Complain to Congress, they’re the ones who set this up to work this way.
So they might be right, they might be wrong - it might as well be a Twitter post.
You'd see them, if you read the article. Look for the big image with the caption saying "Source:".
I should warn you that you'll have to make it through seven (7) sentences of text before you get there.
As a side note, not a single word of your comment just now is true. Did you think no one would notice?
Edit: it’s a tiny text chip embedded in a reaction video type image in what looks like yet another ad, that actually showed up hidden by 2 other actual ads when it loaded.
I was just reading the text, because wtf.
Have you considered you’re just being a jerk?
>Two weeks ago, Rich had posted a video on installing Windows 11 25H2 with a local account. YouTube removed it, saying that it was "encouraging dangerous or illegal activities that risk serious physical harm or death."
Stop embarrassing yourself.
Please don't don't sneer at fellow community members on HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
It's also not clear how an informational YouTube video would be either a circumvention tool or an act of circumvention if nothing in the video itself is infringing.
Who lobbied for it to work that way? I'm assuming google aren't entirely innocent here.
That's not the argument IMO. They don't have to be intentionally malicious in each action. A drunk driver doesn't want to kill a little girl in the road. Their prior choices shape the outcome of their later options. A drunk driver decides to get behind the wheel after drinking. A large company makes a decision to make more profit knowing there are repercussions and calculating the risk.