And you want to make other people feel guilty for skipping ads because it’s easy for them to get your experience without paying uber-wealthy corporations, so you try to make out that they stole something? Get off your high horse. Your giving would be far more beneficial if it went to a charity instead of Google.

The content creators make content using which YouTube/Google earns vast sums of money in advertising. They top slice most of the money for themselves and forward very little of it to the people who worked to create it, so in that sense they change the content creators. They’re one of the most profitable companies on the globe. Where does that profit come from? It comes from underpaying content providers. Still don’t know why you’re defending them. They dropped the “don’t be evil” plan and they meant it.

You know full well that Google is charging content creators way, way over their costs, even if they qualify for the more lucrative partner programs (most don’t - the long tail - and those who do are the better off YouTubers), exploiting their monopoly position to extract money to an unfair extent from both content creators and advertisers.

So, I do think it’s weird that you defend one of the richest and financially exploitative corporations on the planet and all your criticism is for me for skipping the annoying and repetative ads and not for the exploitative monopoly corporation.

Do you let the ads play in full, or do you press skip as sin as you can?

Guess what, pressing skip means the advertiser isn’t charged and the content creator isn’t paid. Far more people press skip than get ad blockers. You should be criticising me for pressing skip, surely! Ad skippers hurt content creators far more!

And IT IS NOT THEFT! None of it is stealing. The outright LIE is that skipping or blocking ads is theft.

I actually don’t use an ad blocker, I just skip the ads, and I skip them guilt free, because the majority of content creators aren’t in Google’s more lucrative partner programs, so Google keeps most of the money, and if their content doesn’t qualify for monetisation, Google keeps all of the money from ads on their content.

But I put an ad blocker on my elderly relative’s computer because those ads that you keep defending kept tricking her into installing malware, and it’s not even slightly illegal and it’s not even slightly morally questionable.

You’re spending a lot of time and effort defending one of the richest corporations in the world. It’s weird.

Has put occurred to you that young impressionable minds are hurt by you lying on the Internet that skipping ads is theft or that it hurts people?

So stealing is defined (in some states) as taking property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. So you’re incorrect and commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com might be breaking YouTube’s terms and condition not the law, and it’s not theft.

If Google were paying the content creators anything even remotely resembling the kind of income from advertisers the content earns, I might have a shred of sympathy for them losing a tiny bit of advertising revenue if some user watches a video without watching the same three ads they’ve seen ten times already that day.

You’re spending a lot of time and effort defending one of the richest corporations in the world. It’s weird.

I’ve travelled on hundreds and hundreds of trains in the UK. On busy services, unless you’re getting on at the start, if you don’t have a specific seat reserved, you will be standing. This is normal. I don’t have a source for that claim, I just have many years of experience.

There’s a plausibility gap on capping ticket sales for trains. Why on earth would they stop selling “anytime” tickets? They’re really expensive and a train with plenty of people standing costs the company no more but earns them a great deal.

What’s unusual here is that this looks like it came with an “advance” ticket, which is cheaper, limited in number, only available in advance, and is required to come with a reserved seat, but they’ve clearly oversold even them.

This is the UK. The train will be heaving, and those without a specific seat number reserved will likely have to stand unless they’re getting on at the first station and are early on to the train.

Not common in the UK where this seat reservation ticket is from.

Everyone is permitted to sit, except if the seat is reserved for someone else who has a normal seat reservation ticket which specifies the coach and seat number.

No, only individual seats are reserved. There’s no “reservations only” carriage, but there are carriages that are more or less reserved. Off the top of my head, I think coach B is often very close to, but never actually fully reserved, whereas D has only a minority of awards reserved.

They absolutely oversell on a regular basis on UK train.

I suspect it’s an “Advance” reduced fare ticket, which is only ever valid with a seat reservation, but either the seat was over specified (ticking all three of facing forwards, table seat, near the entrance, for example), or the train company continued to issue “Advance” tickets even after all the reservable seats are gone, which you could count as a dick move, or you could interpret as allowing more people to buy tickets at the reduced fare.

It could be that that was one of the least overcrowded trains scheduled on a day that’s expected to be very overcrowded indeed, and they’re trying to spread the no standing room pain across as many trains as possible. It’s certainly cheaper than putting on additional services.

I am very familiar with this ticketing system, and if you don’t have a specific seat reserved, you’ll be very lucky to find a seat unless you’re getting on at the beginning of the train’s journey.

Very, very incorrect. You’ll very likely be standing with this scenario. No seat number? No seat, unless you’re very very lucky, or you happen to be getting on at the train start station and it’s there very early and so are you.

That’s in fact absolutely false.

No, they still sell tickets without reservations and anytime tickets without limit. Your only guarantee is a numbered seat that you can claim. This has no such thing.

Wait till you hear the chlorine washed chicken news!

Chickens in the USA are typically “battery chickens”, which is actually about as brutal as it sounds. They’re kept in way too small spaces, unable to move around, and stand and sit in their own feces all day.

The chlorine wash helps them pass lab tests for lack of pathogens, because small amounts of chlorine get onto the test samples and kill the bacteria, but the chlorine is only surface deep. Salmonella is endemic, and many chickens’ undersides are actually rotting from being in their own filth all day. But if the bacteria test passes, it’s fine and the big corporation buying the cheap chicken doesn’t care.

Salmonella infections and food poisoning generally are relatively high as a result of these kind of profit-driven practices.

The boil in the bag thing isn’t a big deal by comparison, but no, the USA does not have strong food safety standards, the USA has strong lobbying and openly legal corporate funding of politicians that would be seen as corruption in many other countries.

This was my experience as soon as I went electric too, yes. If anything, the only thing that’s surprising about the article title to me is that it’s only 20% more plaque!