I love that he responded to their takedown request by releasing an entire video about Bloomberg and their shitfuckery.
I would like to see more content relating to the last interview in the video with Mr. Pigeon. Truly think he has great arguments that need further airtime
So controversial, yet so brave
No! I’m sick of these influencers giving a platform to fascist birds. Enough is enough! #cancelmrpigeon
They can platform whoever the hell they damn want! #cancelcancelculture #cancelthewokemob
Time to move to nebula? :)
How about Floatplane /s
Nebula is a shithole, just have a glance at their privacy policy.
Floatplane would be ideal but I think he burned that bridge.
PeerTube is probably his best bet.
I don’t want to see his channel deleted but I’m also VERY interested in what would take place in the aftermath…
Nebula is a shithole, just have a glance at their privacy policy.
It looks pretty run of the mill to me?
Because youtube was so much better in that regard?
Might sell your data in the future is a hell of a lot better than currently selling the shit out of your data. Nebula is a side grade in terms of privacy, but an upgrade in terms of creators not getting their shit deleted for no good reason.
I’m so fucking sick and tired of everyone saying “WELL EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING IT TOO!” as if that’s any sort of defense. The world is fucked. You do you but I’m gonna do whatever I can not to contribute to it.
K
https://tosdr.org/en/service/2459
but seems it isn’t completed yet
Just checked the contributor’s page, the crawled privacy policy being referenced is stated to be 4 months out of date, but the policy on Nebula’s website hasn’t been changed since Aug 31 2023, so I think TOSDR might be a little bugged, and just doesn’t have all the current policy’s points available for contributors to tag. The current privacy policy is much more lengthy to cover local state privacy regulations, the scope of what they now offer, etc.
Still, it’s all pretty boilerplate, and nothing about it is really out of the ordinary or super harmful. Extremely basic attribution might be used if you click onto Nebula from an ad, and they might share a non-identifying hashed ID with that company. They’ll collect aggregate statistics to determine the impact of marketing campaigns, they sometimes email you, they collect data on your device that most webservers would by default in logs. All very standard.
If they update any part of the policy about how they collect/use/share your data, they’ll notify you,
They even explicitly say to not provide them with info on your race/politics/religion/health/biometrics/genetics/criminality or union membership. You are given an explicit right to delete your account regardless of local privacy laws, and they give you a single email to contact specifically regarding any requests related to the privacy policy.
None of this is crazy, and I have no clue why artyom would call it a “shithole” based on that.
I feel like this site needs more attention.
Maybe it not being in legalese just means more people understand it? This is a pretty acceptable privacy policy relative to most of the other ones you will have already agreed to in your life.
Yes, that’s the problem.
I guess perspective here depends on your anchoring point. I’m anchoring mostly on the existing platform (YouTube), and Nebula’s policy here looks better (subjectively much better) than what runs as normal in big tech. If your anchor is your local PeerTube instance with a privacy policy that wasn’t written by lawyers, I can see how you’d not be a fan.
However beyond being in legalese I’m not sure what part of it you find so bad as to describe it as a shithole. Even compared to e.g., lemmy.world’s privacy policy Nebula’s looks “good enough” to me. They collect slightly more device information than I wish they did and are more open to having/using advertising partners than I had expected (from what I know of the service as someone who has never actually used it) but that’s like… pretty tame compared what most of the big platforms have.
I don’t have an “anchor point” other than what’s what’s fair and respectful of your customers. “We’re going to collect as much data about you as we can to sell to advertisers” is neither.
“We’re going to collect as much data about you as we can to sell to advertisers”
That’s a rather pessimistic interpretation of a privacy policy that starts with this:
The spirit of the policy remains the same: we aren’t here to exploit you or your info. We just want to bring you great new videos and creators to enjoy, and the systems we build to do that will sometimes require stuff like cookies.
and which in section 10 (Notice for Nevada Residents) says:
We do not “sell” personal information to third parties for monetary consideration [as defined in Nevada law] […] Nevada law defines “sale” to mean the exchange of certain types of personal information for monetary consideration to another person. We do not currently sell personal information as defined in the Nevada law.
So yes, I suppose they may be selling personal information by some other definition (I don’t know the Nevada law in question). But it feels extremely aggressive to label it a “shithole” that “collect[s] as much data about you as we can to sell to advertisers” based on the text of the privacy policy as provided.
Oh, I didn’t realize they said they wouldn’t sell your information, despite having a privacy policy that explicitly allows for it. My mistake. No one would just lie on the internet like that…
Elaborate? Genuinely asking… what is your key takeaways for “it’s a shit hole”?
Pretty much “we collect as much data as we can and sell it to data brokers/advertising companies to be used to target you for advertising.”
How is his channel going to be deleted? They appealed the take down and YouTube will reinstate the video in a matter of 10 days if Bloomberg failed to produce proof that he used their copy right shit. I’m actually genuinely asking because I watched the whole video and Steve didn’t say anything about their channel being deleted.
3 dmca/copyright strikes on a channel and yt deletes you. It was mentioned near the beginning of the video.
Right but Bloomberg only did it once, right? Or are they talking about “in general”?
Why is this being downvoted? I’m genuinely asking questions 😂.
You can easily get three strikes in a few moments with frivolous takedown. Then you are deleted and can only hope to beg youtube to reinstate you on twitter.
That’s fucking insane. I can only imagine how scary it is for those who make YouTube their full-time job. :/
Play in someone else’s walled garden, and they may kick you out and not let you back in. It’s not as if people haven’t been warning against this since the beginning of youtube.
That’s why I never made a career out of it. I just never like the idea of putting my whole life in YouTube’s hands. I do have a small channel that I post to whenever I feel like and never really cared for it much. Sometimes, I don’t post for a couple of years.
You can easily get three strikes in a few moments with frivolous takedown
So what you’re basically saying is that any YouTube channel since the dawn of the DMCA has been permanently in the status of “Our Channel Could Be Deleted”. That’s… not exactly news is it? What makes the GamersNexus case special?
What’s different is they are being targeted.
Why is this being downvoted?
You angered the tech jesus fanbois
😂. My apologies, my apostles.
It’s clickbait.
It’s not clickbait. The 3 strikes is general, so even if Bloomberg comes back and says it was an accident or unsubstantiated, gn still takes the hit and is that much closer to being deleted. They could very easily make another 2 or cause a lot more issues leading to the deletion of his account. An considering they don’t want to talk to him at all, and even making this video will likely really piss them off, it absolutely does lead to the possibility that he has his account deleted
It’s not clickbait. The 3 strikes is general, so even if Bloomberg comes back and says it was an accident or unsubstantiated, gn still takes the hit and is that much closer to being deleted
That’s not true. It has to be 3 strikes with merit, so rejected or reverted ones don’t count, and they expire after 90 days too.
Ah I didn’t know that, so I appreciate the correction. In that case itsa little more click baity… But still good to know if you follow his channel. Thank you!
I would assume its in reference to the section of the video quoting YouTube’s policies that channels can be removed after 3 copyright strikes. Bloomberg has 10 days to appeal to YouTube and keep the strike active
Right, but Bloomberg only did it once. Unless Steve is talking “in general”.
The problem is that any strikes put an account at risk. There have been instances of accounts being knocked off overnight by frivolous strikes from one claimant, or multiple claimants just happening to coincide. The title was intentionally alarming, or sensational, but not really clickbait.
Bloomberg has 10 days to file for lawsuit against Gamers Nexus. If they do, the take down stands, and it’s a strike until Gamers Nexus may win the case. Which will be expensive. 3 strikes and YouTube closes the channel with near zero option for appeal.
Gamers Nexus cannot manage if a big company like Bloomberg goes all in. They can easily bankrupt a small channel like Gamers Nexus with frivolous lawsuits. And if you are bankrupt, you can’t defend yourself.
The US judicial system is heavily tilted towards those that have more money.
“small.”
Make no mistake. Gamers Nexus is a multi million dollar company.
Sure, Bloomberg is much, much bigger. But while gamers Nexus is the underdog, it’s not the toothless underdog. That little fucker will bite in bloomberg’s ankles before it dies and tbf: it looks like it’s already yapping and took it’s first bite.
That is true, but yes Gamers Nexus is (relatively) small, and a million dollars can be gone in no time, if a multi billion dollar company decides you need to be gone.
1 million dollars is far from enough to run just a single somewhat high profile copyright lawsuit.This case is simple, so they will probably manage that pretty easily, there is basically no way Bloomberg can win. It’s just a typical harassment tactic that will work against by far the most smaller outlets. But Steve is smart, he knows bullshit when he sees it, and he is not easily scared.
But if Bloomberg gets pissed enough, Gamers Nexus could soon be toast. Just like Gamers Nexus has friends more powerful than themselves, so does Bloomberg.
And 3 frivolous take down notices can appear from various sources in no time. And to YouTube Gamers Nexus is definitely small fry.
Fortunately, New York has anti-SLAPP laws. In fact, they made them stronger when it comes to matters that touch free speech on public issues, which is what reporting something the president said would fall squarely under.
Good on New York, and good to hear.
What’s the difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars?
Answer: roughly a billion dollars.
Being a million-dollar company means nothing against a company where a million dollars can count as little more than a rounding error.
But it’s only one of 3 strikes.
And I am sure it can even expire at some point.
So what’s the matter?Since YouTube also count frivolous claims, you can get 3 strikes in no time.
How many take down claims have been put against them already? How many did they successfully resolve?
IDK, and if you don’t either, you are making an argument from ignorance.But as I mentioned, there is basically no defense against 3 frivolous strikes. It will close the channel, no matter how much the channel can prove it’s innocence.
Unless of course it’s a mega corp, they have different rules, because they are big and google makes money from them, and they have big lawyer teams.
I sympathize with Steve and how he is, and how he goes about explaining things. And the style of making sharp points.
But he’s also flawed, and knows how to play the content game. This is nearly just clickbait. And they flew across the country in service of his style of rhetoric.
I honestly wish more people with audiences were just as pedantic and critical as he is. But he also has his own set of biases in the computer landscape. He is still a Gamer after all.
I don’t think it’s clickbait at all. He’s in real danger of being silenced. With this latest project he reached into a massive wasp nest for sure, but I admire his efforts to speak up in cases like this.
And I haven’t found any bias in his content in general. He’s pretty transparent about his methodologies.
Title is clickbait, because a sentence like that without context is alarmist.
It’s not wrong, it’s mentioned and explained in the video, byt it’s still clickbait.
The story here is Bloomberg fuckery and the copyright strike, not the imminent channel deletion.
without context? context is in the video. or do you want titles that span 4 lines with 3 sentences?
No, just be honest. “Bloomberg fradulent copyright strike on our black market documentary”.
Still one sentence.
I use a Firefox extension called Dearrow because of this understandable, but unfortunate trend.
Why is it a big deal? Don’t you agree with Linus that clickbait is just part of the game, and we should accept the sensational thumbnails and titles? Hate the game, not the player and all that?
I don’t think it’s clickbait. if you made a company angry, it’s not that hard to get another 2 strikes too now that they are watching more closely, and it’s very hard if not impossible to get back a channel from that.
So it was strike 1? And wasn’t strike 3 and the deletion is pending? It’s not the worst stretch of things, but it’s stretching it a little unless the deletion is pending.
I don’t think your perspective is invalid tho.
Just because it’s being normalized by the Linuses and Tech Jesuses on youtube doesn’t mean we shouldn’t call it what it is.
This video is click bait and the content is rather mid. We’re clearly supposed to feel some kind of outrage over a freedom of press kinda thing, but in reality the video is more like: waaah our ad revenue took a hit on this one video because of Big Evil Company abusing the copyright claim system, NOT FAIR! (Ignoring that this has been happening hundreds if not thousands of times per day for over a decade to much smaller channels than GamersNexus, without a peep from Tech Jesus on the issue).
I’m actually on your side. I was bringing up those questions to question why they would get upset with be gently applying clickbait label.
Usually fans of these channels fall in line with the rhetoric.
But once again, I tried a conversation style that failed when I didn’t get a response from who I was talking to, and I got downvotes.
He has a huge bias against Macs. I suspect you won’t be receptive to that idea.
There’s a general sense of consoles and other devices being beneath the channel. Little comments often surface during news segments that touch on them. It’s not that they don’t acknowledge them.
And with how shitty Microsoft is, you’d think they would be more even handed about the whole thing.
But this is filtered though my sensitive ears because I came up with Mac gaming and console gaming, and I’m sensitive to when people are dismissive of other options. The same thing use to happen to Linux until the Steam Deck and associated software support from valve forced people out of treating all Linux gaming as an afterthought.
Edit: use your words guys. The downvotes are nonsense.
I agree with you.
How is his channel going to be deleted?
It’s clickbait.
It’s clickbait.
That is an ignorant knee jerk claim.
As I wrote in a previous response:
Bloomberg has 10 days to file for lawsuit against Gamers Nexus. If they do, the take down stands, and it’s a strike until Gamers Nexus may win the case. Which will be expensive. 3 strikes and YouTube closes the channel with near zero option for appeal.Gamers Nexus cannot manage if a big company like Bloomberg goes all in. They can easily bankrupt a small channel like Gamers Nexus with frivolous lawsuits. And if you are bankrupt, you can’t defend yourself.
The US judicial system is heavily tilted towards those that have more money.
Buff
Removed by mod
Where did I claim Gamers Nexus is above using click bait!
But very clearly it isn’t here, and the amount of downvotes you received for claiming it, hints that most don’t agree with you.
So maybe it’s not so much me, as it is you making an unreasonable and unfounded claim.And no the take down is not reverted, it is in a process where it MAY be reverted.
Also I don’t see you provide a single valid argument for your statement, while I actually explain how it is not click bait, because the threat is real.
But very clearly it isn’t here
How the hell isn’t it?
Title: “Our Channel Could Be Deleted” <insert dramatic thumbnail featuring the word “SILENCED” in big capital letters>
Yet even in the video itself they explain that :
- Youtube sided with them, the copyright strike got reverted and the video wil be restored. The only recourse Bloomberg has is to press actual charges in a court of law.
- It takes three copyright strikes to delete a channel, not one.
And I will add my own 3: YouTube will never just outright delete a cashcow channel like GamersNexus.
I get that they’re pissed because the claim was bogus and it cost them good ad revenue on that video, and they will probably not recoup the cost of making it, but the channel is not and never was in danger of being deleted. So the title is clickbait intended to generate outrage for some, let’s be honest, rather mid content.
the amount of downvotes
LOL “I’m right because I got more upvotes”.
How the hell isn’t it?
Because it is true, the channel could be deleted, and it was an obvious attempt by Bloomberg to silence him, which he shows many reason for why they may want to do in the video.
When it is true it is not clickbait.
Youtube sided with them, the copyright strike got reverted and the video restored.
For the fourth time, it is NOT reverted, and the video is NOT restored.
It takes three copyright strikes to delete a channel.
Maybe it is the third? You don’t know, at least you haven’t shown anything to indicate that you do.
And I will add my own 3: YouTube will never just outright delete a cashcow channel like GamersNexus.
Again Gamers Nexus is small fry for YouTube.
LOL “I’m right because I got more upvotes”.
No you make false claims, and was downvoted for it. Usually click bait is an easily accepted answer, but here it was not because you are wrong.
How the fuck are you so dense?
Read my whole comment. It is demonstrably NOT true.
All YouTube will be is just AI “creator” slop soon. People should be ditching that shit post-haste.
Aw, don’t you love searching for an update on something just for the algorithm to show you a low view count video that’s a mediocre computer voice talking over a barely related slideshow?
Oh absolutely. And it’s one of the same 3 or 4 voices in every video. And not only that, but a lot of the videos themselves are AI. Check the comments… yeah. No one notices or even cares.
It’s a foregone conclusion at this point. AI going to absolutely wreck the creativity of mankind. Art will be viewed in history books, and it’s fucking sad.
I would recommend going to some local art faires, it will soothe your anxiety about the future (of art). I bought a small oil-on-canvas painting of a sailboat at sunset from a young artist at a recent art faire, who was thrilled to talk about art and even tried to give me the painting for free. Creating art by hand is soul-satisfying, and rest assured, my friend, it will never be replaced my AI.
God I hope you’re right. We create such beautiful things. I’d hate to see humanity become so hollow that we stoop to accepting AI slop as art.
Well, just think about how pervasive cheap junk plastic (toys, food packaging, vehicles, furniture, etc) is in our society, yet there are tons of people who make or buy things made out of high quality materials like solid wood furniture or quality steel kitchen appliances. So, there will always be people who reject imitation and embrace originality (and you can find them at art festivals!)
I’m just thinking about all of the gigs and contracts musicians and other artists are going to miss out on because some smug kid with a laptop can coherently type a string of words into a field a produce what gets the job done for a quarter of the price.
It’s a shame.
Maybe that will happen in those giant urban nightmares they call cities. I moved out of the decaying concrete jungle (Escape From L.A.!) and have been living in small towns for the past decade. Here, live music is made every night, spilling out onto the boardwalk and carried by the wind to brighten and invigorate minds old and new. Real music is an art that will survive the AI apocalypse, and perhaps be the last echo of our civilization, spreading out into the cosmos long after we’re gone, and exchanting distant (alien) minds.
deleted by creator
Before Google came along, most search engines were manually curated. I’m disappointed that nobody’s had any success bringing that concept back. They always cave in and take the cheap route by trying to make the general public & algorithms rate things, which of course instantly gets gamed to uselessness.
The pagerank algorithm worked fine for many years in the 2000-2010s before google transitioned into a full time advertising company
It was sooooo good in retrospect.
Isn’t this a bit disingenuous to why they originally started to change the algorithm though?
People figured it out and started abusing it by spinning up proxy websites that would just link to the sites they wanted higher up in the rankings. You could argue Google only became an advertising company so that they could regulate that whilst also taking a slice.
I’m not arguing that they’ve since lost their way though.
SEO used to be a fulltime job.
These two comments read like Dejá-vu…
Bloomberg’s lawyer to Steve: how DARE you contact us without going through another lawyer
While The title of the video is absolutely one of sensationalism, It’s not out of the question as two more strikes could indeed delete a channel…
One strike is nothing.
You’re getting downvoted, but this is true. Nearly everyone who does youtube has gotten a strike at some point, me included. It goes away after 90 days. This means you can get a strike almost every month and keep going.
If you’re knowledgeable, I have a question. Years ago I uploaded a YouTube video that wouldn’t publish because of an automatic claim. I instantly disputed it, and it took like 5 or 6 months to resolve. But I saw someone today say that claimants had a week or two to respond to a dispute. Do you know if that’s the case now, or if someone was talking trash?
(I found a similar claim on YouTube, but they may’ve found the same line and repeated it, and who knows if FAQs are actually up to date.)
Honestly sounds like a glitch. Never heard of this before and from a quick search, I don’t see anyone else having this issue. Did this by any chance happen in 2022 summer-autumn? At that time youtube was modifying it’s dispute system and how many days it can take, which could have resulted in some oversight for some who were already in the process of it.
Claimants have 30 days to respond, after which it is automatically thrown out and your video should be good to go. The 7 day thing applies to counter-claims and escalation, not standart disputes, so 30+7 days(x*), but not months of just waiting.
I initially uploaded it on March 30th, 2021. YouTube still shows that as the upload date for the video, and I’m stuck on my phone at the moment, so I’ll look to see if I can find a date for the claim updates later to sate my own curiosity, but that’s recent enough that I trust my memory of it being months, plural. I got an email about the claim that day, disputed it, got a copyright strike the next day, disputed THAT… And was eventually approved. I don’t have another email about that video saying it was approved or dropped or anything, until there was another claim (after apparently a manual review) on February 9th of 2023, resulting in a regional block.
So maybe it was because I disputed the actual strike and not just the initial claim?
Not that I’m complaining at you. I’m just surprised. I thought this was typical. Though I was annoyed at YouTube. I thought the video could’ve done a little better on YouTube than it did in Vimeo if I pointed people there instead, you know? (100-ish on YouTube now vs 30k on Vimeo those months earlier. But it was a timely video.)
But thanks for the insight. I appreciate it.
Stop building houses on the king’s land.
The actual title of the video is:
Our GPU Black Market Documentary Has Been Taken Down by Bloomberg
Way less Click Bait sounding. And while a shitty thing for Bloomberg to do it is not any different than what tons of channels have been dealing with for years. So the Youtube sky is not falling any faster now than it was last week.
It’s not uncommon for titles to change over the first few hours after a release (A-B testing). I’ve seen the title as posted by the OP yesterday on my feed.
A copyright strike is a little bit more serious than a content id match, fwiw.
Yeah I was about 1.5 hours in.
Sure, then post it on peertube.
I don’t watch his channel, but from here it seems like he is in a “rage” spiral. Like being a bit unpleasant and when people respond to that he doubles down going fro just a bit to kind of an ass
Yeah it’s strange why more people don’t just give into corporate greed and losing ownership of their channels when they discuss potential (obvious) corruption.
Upsetting that they would react in a negative way!
Ive also only seen a few videos of his over the last few years but it seems like he’s recently had some wildly successful videos based off exposing corruption in the PC/tech industry and has morphed his channel from tech reviews to some sort of investigative journalism chasing that high he got from said viral videos.
He goes into detail on some of the videos, but to summarize the “controversial” videos due less well when it comes to recouping the money it takes to film them (if at all). They (often):
- have to account for more travel expenses to interview people
- can’t be sponsored since no one wants to sign up for those kinds of pieces and depend on ad revenue alone
- can include additional legal costs (have lawyers review things, etc. )
- for things that are time sensitive, they can also mess with the work life balance of the team and the regularly scheduled content they’ve been working on
- stress from dealing with mega corps with the money to ruin you as a side quest
Is that supposed to be a abd thing?
No, i don’t really have an opinion either way.
Uh. Good for him
Chasing the high? You think that is why he does that? Sit down and think …THINK what you just said … according to you his motivation is some junky high chase?
At the end of the day he’s running a business and has had lots of financial success with this type of “product,” so it makes sense to focus your efforts on said product going forward.
I like that he’s exposing corruption, but question his motivations and use of clickbait. I’m not really passing judgement on him either way and things don’t always have to be black and white, “good” or “bad.”
Do you have something to add? Asking if my stated opinion is “what I think” in three different ways isn’t really contributing much to the conversation.
No offense, but Questioning the use of clickbait on youtube is such an idiotic take, clickbait thumbnails and titles make double percentage difference in terms of viewership and thus income for the video. These people employ others, not using clickbait would be a disservice to the employees who depend on this job for their livelihood as a business owner you have a fiduciary duty to the best you can and take care of your employees.
How is that an idiotic take? I watch a ton of YouTube and none of the channels I regularly watch rely on clickbait to push their videos. You could use this same argument to justify it anywhere including ‘regular’ journalism meaning there is no example where clickbait is unacceptable using this logic.
The only high he’s chasing is a money one. Controversy brings clicks.
I don’t watch his channel
You could have stopped your comment right there, because what followed was nothing of value.
I apologize. I thought you were someone that completely blew up when they read my comment. You didn’t insult me
No necessarily. “I don’t watch his channel bit I whenever I hear about him he is in some sort of drama” is 100% true. I just wanted to know if I was wrong or not. The down votes tell me I’m wrong and I’m OK with that. But you started insulting me for no reason
Removed by mod
What the hell happened? .did my comment hurt you or some one you love?
I don’t care about him enough to go see if all the drama is justified, so I’m not going to. I just said what I thought, and without pretending to know it all.
If only those who are up to date in his drama are allowed to say anything, then you only hear the crybaby fanboys, because nobody else cares
Oh no, no more YouTube tech drama
It’s not YouTube drama, it’s international trade drama.
It’s a singular circle
On one hand, yes. Totally. Just like the Roblox vigilante stuff and the SKG stuff, etc.
But this video and those examples are connected to larger systemic issues in the world and in the tech industry. It’s not just YouTuber beefs or relationship drama.
Totally agree. This is corpo, government doing stuff because they can, disregarding law they would have you uphold because you’re beneath them.
Corruption. Plain and simple.
