personally, i always check ebay. but i know general sentiment around "used/like new" items is fairly poor. just ask grand pap sitting in florida, buying half the computer new, because "he would never buy used", aka some returned tower.
I see what you're saying, I didn't make the assumption it was the US authorities, simply that an authoritative entity was involved. In this case, that entity applied enough pressure to directors to make the organizers feel the need to cancel the event. I consider the headline to be clickbait, but obviously we drew very different conclusions from it.
The FBI and Canada seem to feel differently enough to investigate, and have arrested a few individuals operating these types of "overseas police stations". [1]
"Chen Jinping, 60, of New York, New York, pleaded guilty today to conspiring to act as an illegal agent of the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC),"[2]
The films weren't just pulled - the festival was cancelled.[3]
i checked. he seemingly limits his "i have a controversial opinion, let me explain why everyone who disagrees is disgusting" posts to once a month. i'm not sure they're increasing racist, but he's clearly becoming more and more enraged.
anyone so unhinged that they can't comprehend the value in not publicly attacking subsets of the population you might need to cooperate with, eventually becomes a liability for everyone.
Manifest V3 has 100% market share for all "full featured" browsers. My understanding is that just yesterday, YouTube made a change that allows them to apply DRM to videos, with even the client side buffer maintaining encryption until playback. How long until we start seeing similar applied to websites/articles?
Eventually, there will be an overstep that make enough capable people mad, and those people will get together and make/mod something better.
You talk about Google as if it's a person. You should take a step back and think to yourself why the changes were made to Manifest V3 that broke backwards compatibility, weakening ability to ad-blocking. Rule set based modification is one of the first features I'd think of when developing a systems of extensibility in browser, and they removed it.
The reasoning is obvious, and "plausible deniability" is not enough to give Google charity. The more difficult you make it to block ads, the more impressions, and the more money made. Yet you believe people should be "charitable" to the same company that can't hire the manpower to defend their own users against bad faith DCMA takedown notices. Because they ran the analysis, and it wasn't worth the cost.
Best case scenario, Chromium loses market share, implements the parts removed from V2, Google likely kicks the can down the road to Manifest V4.
There's no reason to believe companies deserve charitability. Companies are systems designed to extract maximum value, and when the world around that system changes, the system adjusts itself. It's not the systems fault for trying to get more value, it's our fault for letting them.
YouTube has been playing a cat and mouse game, disabling some accounts until disabled, randomly re-enabling them. I personally think it's so when people talk about issues like this - people say "Well, it's been ok on my end". But it's definitely some kind of A/B testing.
source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-military-tested-device-that-...