span, hearing issues*, limited mobile data and being at work, where an article or summary is much easier and faster to read and can be interrupted at a moment’s notice unlike a video which I’ll have to pause, scrub back through if I missed a detail and wait for it to get to the right point, and I can more easily search for stuff.

My point is that there seems to be a habit of dismissing the value of textual summaries in favour of “just watch the video” in much of the online world, where I’ll be looking for a quick explanation and get presented with some video instead. Some people don’t do so well with videos so it’s not “just” watching the video.

There are advantages to text that I hate seeing people ignore.

(Besides, how would you know I’m incapable rather than just unwilling; or why would you assume either in the first place instead of considering inability?)

* That issue applies to voice messages and phone calls too. While videos occasionally have good CC, I haven’t found them to be reliable or ubiquitous enough. Additionally, they present the speech in fragments and usually are just as hard to search through. Either way, videos are a “sometimes” thing for me.

EDIT: That was an undeservedly harsh phrasing. The matter touched a nerve, but that’s not OPs fault. I’ll clarify, but leave the original comment at the end for transparency.

I’m not a fan of videos and much prefer having texts to read. I find them more comfortable to process, interrupt, resume, search for a specific section and consume while not on WiFi (due to a limited data plan, which YT tends to eat through).

Both professionally and privately, I have been frustrated by the number of tutorials and guides that are presented as videos where articles would work well enough. They seem to be more popular too, to the point that useful articles are buried deeper in the results.

I like textual summaries of interesting videos, because I’m curious, but often not enough to warrant clicking a YouTube link. I understand people’s frustration with AI ripoffs stealing content, but if the original content creator doesn’t cater to a textual medium, then someone else steps into that gap, I don’t feel like it’s so much ripping off as adapting to a different medium.

If the original creator offered a textual summary, and someone stole that to sell it as their own, I’d share the frustration. But if they didn’t, you can’t really steal what never existed.

Not that I’m a fan of AI slop specifically, but it’s better than nothing. If I can’t have a human one, I’d rather have an AI transcription than be excluded.

Sorry about my rudeness. This is a sore spot, but being snarky doesn’t help anyone.

Original comment below

Does someone have a content description so I can read instead of having to watch it?

Oh wait, here’s an article, nevermind.

That sounds like a neat option, if it was optional…

I do think that we should continue to encourage developers to create native builds when they can

Yes

My problem is calling people who want Linux native games misguided or wrong. I really don’t think that’s helpful.

I’d prefer games to be compatible natively too, so I definitely count myself among them. I think it’s an issue of visibility, the usual “loud and visible minority”. A thousand calm “I would prefer games were natively compatible” just don’t stick out as much as one aggressive “Fuck every company that doesn’t make their games natively compatible, and fuck you for supporting them by buying their game”.

I just don’t think Proton is the worst thing to happen to Linux Gaming because it allows developers to target alternative platforms without having to actually support them. This is where my personal impression of “misguided” (again, probably a loud minority) native game advocates comes from: Platform Inertia works because people stick with the platforms holding things they like, and the things on those platforms stay there because their prime audience is there. If the extra effort (=cost) of supporting Linux doesn’t match a sufficient uptake (=revenue), profit-controlled companies won’t do it (as they can’t justify it to their shareholders).

This isn’t just an issue with the evil corpos, but with the whole system itself. Screaming at consumers to change their habits won’t make much of a dent either there. Compelling people to change rarely has lasting results, if any. Better to invite them over and make the switch attractive enough to break that inertia. Only then can we meaningfully challenge the status quo.

It comes down to strategy accounting for ideological passion, an understanding of social and economic dynamics and patience. By and large, I think many understand this. Proton may not be what we want, but it’s an ally in achieving our goal. When we get to the point where it’s no longer “Underdog Linux against the near monopoly of Windows”, we can push harder (and honestly, I don’t think Valve would be terribly upset if Proton became obsolete and saved them resources).

We shouldn’t stop asking for native builds, so long as we do it mindfully and respectfully.