Oops, forgot to link the original article. Fixed.

I wasn’t aware that odysse was originally a crypto video sharing platform, I thought it operated more like YouTube.

Hey mate, It’s not exactly a crypto video sharing platform, but it does incorporate crypto in how it operates. Odysee isn’t the blockchain itself, it’s a website frontend for the blockchain, which has previously always been the LBRY network. How it works is that you would receive small amounts of LBC (LBRY coins) for watching some content. You can than use the earned currency to upload videos and articles onto the platform, and it can be boosted by other peoples channel donations to support individual content creators, which are optionally either more LBC or using traditional fiat currency if you so choose. I know it’s very easy to upload stuff because I have my own channel, you practically aren’t even paying for it since you can upload a video for as little at 0.0001 LBC. My understanding is that they’re moving away from LBRY and towards Arweave, though I’ve not looked at the FAQ yet (linked below). If you check their channel, they posted more a lot of info at the same time as this video. The Odysee community has been waiting for details on an announced update for a few weeks.

The Future of Odysee (Article)

FAQ concerning Odysee’s new tech

Yeah, I’m on Linux too, and you’re right that GOG isn’t as convenient as Steam on Linux, but you don’t have to mess around with bottles to get them working. Heroic Games Launcher is excellent and has Wine and Proton built in, so installing GOG games and playing them through that is almost as convenient as playing through Steam on Linux.

I find that compared to Steam, I have to tinker slightly more often than Steam to get them working; otherwise, most games install and play perfectly just like on Steam. There’s an official GOG client called GOG Galaxy, but it’s only on Windows and Mac, so third-party launchers like Heroic are the best options on Linux. Plus, somewhat recently GOG officially partnered with Heroic Games Launcher which improved the compatibility quite a bit. There’s no achievement support in Heroic yet, but they are working on the feature for it, as far as I’m aware.

I can’t remember where the option is, but you can also add the GOG games from your library in Heroic to Steam as a non-steam game.

As for sales, like I was saying before, the sales across GOG and Steam seem to be very similar to each other, having the same price cuts at the same time as each other.

One thing to be weary of when buying games from GOG on Linux is when you buy games that are playable online, such as No Man’s Sky and Divinity: Original Sin II. These games rely on GOG Galaxy to connect you online, which currently isn’t functional on Heroic Launcher (but may get support in the future). One other thing to note is that occasionally I’ve noticed that a game publisher releases an official Linux port on Steam, but ignores it on GOG. I was disappointment when this happened to me. I bought the whole Metro series in a bundle from GOG, but I only found out afterwards, that on Steam their are actually official Linux ports for the whole trilogy. I use ProtonDB to quickly check which Steam games have Linux ports

That’s fair. I’m not sure about Ubisoft games in terms of pricing comparisons. But no, most games are the same price on GOG as other places like Steam, though unfortunately GOG doesn’t have regional prices so that may not be the case for you. Some publishers decide to up the price a bit, annoyingly, just because they know that users are willing to pay more.

Have you not heard of GOG? They only sell games DRM-free, and have similar sales to Steam. Ubisoft particularly don’t seem to like publishing much from the past 10 years though.

If we’re talking in the realm of privacy, it’s technically better than the other popular PC storefronts because they provide an optional offline installer for the game that, once downloaded, can be preserved into an archive and installed at any later date without internet (and can still be used if the game is taken down from the store). As far as I remember, they collect far less private data too, so that’s a plus. They have a giveaway going on at the moment that ends in 10 hours for an old game called The First Templar if you wanna try out the platform.

Nope, but people should be aware. It seems most invasive policy changes in the tech industry fly under the radar because no one reads them to begin with.

I just only get Ubisoft games pre-owned physically on consoles. It wasn’t for privacy reasons but just because I don’t want to support them. The only exception is DRM-Free copies on GOG.

Ah, apologies. Yeah, I know what Watch Dogs is, it just didn’t come to mind. Knowing Ubisoft, I don’t even need to look at their privacy policy to know that you’re probably signing away your soul with them.

By WD are you referring to Western Digital?

I comment all the time there and read comments all the time. I never see any commenters attacked for being Jews ever. Look, that’s not to say that Jew haters aren’t on the platform, and I find it very annoying that they seem to be brigading the platform in the comment space, but the place certainly ain’t run by Nazi’s. It’s just unfortunate that people like that have to ruin the reputation of the platform and turn people off from it. The comments seem far less moderated than the videos of the platform, because remember that moderation on the Odysee front-end does exist. I’m mostly saying this for the reader, since you probably already know this, but here is one example from the community guidelines:

We don’t care about what you publish, livestream, comment, or include in channel descriptions for the most part. But we don’t allow the following: Content or posts that incite hatred or violence towards a particular group or person(s) based on, but not limited to the following: Ethnicity Disability Nationality Race Gender Religion Sexual orientation Social class/caste Gender identity/expression

So you certainly can’t argue that Odysee allows this content on the platform. I’ve only once (one time too many, though!) seen someone actually directly promote violence. I slimed it (disliked), reported it, and told other people to do the same (sliming it enough hides the comment like a spoiler), and the other viewers did so. That’s the first time I’ve ever done that, but if you saw what he was promoting, you would probably think he should go to a mental ward. Thankfully, people did slime it, and it became hidden, before eventually being removed by the site moderators.

That thing looks hilarious!

Because the general population doesn’t know much about data privacy and they are purposefully mislead and inticed into accepting agreements that share all that information out. The point of NBTV is to raise awareness.

Reason for deletion: Decided it wasn’t worth arguing like my last comment said. The readers are smart enough to see what’s stupid about your comment without me having to defend myself.

Update: Oh, you deleted all your comments, good job.

deleted by creator

I’m not disagreeing with you, but this video style is only meant to discuss the issue, not simply tell people exactly what’s happening and end it at that. But I see your point, and I’ve noted it: I’ll make sure I share more quick and to-the-point video’s when I do in the future.

I’m not going to argue with you, because I can see it won’t accomplish anything good, so I’ll just leave it at this:

No, I did not promote the Chromium monopoly, I simply asked a question, about a security issue with Firefox; this is not the same as promotion. If I wanted to promote the monopoly, this post would have been telling people why they shouldn’t use Firefox and I would have posted it on a more broad community about Web Browsers and done so on Reddit for the most impact. I’m against this monopoly, and I intentionally go out of my way to not recommend Chromium-based browsers to people. Discussion about issues with something you love is only healthy, not a promotion of another side.

I’m not taking sides because I don’t currently have time or energy to look into the issues GrapheneOS and/or Micay may or may not have, but I will say that I don’t know how you could think (at least based on the information I referenced from Graphene in my post) that they are saying or implying to people that Firefox is less secure. They did say it was inherently less secure on Android, but not in general. They did say that the Site Isolation feature specifically is less secure even on Desktop, but they didn’t say that Firefox as a whole is inherently less secure, just that it currently is on Android. I can see how an average reader may interpret that as Firefox being less secure than Chromium as a whole, but that would simply be their own misinterpretation of what’s being said.

and “The moment anyone starts calling Firefox insecure, immediately become alert”. Why? Anything is capable of being insecure and Firefox equally so. At any given time, Firefox could have security vulnerabilities (as it does), so it’s quite ridiculous to automatically assume that anyone calling Firefox out for being insecure in some way is just Daniel Micay or his “minions”

“Micay and GrapheneOS, and fans/members associated like OP are well known for…”. Are you accusing me of being associated with Micay and GrapheneOS, or am I misunderstanding you?

I’m no professional, but from my research I’ve been doing, it appears that the risk (at least one of them) is that a hacker could in theory create a website that exploits this vulnerability. If you access their website, their site could be capable of stealing sensitive information from the other Firefox tabs that you may have loaded on the side, at any given time.

I don’t see where they said any of that. Nothing was implied here, you’re just making assumptions about their point of view.

I know how helpful GPS is. Also, I am not paranoid, and you shouldn’t be making those kinds of assumptions about anyone you don’t know. I simply want to minimize private data being open for abuse and am exploring what can and can’t be done, and their benefits and disadvantages. This after all, is the privacy community you’re talking in; where you share advice and knowledge about enhancing ones privacy, not telling them they are paranoid for pursuing it.

So you’re saying that other electronics used within the car (ones that aren’t damaged by the lack of antenna) may be able to detect the lack of antenna as a “fault” and thus hinder their own functionality? Also, by “antenna”, are you referring to the one used for the radio? Like an Aerial? So my understanding is that giving the antenna connection a “dummy load” is a way of removing the antenna, and stopping the sending of data, without damaging or hindering any other electronics/components of the car.