Draconic NEO

It’s not actually unstable, more accurately it’s tested and verified as much as Debian stable, meaning it’s fine for desktop use but I wouldn’t use it for a server or critical system I plan on running 24/7 without interruption, both since it may have bugs that develop after long term use and gets more frequent updates which will be missed and render it out of date quickly if it’s running constantly.

There’s quite a few instances like that that aren’t self-isolated prestigious hellholes. Here’s a list:

• lemmy.blahaj.zone - LGBTQ themed instance
• pricefield.org - LGBTQ themed instance based on “Life is Strange” franchise
• Reddthat.com - A general purpose instance
• Lemmy.one - A small general purpose instance ⚠️ Warning, They aren’t maintained well and have gone down for months ⚠️

From what I can see the biggest things these instances have in common with Beehaw is that they support LGBTQ and they have downvotes disabled. So they’re not really that similar, closest one is blahaj.

That’s probably the reason why instances like lemmy.blahaj.zone, pricefield.org, and reddthat.com chose to disable them. They aren’t constructive and more importantly they lead to people using them instead of reporting, which is really bad when it comes to enforcing rule violations.

You should report them as well, downvoting doesn’t do anything to accelerate them being moderated, but reporting definitely does.

And let people disable it if they don’t want to be protected/babied.

I would agree with this but I still think having an opt-out for bot replies is important. That opt-out shouldn’t be compliance.

That’s not opt out, that’s compliance. People are able to not hashtag posts on Mastodon.

If blocking the bot prevented their interaction with users and the posts/comments those users make that would be a good solution, but as is blocking is just an “eww I don’t like this, I don’t want to see it” instead of “This entity will not be able to interract with my account/posts”. In this case there is concern regarding the bot’s behavior, and the unwanted exposure it gives to users who may not want it, which blocking doesn’t solve because it doesn’t provide an opt-out from replies, just to stop seeing the replies.

It really depends on how it was cracked and the use case of the app. Some of them may have it patched out but others won’t. Play it safe unless you know for sure.

Only applies on official apps and frontends with analytics. Without them it’s just buffering the video.

See my other comments on the matter they don’t, not when using apps like this, it’s literally by design as they are meant to be privacy friendly so they naturally won’t send analytics data.

I get why they disapprove of sponsorblock

The app strips analytics and watch data preventing views from being counted. So the argument doesn’t logically make sense. They’re trying to make a moral argument out of something that doesn’t and can’t have any impact because the data used to justify watch-time and engagement isn’t provided.

Also it’s important to report incorrect submissions since if enough people report them they get removed and the users who do this reprimanded.

Lost views is not lost sales. That’s just stupid.

That’s why the ad-funded internet is referred to as a bubble and people are saying that the bubble will burst. It’s money-making based on the promise it’ll make the company paying the advertiser money, without any guarantee. You can’t make money out of nothing, people have tried and failed for years if not decades, it always comes crashing down, either through crypto scams, pyramid/ponzi scemes or though worthless investments like the Dot-com crash, it’ll always blow up in your face sooner or later. Which is what is slowly happening with the ad-funded internet, it is becoming overvalued similar to the dot-com investments.

It’s part of the reason why many say the ad-funded internet is on it’s way out, the idea of ad-revenue is based on the idea that people are going to buy YOUR product when there are 1000 other products making the same exact claim, and 1000 other of the same ads they ignore. Advertisers and Ad-funded companies have a lot of cope when it comes to this fact and make claims like “oh it’ll get in eventually” but the fact of the matter is this isn’t stable, it’s based on the promise of making money, this bubble will burst eventually, it’s not a matter of if but when.

It looks like any other web browser, the problem is that without the Analytics being sent back it looks like a paused video buffering all the way through then the user leaves without watching the video. The analytics include how much and which parts of the video they watched, but videos can be loaded without watching them (that’s what buffering does).

Just FYI for all the people who keep repeating this ad-nauseam it doesn’t apply to third party apps like Newpipe and grayjay which DO NOT send analytics data. If anyone wants to make arguments against sponsorblock they also can’t support apps and front-ends which strip the Analytics from the video because without them you add no watch time or metrics, so it’s a hypocritical argument.

This ignores the fact that these apps don’t have the functionality to tell YouTube a video or segment of a video has been watched, therefore they literally can’t make money off these users period, it’s just the way these clients work, they don’t send analytics data to YouTube, so they don’t count views. It’s as if the person paused the video, let it buffer all the way then clicked off without watching.

People can argue semantics about watching or not watching or what it means philosophically but in the end the views aren’t counted by the software on these apps, it doesn’t matter how much or how long you watch something it just doesn’t count the view, because they never receive any tracking data. So in that regard there really is no sense in shaming SponsorBlock usage, if it seems like a problem you shouldn’t be using these apps in the first place because they defeat the money-making part of the segments in and of themselves.

Well when a video is buffered it’s loaded in memory but not viewed yet, they can’t count loading the video as a view or they’d count the whole video as viewed if you simply buffered it in full, it would also screw up that watched timestamps feature to see which part has been played back most.

So yes they can count how many times it has been streamed but they also need to know you’ve watched it because sitting on pause while the video buffers all the way through isn’t a view, it isn’t watching those segments, but it does stream them from the servers, in the same way Newpipe and Grayjay does. Which is how a video can register no views despite being watched on something like NewPipe.

It’s true that YouTube does track the most watched portions of a video, but in the case of clients like NewPipe or this one the way the video is parsed it doesn’t send the analytic data necessary, so it likely doesn’t even count views, let alone watched segments.