Of course, the creator has an interest to show this data to the advertisers if they have a good audience retention during these sponsored segments. The creators that want to hide this probably can be assumed to have a worse retention… So the advertisers can just ask for the data and know how much money that ad space is worth, and make decent estimates even when the creator refuses to share that data.
In the end, that data may very well influence how much the creator receives.
The creators sell adventisement space and want the advertisers to know that their channel is a good investment, so the more they can prove to the advertisers that their sponsor segments arent skipped, the more they can charge for it.
A reform that faces backlash and, by the force of collective movements, overcomes backlash and capitalist resistance, is a form of revolution. I think such movements may lead to socialism, or other things (better or worse).
Edit: who is downvoting me speak your mind, im curious… I know what i said doesnt sound like most leninist discourse, but in practice im not sure how they differ.
humanity goes extinct.
… the population decreases. The parts of the population reproducing less becomes smaller than the part reproducing more… and reproduction naturally goes above replacement rate again… Because replacement rate decreases with the population size
I guess it’s fine then
I don’t think anyone’s saying he has these ideas. But he is probably influenced by people with these ideas.
Is this the consensus in the usa already? Just curious cause I’m not from there, and everywhere I look online this is the consensus (in my bubble at least).
Edit: I know the media doesn’t admit stuff like this, but I mean consensus in like the general feeling of talking to people in real life about this war.
Im also not sure what they meant… I actually read it differently the first time… like clippy being a voice of western media, equating not handing arms to Israel with it’s destruction. Just like they equate asking for the end of genocide with antisemitism.
State ≠ people
I never understood how a statistical word-predicting model was expected to be obedient in the first place… of course we can train the model to say yes rather than no to command-sounding phrases, but thats a rather shallow mechanism.
What if the gov has access to both tor nodes, cloudfare infrastructure and mozilla servers?
Isnt security mostly achieved by heavy obscurity? A password secures because other people dont know what it is, it is obscured.
I dont see how they were arguing for subdivisions. There are in fact many problems to solve, and we should unite to solve them. But if we are talking about a specific problem, we should use specific language. This shouldnt prevent us from seeing that there are common roots to all these problems.
The train should move the people that distance in 3h, not be planned in 3h
“has to be”? why do you have to ask this question?