Posts: 5
Joined: Jan 2015
Reputation:
0
2015-07-27, 15:04
(This post was last modified: 2015-07-27, 15:52 by codekrash.)
> if you were Google you would do the same thing
I am not naive about this. I know all of them do it. Amazon at least, and extensively throughout the industry, not to say it's not nasty as fuck or that the result isn't less "consumer friendly".
They want to control (obviously for profit)
it's an unauthenticated token, of course it will be used for shenanigans, and to track "rogue" applications, again, I can't stress enough that it's all about control, and the only way around the bullshit nowadays is to become a resentful developer and trick the easily tricked control structure.
ONLY the "bad guys" get the privilege of "large" datasets - only they're bad because they want better functionality? what?
concerning the industry as a whole, how about that serious lack of sort (and sometimes even search), missing filtering, tiny lists etc. This is standard bullshit for profit saving because fucking stupid cunt-bag users don't even know what they're missing, PROFIT
also, large datasets are so much harder to search and sort with, and youtube is fucking HUGE
sometimes a company will have the slight nerve to say that filter/sort/search are "business features". Users don't appreciate how much resource it takes to have these features, nor do they even pout when it's missing. If you don't ever let them have it, then they won't ever want it (even when they might or should) It's one of those things that if the CEO were to give the no-ROI features to the users they would be fired/sued, in spite of his/her principle. you get no ROI or "good guy points". It's like anonymously donating to charity (pure charity).
I had the notion that this also corporately applies to Youtube and thus your plugin. I just wanted to make sure.
RANT COMPLETED!!!!!