Background playback is a feature of the browser and operating system, not YouTube.
Consumer laws should prevent Google doing this. We need an anti-DMCA to make circumvention, bypassing, or disabling of user’s device or OS features illegal.
They corned the market, drove everyone out of it, and are now rent-seeking. Can't say you have much of a choice between youtube and any other video provider that has the same content on it.
>They corned the market, drove everyone out of it, and are now rent-seeking.
It's almost dumping [1]: they gave a service away for free (even if they were losing a lot of money) just to make it unfeasible for any other company to start a competing service.
Vimeo could have been a competitor, but then they pivoted to a professional market and now that Bending Spoons bought them [2], I'm not sure they will even have a future.
It is dumping. The whole YCombinator VC Silicon Valley model is entirely based on dumping. They call it "burning VC cash", which is an overly wordy synonym for it to muddy the waters, and it would be positive for the world if everyone installed a browser script that did a `s/burning vc cash/dumping` on all text elements.
The equivalent here is if Sony owned the most watched TV network (by far) and decided that it would work fully on Sony Bravia tvs. People with LG or Samsung TV's could only watch a degraded version.
We all pay plenty. Don't forget that every product you buy that advertises on YouTube forwards some of that money to YouTube, even if you then don't watch the ads. I would be happy to pay the same amount for everything, but somehow block vendors from spending any money on ads, if it were at all possible.
Yes, they should regulate any product or service offered by profit making companies to consumers, regardless of whether they are provided “free” of charge or not.
I’m currently experimenting (alongside working as usual) with a reasonably non-trivial rust project that will be designed “project managed”[0], built, and tested by LLM agents (mostly Claude, via OpenCode) based on me providing high level requirements and then prompting it to complete things, as well as course correcting (rule: I don’t edit the code, specifications, or tasks directly).
It’s too early to tell how it will work out but things are going better than I expected. It’s probably 20% built after a couple of days, in which I’ve mostly done other work, and it’s working for quite long periods without input from me.
When I do have to provide input, the prompt is often just “Continue working according to the project standards and rules”.
I have no idea if it’ll meet the requirements. I didn’t expect it to get this far, but a month or two ago I didn’t think the chances were high enough to even make it worth trying.
[0] I asked it to create additional documentation for project standards and rules to refer to only when needed (referenced from AGENTS.md). This included git workflow, maintaining a set of specifications, and an overall ROADMAP.md as well TASKS.md (detailed next steps from the roadmap) and STATUS.md (status of each of the tasks).
There are plenty of situation in which all that matters is that the people actually building are happy with it and a tool that literally nobody else uses would be fine.
Indeed, for many engineering jobs (software and other) in some industries, it's entirely necessary to create new tools and use extremely specialiased. Good people will learn how to use (and build/improve them).
I'd possibly go as far as arguing that a sign of a good team is willingness to aggressively use the right tool for the job even if it is obscure or something they have to build themselves.
Sure, if you're hoping to get traction with an open source JavaScript library… git and github maybe be pre-requisites, but for projects of a certain sort "reach" and "adoption" by other developers are the most important metric. (Though, SQLite has done just fine with Fossil, so there's probably a degree of overstatement in the idea that it anything has to use git / be on Github.)
I think this kind of thing just bothers some people and not others.
I first started to understand and notice update rates and responsiveness as a gamer playing 1st person shooters.
I hate (ok, I find it a bit jarring) the jerky scrolling of a phone in battery save mode limited to 60(?) FPS. It’s so obviously not connected to your touch anymore.
In terminals it’s things like the responsiveness fuzzy finders and scrolling that I really notice.
I turn off animations everywhere I can.
It’s not impossible to use something slower, but when everything feels instant it’s just much more pleasant, smoother, and feels more productive as a result of the computer working at whatever speed my brain does.
I've been closing my tags for 30 years and I assume that I will for the rest of my days. I like that it validates as XML. Historically I used XSLT a LOT.
Because HTML is designed to be written by everyone, not just “engineers” and we’d rather be able to read what they have to say even if they get it wrong.
It's more that it's exceedingly easy to generate bad X(H)ML strings especially back when you had PHP concatenating strings as you went. Most HTML on the web is live/dynamic so there's no developer to catch syntax errors and "make build" again.
Note that Google Pixel hardware is just fine and not evil, and they're looking at a different vendor for the next version anyway, because Google is making it so the Pixel will only run approved OSes.
The Titan chip does a lot more than sign and store keys. It also has storage (could contain malicious payloads) as well as an RNG and AES/SHA accelerators (which could be weakened/compromised), among other things.
Consumer laws should prevent Google doing this. We need an anti-DMCA to make circumvention, bypassing, or disabling of user’s device or OS features illegal.
reply