Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
With many, many servers, otherwise things would go down fast on each new video release. And each server having a fuckton of bandwidth, too. That’s not free.
its fine if its first and foremost a backup, and not a public platform. then you don’t need the bandwidth. then they can open it up when google deleted their channel. they still need to figure out the capacity issues, but at least the content was not lost.
its fine if its first and foremost a backup, and not a public platform. then you don’t need the bandwidth. then they can open it up when google deleted their channel. they still need to figure out the capacity issues, but at least the content was not lost.
I don’t know if I’m stupid or not but I tried going to peertube and I couldn’t for the life of my understand what I was looking at. It just seemed like a vague soup of instances with no continuity or ability to know what I was looking at. Maybe I accessed it wrong but I didn’t fully get it.
These days I am looking at their video on their channel on Rumble while working.
I think they are achieving financial and political pressure in the most wholesome way possible.
That said, I don’t think I am going to click on anything else on Rumble, as it is all Tucker Calson, bitcoin and other shit like that. I don’t see any future in it; it has achieved Dailymotion status in no time.
Just checked the contributor’s page, the crawled privacy policy being referenced is stated to be 4 months out of date, but the policy on Nebula’s website hasn’t been changed since Aug 31 2023, so I think TOSDR might be a little bugged, and just doesn’t have all the current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.
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.
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…
Time to move to nebula? :)
Or better yet PeerTube.
Every substantial youtube channel should be hosting and backing up to a self-hosted, owned, peertube.
With many, many servers, otherwise things would go down fast on each new video release. And each server having a fuckton of bandwidth, too. That’s not free.
its fine if its first and foremost a backup, and not a public platform. then you don’t need the bandwidth. then they can open it up when google deleted their channel. they still need to figure out the capacity issues, but at least the content was not lost.
its fine if its first and foremost a backup, and not a public platform. then you don’t need the bandwidth. then they can open it up when google deleted their channel. they still need to figure out the capacity issues, but at least the content was not lost.
I don’t know if I’m stupid or not but I tried going to peertube and I couldn’t for the life of my understand what I was looking at. It just seemed like a vague soup of instances with no continuity or ability to know what I was looking at. Maybe I accessed it wrong but I didn’t fully get it.
These days I am looking at their video on their channel on Rumble while working. I think they are achieving financial and political pressure in the most wholesome way possible.
That said, I don’t think I am going to click on anything else on Rumble, as it is all Tucker Calson, bitcoin and other shit like that. I don’t see any future in it; it has achieved Dailymotion status in no time.
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…
https://nebula.tv/privacy
It looks pretty run of the mill to me?
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.
That’s a rather pessimistic interpretation of a privacy policy that starts with this:
and which in section 10 (Notice for Nevada Residents) says:
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.”