This „we own the glass“ idea is completely insane. How does an industry degenerate to the point where they consider acceptable to base their business model on owning part of the product they sell you?
If you don't have laws, or don't enforce them, people will do whatever they want.<p>I can remember when this simple point was obvious to almost everyone.
Sony and Microsoft fought to own the living room in console wars
Marketing executives thinking “out of the box” is how. Ethics cannot contain them inside. They have breached the perimeter and now trample everyone for MRR.
The crazy part of this is that LG did not fear flat out admitting they do fingerprint the audio of what you watch. I already knew that, but I can't imagine it's common knowledge yet. How long ago was it that that would have been the crazy untrue accusation?
Discussion: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49645480">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49645480</a>
Original Youtube title of the video I got a few hours ago was: "LG’s Manipulative, Gaslighting Response to GN Report"<p>Either they changed it for some legal reason, or Youtube allows for A/B testing of multiple titles for engagement.
Youtube allows you to AB test with up to 3 titles and thumbnails.
It's almost certainly A/B test. Essentially everyone does it.<p>You can even sometimes see when a list of videos on YT first loads and a given video has one title, and it suddenly switches to another without you reloading the page.
Have you noticed that has become more common recently? Because I have. It seems over the past 3/4 months, reload and see a new title happens pretty much daily to me (it also seems to work because sometimes it causes me to click the video I didn't click with the old title).
On several channels I watch, I've noticed the top comment is always along the lines of "who was here when the video title was XYZ" because you <i>know</i> it's going to change.
YouTube encourages A/B testing of both titles and thumbnails, but it could be either.
[dead]