Which law? in which place? at what time ?

Where it’s hosted? where it’s being accessed? the intermediate locations ?

Which license, is the license enforceable in this context? who decides if it is? what if there are conflicting decisions from different applications of law, who arbitrates?

Do you mean piracy in the maritime sense? or do you mean copyright infringement? perhaps trademark infringement? or intellectual property theft? based on which law in which geographic region ?

This isn’t even hyperbole, the things you are talking about have nuance and context, pretending they don’t is a failure of imagination or intentional trolling.

The law is the law in the very specific contexts in which it applies and is heavily open to interpretation and bias, which is (in theory) why trials and lawsuits exist.

So I gave you two examples that match your criteria and you still can’t figure it out. Got it.

…or …perhaps you did figure it out …and have moved the goalposts again… dammit , can’t believe I fell for that, congratulations.

I mean, I gave you a whole narrative about moving goalposts, if you can’t get it from that im not sure im qualified to help you.

Hmm , actually, there is this I suppose but that’s a lot more words than the previous reply so … It could go either way.

That’s some quality engineering at work there, are you using some of them in-post hidden motors like the sketchy cyclists ?

I can’t even see any wheels.

I thought for sure them goalposts were fixed in to the ground, but no, they just zipped on by at a rate of speed.

At a level you’d need to use for a search engine ?

I see this argument a lot and it entirely glosses over the fact that the market is at least one order of magnitude larger, possibly two.

The cost of a game is the development, marketing, maintenance to some degree and in some cases physical production of the medium.

Past that it’s gravy.

You charge 70 in the 1990’s times 100,000 sales vs charging 70 now to a million sales.

It’s not like producing a car where you have a fixed unit cost, this is mostly copying already made data.

Yes, the tertiary costs can go up and the development costs can go up but the addressable market has also gone up significantly.

Nintendo specifically is absolutely not living release to release and is the worst possible example for this argument.

Not only do they not really do sales but they also have DLC all the way up the wazoo and frequently rerelease old games at current market prices, with minor tweaks.

They do not, however, lean all the way in to microtransactions, which is nice

the majority of the population doesn’t identify this as being nazism.

That’s a big claim for no citation.

Taxonomy.

• A cat is [animal]
• A dog is an [animal]

The nazi’s did such a good job of distinguishing themselves they created their own (colloquial) taxonomic branch.

So [nazi] could be considered a parent grouping of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party and also potentially a parent grouping for the republicans.

I think they key here is separating the nazi party from the [nazi] category

As you pointed out all [nazi]'s are [fascist]'s but not all [fascist]'s are [nazi]'s

• National Socialist German Workers’ Party were [nazi]'s
• The American Republican Party are subjectively showing enough similarities (both in type and progression) that they get the provisional label of [nazi] as it’s the closest existing definition.

Might turn out that they don’t quite fall in the same branch, might turn out they do. Until then [nazi] is an easy shortcut for describing the types of behaviour displayed.

Even if they were just a direct descendent ( taxonomically ) rather than a sibling of the original nazi party there would still be an argument to claim they were nazi’s

Like :

• animal -> mammal -> cat
• nazi -> nazi party -> republican

Come back in a few years and you’ll probably get your definitive answer either way.

You don’t have to agree with any of that of course, but it does demonstrate how someone might have an opposing opinion to your own.

Well, at least they aren’t pretending to accept longer passwords but actually truncating it, like they used to in hotmail and live.

They were silently truncating the passwords to something like the first 16 characters, the rest was ignored.

The server CPU’s are called epyc and they are powerful, but not in the same way.

Server CPU’s are geared to different types of workloads but if you built a desktop workstation with decent one it would be still be a beast.

I wasn’t arguing that the server CPU’s aren’t powerful, i was saying that the latest ryzen desktop cpu was something I’d personally consider to also be powerful.

The threadrippers are also up there in terms of power, but the OP was specifically talking about ryzen.

I mean, going by wikipedia the latest (desktop) ryzen cpu released was the 9950X3D…i’d personally tag that as powerful.

everybody has their subjective scale of power i suppose.

That’s one of the reasons why you get delayed or cancelled, over-budget projects that go nowhere. ( another big one is corruption and general financial shenanigans ).

if you throw a lot of money at a problem/project that doesn’t have reasonable management and competent understanding of where that money could work efficiently then you’re asking for trouble.

Destinating more resources to that quickens and makes better that process, though, incentivating people to work on it and test it.

That is charmingly naive, in my experience.

I’m not saying more money wouldn’t help, I’m saying throwing money at it isn’t generally a stand-alone solution, which is what i think the person you were replying to was trying to say.

Not sure how versed/willing you are to selfhost but I’ve heard good things about tube archivist.

There are also a bunch of ui’s for yt-dlp, though i can’t vouch for quality.

It’s somewhat of a catch, that’s generally how monopolistic moats work but you really shouldn’t be relying on google as a backup service for obscure videos you wish to keep.

I’ve no idea of the amount of lectures, guides, documentaries and other non-entertainment media that is available exclusively on youtube, but again it isn’t an archiving service.

They can, will and have deleted whole channels for various reasons, most of which were bullshit, if you find something you absolutely have to keep, download it.

That being said, the process of downloading, archiving and curating content on anything more than a trivial scale can be much more involved than it seems, especially if you want backups/redundancy.

I’ve never been a big youtube user so my opinion on this is coloured by the fact that i don’t have that much invested in the platform.

Literally any other form of entertainment.

Though the statement was to stop using it, not replace it.

2/2

I agree completely, which is why I say it’s not the right word. I am totally against people saying homosexuality is a mental illness because it implies it’s something that needs to be corrected. I do see it as something that deviates from the norm, but in a way as harmless and inconsequential as left-handedness.

And i don’t disagree (aside from the discussion on “norm” as stated above).

I thought I had done a good enough job of establishing upfront what I meant when I said that I was pro LGBT and was coming at this from a point of trying to understand, but I the backlash clearly shows that was not enough.

That’s not necessarily true, people are going to disagree and misunderstand especially on a subject such as this, all you can do is engage in good faith and work with the results of that.

If you want to refine your explanations, that’s fine also, but you aren’t going to get 100% success rates, especially on the internet.

I find it frustrating having to tiptoe around topics like this and always try to explain myself because people are so quick to look for the bad, but I suppose that is the current world we live in.

All we can do is our best, if that’s not enough for some people, so be it.

This kind of communication is a skill, it’ll get more refined over time.

It’s a sad fact that there are a lot of people trying to opress anyone who is different, and I can’t exect strangers on the internet to know me or what I believe in.

True, so manage your expectations accordingly.

If you go in to it with an understanding of the potential outcomes you won’t be blindsided.

I’ve done a lot of explaining myself, but I’m still not conviced my original assumption is incorrect. I still think that homosexuality has a biological/mental aspect because gay people say that they were born that way, it’s not a choice, it’s who they are. I didn’t choose to be straight so that makes perfect sense to me. I also know that the people who feel that way are in a minority, therefore something is happening mentally, biologically, I don’t know, to a small subset of people making them an abnormality.

The conversation about a potential biological/genetic component to homosexuality is incredibly charged for various reasons but mainly because of the consequences of either outcome.

If it turns out there is a genetic component then think of all the things the fundamentalist nutjobs would want to do with that information.

And given that fundamentalist nutjobs aren’t know for their clear headed and rational thinking they wouldn’t understand (or would wilfully ignore) that you probably can’t just point to a “gay gene” as a means of identification so not only would they being doing stupid shit, they’d be doing stupid shit that doesn’t make any sense.

What I HAVE learned is I need to be more cautious of using the word abnormal which goes full circle to my question on if this is an issue of language. Most people really don’t like words that black and white say they’re different, because while it may be true, it can be used by people who do not feel like deviations from the norm are acceptable, and they will attack them for being the “other”. This is just a very polarizing topic and can cause people who say they’re on the same side to get at each other assuming the worst, which is unfortunate.

I think it’s more complicated than just language, though language is a major component on the internet.

There are sometimes ways to present the same information in a similar way that makes use of linguistic and societal context to convey the meaning of what you were saying while downplaying some of the the negative aspects of how it could be received.

I suspect an issue you might be having is that at a glance they’d probably both look the same to you, so with a choice between four words and two sentences the more concise seems like the better option.

Though i might be projecting.

I don’t actually think that’s the issue here however, i agree it’s just a charged subject and people are people.

1/2

Thank you for taking the time to write such a well thought out comment. I’ll try to reply to it but honestly the amount of downvotes I’m getting for trying to understand something is a bit discouraging so I don’t think I’ll be keeping the conversation going much longer.

No problem, i recognise the style of question because it’s how i would approach it.

As you correctly noted a few times, this is an emotionally charged topic so a higher than normal amount of people will interpret the question through the lens of their emotions

Even with the best intentions and most detailed prefaces you should still manage your expectations on the types and tone of replies you will get to such a question.

I think of it this way :

• if if think they are misunderstanding the question i am posing then they are not actually attacking me or my position, they are attacking what they think is me or my position.
  • Then it’s just a case of determining if I’m willing to put forth the effort required to try and bridge that gap, which varies.
• If i think they are approaching in bad faith, that saves me some effort because i can just ignore/block them.
• If i think there is a genuine engagement, that’s good, even if they disagree I’m getting the discussion i was looking for.

In more concise wording, people are going to people, don’t let them foist their issues on to you, engage when you want, disengage when you don’t.

At least that’s what works for me.

I’m making a pretty general statement so I don’t have numbers to back anything up, but I would be very surprised if we didn’t have basic statistics on how many people identify as gay, or are diagnosed with ADD, etc. So I think we do understand norms, but you’re right this always changes with increased research and study.

I do see what you mean, what i was saying is that the understanding of “norm” isn’t very clearly defined in these sorts of cases.

Eye colour is relatively easy (within defined colour brackets) you can look at the single item of data and categorise so it’s easy to partition the population based on something like that.

With things like mental health diagnoses we can’t even reliably agree upon what brackets to apply so it’s significantly more difficult to apply the idea of a norm.

in turn that makes the idea of abnormal equally difficult to define.

I did this on purpose. I’m not saying any of these are similar at all, just that they’re attributes that might make us unique and as far as I’m aware (since I’m not religious) these are functions of brain chemestry. Somone who has a very creative mind can be encouraged through their upbringing and surroundings to use it for music, arts, etc but I do think think there is something physical in the brain there. I’m not a neuroscientist so I don’t know how much is attributed to genetics, hormones, etc.

I agree with them all being functions of brain chemistry.

Though i don’t rule out something we’d consider supernatural or spiritual because honestly i don’t really know much of anything to be definitively ruling out something like that.

I don’t subscribe to them in my daily life, but who knows.

The answer to most of this is “it’s complicated” and we’re basically using best guesses at this point, these guesses are based on scientific principles, but all that science really is is a semi-concrete method of defining and refining what our best guesses currently are.

What i was trying to convey is that while all of these things could be considered “attributes”, in reality it’s much more nuanced than it seems, musical talent has many forms, as does ADD and sexual orientation/preference.

Honestly i’d consider most brain stuff to just be unique expressions of an individual, rather than a set of labels, but that isn’t very helpful in most circumstances.

Ah i think i see.

That quote is not from my post, i think you meant to reply to the OP.

I don’t think understand what you are asking, would you mind adding a bit more detail please ?