It is more like the data could make money in the future but is not making money right now so they don't have infinite money for storage. If they had I am sure they would be happy to increase free storage limits.
GreatDong3000
Governments shouldn't [?] whether or not specific content is ok
Yes they should.
Idk why do people act as if online content is detached from real life. Governments decide what type of content/things are ok irl all the time, literally laws are deciding what is ok for you to do and show in real life all the time, everywhere, in all aspects of life. Why do you think online content is untouchable?
In most countries going out and showing your penis in public will land you in jail, why is the government deciding this is inappropriate "content" to be in public? It is just an example out of... thousands.
What do you think would happen if you set up a huge screen on a public square irl and started playing real murder videos that happened recently to people from your own country? Do you think people would see your huge screen showing actual muders and not call the cops on you? Do you think this behaviour would not destroy your life, maybe land you in jail or get you a huge fine, get you lawuits from the victims' families (who were real people on your videos) that you would 100% lose?
If you think governments shouldn't decide what type of content is ok to be shared publicly on social media, I invite you to download a collection of gore videos and set up a huge screen out on the streets and see how long you manage to be showing this in public before it lands you in trouble.
You wouldn't do it and I bet you know damn right that you getting in trouble for this is correct. Why is public social media different? Online = ethereal world where rules don't matter?
Come on dude, online content is not detached from real life.
Remember we are talking about content shared publicly for anyone, even unintentionally, to see. Not private messages and private groups that people join willingly.
These companies hoard data they might have an use for but not even know how yet. Training AI and shit. Deleting stuff ain't in their dictionary.
Thanks, not this in specific but it was something related to not shuting down properly. I powered off from windows by holding the off button instead of clicking on shutdown (I was afraid windows would want to install updates b/c I didn't use it for so long). So I booted windows again and turned it off properly then Debian came back to life.
Goodness gracious they must have great balls of fire to have done this.
But what if it was trained on covers?
I use Linux and only install software from the official distro repository + verified flatpaks. No av, no worries.
Not open source but DaVinci Resolve is the best editor around and supports Linux.
No you don't need the terminal in most distros meant for desktop use to install software. Your distro will have a GUI app store, then flatpak and snap which are the most common software repositories after your distro's default also have GUI. You can use the terminal because it is literally faster, you don't have to if you lack cognitive ability to write apt install gimp or some shit.
Nah, computer vision for standalone image processing (I mean, not batch processing dozens to thousands of files at the same time) today is pretty lightweight and can be done easily on consumer laptops and smartphones. It is just a different technique and takes people with different skills to do it, but completely doable. Gor example, even face detection AI models can run on your laptop, if AI can learn to classify faces, objects and animals it can learn to classify ads.
At this point you can just replace the video with the same video using a timestamped link from just before the ad started. Under IPv4 they can't tell if it is the same person/device requesting the same video. So unless they put the ad at exactly the same timestamp (which they won't) you can just blank out the video when an ad starts and replace the stream with the same video using the timestamp to start the video where you left off.
Google has a lot more money