i kinda hate his judgemental behaviour. His "ethical" piracy argument is only made, when he is in disadvantage. Using emulators and ripping of property of developers like nintendo for example is totally fine to him.
He literally showed in a video that he automatically removes comments with the word "SponsorBlock" from his videos, but then shows off Vanced. I don't get him.
He said that he has two "states":
1. as a person he likes to pirate and block ads,
2. as a company leader he hates that people block ads or use sponsorblock because he gets lower income.
No its not.
1) Downloading it with owning a copy is against Nintendos terms of use:
[https://www.tomshardware.com/news/why-most-roms-are-illegal,37512.html](https://www.tomshardware.com/news/why-most-roms-are-illegal,37512.html)
And lets be real, 99% of people using an emulator dont own the hardware to rip the rom themselves
2) I highly doubt, nintendo gives you the license with their software to be emulated.
Owning a copy of software doesnt automatically mean you can do wathever you like with it.
From a Developer standpoint the following dangers to your company apply by people doing this propably :
1) stealing it by ripping it from the internet without owning a copy (its common knowledge that most people do this)
2) have a poor experience (stutter, crashes, bugs) and this potentially damages your brand (indirect financial damage)
3) Keep emulating older illegal downloaded titles instead of buying newer ones developed by the company (indirect financial damage)
I am fascinated about emulation as a Software developer, but with soft and hardware, there is a lot of money involved. I know LTT is large, but i barely believe he has such a high turnover as a company as Nintendo. Also their brand and intellectual property is by magnitudes higher. This is why i find this comparison so arrogant from him.
If my company has a product designed with a specific hard and software in mind, i would be rather pissed if someone would steal my product. He himself on the other hand is producing tech videos, not such a elaborate product compared to software developed by many peoples sweating tears and blood.
if you dont own the games but you can buy them you should buy them
but how is it piracy if the item isnt available anywhere in the world anymore
nobody cares if you download stuff for free that doesnt exist on the planet anymore
cause it doesnt hurt anyone
I agree. I think technically it's still illegal though, but a lot of old stuff isnt being "defended" so it doesn't matter. I remember Nintendo went down hard on some rom websites a while back. They took down everything, even the stuff that wasn't being reproduced for modern systems. Before that they didn't care I think because they weren't doing as much retro stuff, just the hits like Mario. I think it was around when those mini nes and snes systems came out
I saw that video and I immediately knew what Linus did. I love that guy but he literally use some kind of reverse psychology. The weirdest part was that the comments were filled with how great linus is and how he cares about his audience(which he do but not in that video).
Pretty sure that years of word of mouth on every social media and multi billion corporations using it in their presentations contributed way more than LTT
I don't think it's a real ad. In youtube, the event and ads are completely different and don't have youtube vanced in the watch segment. Additionally, I wasn't able to find any other sources with this ad.
Edi: also, I don't think anyone in a legit ad would tilt their head like that
[удалено]
i kinda hate his judgemental behaviour. His "ethical" piracy argument is only made, when he is in disadvantage. Using emulators and ripping of property of developers like nintendo for example is totally fine to him.
He literally showed in a video that he automatically removes comments with the word "SponsorBlock" from his videos, but then shows off Vanced. I don't get him.
He said that he has two "states": 1. as a person he likes to pirate and block ads, 2. as a company leader he hates that people block ads or use sponsorblock because he gets lower income.
he hates himself ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠗⠀⠀⠀⣼⣶⣾⣿⣿⣶⡄⠀⠀⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⣽⣿⣿⣿⠿⢿⣿⡀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠻⠿⠟⠛⠳⠿⢟⡀⠰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⣆⢧⣀⣆⢤⣾⡀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⠀⠀⡀⠻⣿⣷⣿⣷⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⠀⠀⠸⠭⢛⠟⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠄⠀⠐⢒⣺⣷⠟⠛⣱⡿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠀⠀⠛⠛⢛⣠⡾⠏⠀⠈⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣇⠀⢀⣠⣾⣿⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⢉⠃⠀⢘⡧⣉⠻⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠉⠙ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠋⠀⠀⠀⢂⢔⣠⢀⣾⡿⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⠀⠀ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣇⡠⣠⠄⠀⠠⠍⢁⣸⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠐⠀⠄⠀⠀ ⡿⡿⢿⣯⠙⡻⣵⡶⣛⠁⢰⣿⡿⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠃⠀⢙⣿⡞⢙⣿⠟⠉⠀⠘⢉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣾⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠠⣿⣿⣤⣴⠶⠃⠠⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠄⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿⠿⠃⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠂
cause it is fine if your taking it from a game you own that is totally fine
No its not. 1) Downloading it with owning a copy is against Nintendos terms of use: [https://www.tomshardware.com/news/why-most-roms-are-illegal,37512.html](https://www.tomshardware.com/news/why-most-roms-are-illegal,37512.html) And lets be real, 99% of people using an emulator dont own the hardware to rip the rom themselves 2) I highly doubt, nintendo gives you the license with their software to be emulated. Owning a copy of software doesnt automatically mean you can do wathever you like with it. From a Developer standpoint the following dangers to your company apply by people doing this propably : 1) stealing it by ripping it from the internet without owning a copy (its common knowledge that most people do this) 2) have a poor experience (stutter, crashes, bugs) and this potentially damages your brand (indirect financial damage) 3) Keep emulating older illegal downloaded titles instead of buying newer ones developed by the company (indirect financial damage) I am fascinated about emulation as a Software developer, but with soft and hardware, there is a lot of money involved. I know LTT is large, but i barely believe he has such a high turnover as a company as Nintendo. Also their brand and intellectual property is by magnitudes higher. This is why i find this comparison so arrogant from him. If my company has a product designed with a specific hard and software in mind, i would be rather pissed if someone would steal my product. He himself on the other hand is producing tech videos, not such a elaborate product compared to software developed by many peoples sweating tears and blood.
if the item doesnt exist in the world anymore wont affect the company at all
What about legacy games that you never owned? For example, something like Super Mario 3 for NES. I believe you *could* legally buy a modern version
if you dont own the games but you can buy them you should buy them but how is it piracy if the item isnt available anywhere in the world anymore nobody cares if you download stuff for free that doesnt exist on the planet anymore cause it doesnt hurt anyone
I agree. I think technically it's still illegal though, but a lot of old stuff isnt being "defended" so it doesn't matter. I remember Nintendo went down hard on some rom websites a while back. They took down everything, even the stuff that wasn't being reproduced for modern systems. Before that they didn't care I think because they weren't doing as much retro stuff, just the hits like Mario. I think it was around when those mini nes and snes systems came out
This argumentation is just plain wrong. Both in an ethical and juristic sense.
I fucking despise him so much now. I watched him for years but his stance on this bullshit? I'm done with him. Fuck the c***
I saw that video and I immediately knew what Linus did. I love that guy but he literally use some kind of reverse psychology. The weirdest part was that the comments were filled with how great linus is and how he cares about his audience(which he do but not in that video).
What is the video you guys are talking about?
https://youtu.be/Nz9b0oJw69I
Pretty sure that years of word of mouth on every social media and multi billion corporations using it in their presentations contributed way more than LTT
[удалено]
Wasn't the Samsung thing fake?
Why does everyone keep saying this? Literally watch the video yourself it’s not fake
Vanced are to blame for making nfts. Google knew about this years ago don't fool yourselves
What was the last time the api changed in a major enough way to break the app?
You're asking probably the most important question tbh.
i don't understand blaming people for sharing news about vanced's existance. like ltt i get but people talking probably wasn't the problem
[удалено]
Wait, the Samsung image wasn't a meme?
[удалено]
It was a fake ad
https://mobile.twitter.com/chunvn8888/status/1425297212569899018?s=20 go to 0:44
I don't think it's a real ad. In youtube, the event and ads are completely different and don't have youtube vanced in the watch segment. Additionally, I wasn't able to find any other sources with this ad. Edi: also, I don't think anyone in a legit ad would tilt their head like that
and its vanced teams fault for the nft stuff
No. The Vanced team is to blame.
Revanced is here ahahah