I can't confirm, but given the question is several hours old without response;

yt-dlp can use webbrowser cookies to use browser login sessions --cookies-from-browser firefox, which may be enough

Dunno about Germany. It had a big move to the right. The second strongest party is now right, passing two other traditional established parties.

They could steal your personal data without you knowing.

So very ironic when it's the opposite between them.

This doesn't make sense.

They say "endpoint in the UK" and "VPN Server in the UK", and that they could not confirm whether outside the UK would still block.

Cloudflare blocks UK requests. If you use a VPN you choose which country you send the requests from.

Cloudflare as a separate entity from the VPN provider can't know where requests originally came from. That's the whole point of the VPN.

There is nothing new here. The article seems to misunderstand and to misrepresent.

In 2021, YouTube announced that it had invested "hundreds of millions of dollars" to create content management tools, of which Content ID quickly emerged as the platform's go-to solution to detect and remove copyrighted materials.

Content ID was introduced in 2021? Only 3 years ago? I thought it was significantly older.

Wikipedia says 2007.

Dunno if they meant something different or typoed the year.

Confidentiality in such a case is so stupid.

Court rulings have elaborate reasoning on how they come to their conclusion. Would be nice if we could have something like that when public goods like the Internet Archive are under pressure. For all of us to have a better understanding of the law, rights, and consequences.

Spot the difference:

No IPTV is not a crime

No, IPTV is not a crime

Post title should add a comma.

Citing the username alone should be enough. The email address is explicitly named for this use case only.

Earlier this year Japanese lawmakers were shocked to realize that illegal consumption of manga cost the industry around 1 trillion yen.

Why do articles quoting shit like this never contextualize it?

I assume these numbers are, like they always are, a consumption = loss of buy equation, which is not a realistic calculation at all.

The article talks at length about accessibility, yet fails to point to that issue when quoting these "cost" numbers.

It's not like they're hosting any of those. It's not costing them anything. At most it should be labeled loss, but an equation makes no sense then either.

Notably, 5.0.1 was released three days ago. So a fix is available.

The first patched release is version 5.0.1, released 2 days ago.

What the fuck did I just read.

I hope the judge bans these presumably copyright/DMCA scammers/trolls from participating in the legal system as lawyers.

If the judge asks them to show them the UK film, will they claim they are lost, or will they download the other movies from the supposedly infringing websites and then claim the films are not just titled the same but also look exactly the same? Insane.

… new pirate sites appeared. Cost to the industry: $800m per month.

oh, because they're hosting those illegal sites? /s

Are there free seedboxes? If they can't afford a VPN, they probably can't afford a seedbox.

There are website services where you both stay online and transfer directly.

There could be direct peer to peer transfer tools that are more robust.

If you want to go through a file transfer/hoster

• no limit https://gofile.io/
• 300 GB limit https://1fichier.com/

There's some more, those are the top two in my bookmarks.

You'd do good of encrypting/7z-passwording if you don't want others to see the content, just to make sure not to have to trust the hoster.

With Ollama you can install and use various free AI models.

found a movie, but […] it wouldn’t play

So it played… you /s

Depends on your torrent client. Be careful that the client does not accidentally overwrite your files, replacing the completed content.

In qBittorrent you add the torrent without starting the download, and then let it or make it re-check [existing] files. it should then progress the check to completion with the correct files and file names in place.

If you have the torrent added and then put/move the files correctly, you can use the context menu "force re-check".

When you then start that complete torrent, you're seeding.

That's a very ambiguous and loaded question.

Here it is - published on YouTube, JP audio only - 【公式】『エヴァンゲリオン放送30周年記念特別興行』

Awareness is the first step to aware procrastination.