::: spoiler Summary Part 3 21. In some cases, third-party YouTube creators upload “re-distributed” content, such as ESPN, CBS Sports, or Fox Sports college football game live streams or episodes of TV shows such as Family Guy. After ~12 hours, the creators edit the videos to cut out the “re-distributed” content and they edit the title, description, and meta-data of the videos to something unrelated. This appears to prevent brand advertisers from knowing against what sorts of content their ads were served on in their original form, and suggests that YouTube ad delivery placement reports may not accurately convey what sorts of content the ads were served against before the videos were retro-actively edited and re-named. 22. Disney, Lionsgate, Paramount, Universal/Focus Features, Bleecker Street, and streaming services like Disney+, Peacock, Sling TV, YouTube TV, and Hulu/FX, in their capacity as advertisers, have run ads against uploaded copies of their own intellectual property on third-party channels, thus potentially funding it. 23. The presidential election campaigns of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, as well as major brands such Procter & Gamble, had ads served on videos that appear to belong to various professional film studios, such as “Deadpool & Wolverine”, whilst the film was being shown in movie cinemas in the summer of 2024. 24. The list of brands whose ads were served on third-party, “re-distributed” content YouTube channels which were later deleted by YouTube (and thus, likely retroactively redacted from their ad delivery placement reports), includes: a. the New York Times, the presidential election campaigns of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, the House Majority PAC (a Democrat Super PAC), Procter & Gamble (P&G),Unilever, BMO Bank, Ben & Jerry’s, McDonald’s, US Bank, Crossmedia, Samsung, Disney+, FX networks, WarnerMedia (HBO Max), Mint Mobile, Focus Features (owned by NBCUniversal), Kellanova (Special K, Frosted Flakes), State Farm, Verizon, Visible (by Verizon), T-Mobile, Disney, Hulu, Mazda, the Wall Street Journal, Nissan, North Face, Paramount+, Health for California Insurance Center, A&E Television Networks (Lifetime), NBCUniversal Media (Peacock), Volvo cars, Lionsgate, Macy’s, Adobe, SlingTV, Hyundai, Genesis, AAA (American Automobile Association), Amazon, AMC Plus, Mindshare USA (part of GroupM/WPP), Peloton, Linkedin, TD Bank, Grammarly, General Mills, Ubisoft, Zaxby's, Dentsu X, Dentsu Carat, OMD (part of Omnicom), Publicis Media, Alfa Romeo (part of Stellantis), Starcom Worldwide, Horizon Media, Canvas Worldwide, Safelite, Ricolino (owned by Mondelez), Save The Children, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Hasbro, Kinder (Ferrero), TruGreen, California Teachers Association, Frontier Internet, Ticketmaster, Meta (Facebook), Ray Ban, JetBlue, Quest Nutrition, Shopify, General Motors, Ruiz Foods, JPMorgan Chase, Currax Pharmaceuticals, TikTok, B&H PHoto & Video, Invesco, VaynerMedia, Kingsford, St. George’s University, Empower insurance, Ezcater, Philo, GolfNow, World Vision Fund, Discover Puerto Rico, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (Jimmy Fund), Novo Nordisk, Ooni, Aquasana, Panasonic, Atlassian, Caterpillar, Fandango, Harbor Freight Tools, Castlery Furniture, Blue Diamond Hotels, and others. b. Zefr, which is a Partner of the YouTube Measurement Program, appears to have been observed transacting ads for Dexcom on a “re-distributed” video of Netflix’s “Squid Game 3” which was later removed. Channel Factory, which declares itself to be a Google Premier Partner, part of the YouTube Measurement Program, and is TAG “Certified for Brand Safety”, was observed transacting ads on behalf of brands such as: General Mills on “re-distributed” YouTube videos of the movie “John Wick: Chapter 4” on a channel which was removed from YouTube, Sephora and Quest Nutrition on “re-distributed” YouTube videos of the movie “Spider Man: Homecoming” on a channel which was removed from YouTube, Tena (part of Essity) on “re-distributed” YouTube videos of the movie: “Deadpool & Wolverine” on a channel which was removed from YouTube “because it violated [YouTube’s] Community Guidelines” (archived here: https://www.loom.com/share/9fff55d650eb4fd68ae938fc19aa0299) :::

Even with pirated Spotify the worsening of recommendations pushed me to pirate another service. Which is a win for Spotify, I guess.

Or, how about they fuck off and leave me alone with my private data? I don't want to have to pay for something that should be an irrevocable right. Even if you completely degoogle and whatnot, these cunts will still get hold of your data one way or the other. Its sickening.

Brother I live in western Europe and of the 6 supermarkets in my smallish city, 4 offer the handscanner. It's incredibly common here, and very convenient.

You don’t understand. The tracking and spying is the entire point of the maneuver. The ‘children are accessing porn’ thing is just a Trojan horse to justify the spying. I understand what are you saying, I simply don't consider to check if a law is applied as a Trojan horse in itself. I would agree if the EU had said to these sites "give us all the the access log, a list of your subscriber, every data you gather and a list of every IP it ever connected to your site", and even this way does not imply that with only the IP you could know who the user is without even asking the telecom company for help. So, is it a Trojan horse ? Maybe, it heavily depend on how the EU want to do it. If they just ask "show me how you try to avoid that a minor access your material", which normally is the fist step, I don't see how it could be a Trojan horse. It could become, I agree on that. As you pointed out, it’s already illegal for them to access it, and parents are legally required to prevent their children from accessing it. No, parents are not legally required to prevent it. The seller (or provider) is legally required. It is a subtle but important difference. But you don’t lock down the entire population, or institute pre-crime surveillance policies, just because some parents are not going to follow the law. True. You simply impose laws that make mandatories for the provider to check if he can sell/serve something to someone. I mean asking that the cashier of mall check if I am an adult when I buy a bottle of wine is no different than asking to Pornhub to check if the viewer is an adult. I agree that in one case is really simple and in the other is really hard (and it is becoming harder by the day). You then charge the guilty parents after the offense. Ok, it would work, but then how do you caught the offendind parents if not checking what everyone do ? Is it not simpler to try to prevent it instead ?

Tokyo banned diesel motors in the late 90s. As far as I know that didn't kill Toyota. At the same time European car makers started to lobby for particle filters that were supposed to solve everything. The politics who where naive enough to believe them do share responsibility, but not as much as the european auto industry that created this whole situation. Also, you implies that laws are made by politicians without any intervention of the industries whatsoever. I think you know that it is not how it works.