You sure about that? You aren't allowed to read it outside of the license attached to it. Downloading pirated source code, reading it, and then typing it out from memory doesn't magically give you a right to use it in any way. I would argue the licenses attached to most copyrighted code are being violated the moment the code is scraped and replicated without permission.
If I actually intended to do something illegal over a VPN, then yeah. Not really my style though. I prefer a dedicated, clean laptop, a large antenna, and a public hotspot for my torrenting.
Has PIA solved that issue a lot of providers have where services like Google voice recognition just fail to work better than half the time? I presently use AirVPN to bypass my carrier's video streaming limits but barely being able to use Assistant is a pain.
The only standard you can really trust is when they actually get subpoenaed and don't have anything to give to the court. An example of this is Private Internet Access.
Rather reminds me of what happened with Palm OS 5 and Palm OS 6. Both ended up adopting separate names but because OS 6 wasn't backwards compatible the sheer weight of legacy software kept it from ever catching on.
How about giving us back the features we lost with Windows 10?
Like if I want a desktop shortcut to Notepad in W7 I open the Start menu, begin typing Notepad, and when it shows up in the search results I drag the icon onto the desktop or right click on it and hit "send to desktop". Neither of those work in Windows 10. Clicking and dragging does nothing, and right clicking doesn't let you make a desktop shortcut either. You have to add it to the Start menu, then drag it to to the desktop, then delete it off the Start menu.
I've only ever heard arguments for the banning of flavored e-juice in the context of them appealing to children, which is why I mentioned them that way. For me personally, I find both alcohol and tobacco disgusting but I don't see any constitutional basis for government regulation of what informed adults put into their body, so long as it doesn't pose a danger to others.
I don't see the point of banning particular flavors. People use them for the nicotine. I haven't heard anyone clamoring to ban flavored alcohol, which is another life-destroying poison product that's illegal for children.
It's been a long time since I cared or noticed how fast my internet was. Experientially, there's not much difference between 25 megabit service and 200 megabit service. You can stream 4K video on either, and both will require you to go do something else while your 60 gigabyte game download completes. One does it in 5 hours and the other in 40 minutes, but neither are instant-access. There's no escaping from the 1TB data cap I've had for ten years and until that's dead for good I won't be moving my media archive to the cloud.
Now, offer service that cuts my average ping to multiplayer servers in half and I'll get excited. Give me a plan with guaranteed 4G coverage no matter where in the US I go and I'll get excited. That's not going to happen though.
I miss the days when you could watch "Bill Cooking Chicken part 1" and the related videos would be "Bill Cooking Chicken part 2" and "Bill Cooking fish part 1" instead of "I wasted $200 on Wish.com" and "More Adventures in Replying to Spam" and "Ten Flaws of the Borg Collective".
Does YouTube mistreat and exploit its creators in a myriad of ways? Absolutely. Is it a fair platform and does it behave in reasonable ways? Absolutely not.
That said, I feel that a reminder about the nature of YouTube monetization, AKA the YouTube Partner Program is in order. The YPP puts ads in and around your video and gives you part of the profit from running those ads, but what does that mean? It means YouTube is:
>Finding advertisers
>Persuading them it can pick content (yours) that is profitable to advertise on
>Handling the entire negotiation and payment work behind implementing that advertising
>Handling the entire technical aspect of adding those advertisements to your video
That is an enormous amount of work YouTube is doing for its content creators for free. You are not in any way entitled to YouTube doing that work for you. Having your videos categorized as not eligible for the YPP is not in any way depriving you of the ability to make money from them, just the ability to automatically make money from them with no effort on your part. Without access to the YPP, you are still free to find sponsors, find advertisers and run your own ads, receive donations, or rely on patronage services like Patreon. That means you have every single avenue of revenue generation (aside from paywalling your content) available to you that you'd have if you were hosting the videos yourself on a personal server. Hell you can even do that if you want to set up some kind of script that uploads your videos as Private and only adds viewer usernames to the whitelist after they pay you.
It would be a terrible idea, but YouTube would be entirely within its rights to charge content creators for the bandwidth consumed by their viewers and offer no assistance at all for making money off your content. YouTube owes you nothing.