this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
425 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

34798 readers
216 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I’ve Invidious hosted on my Little Raspberry Pi 4, and using it’s WPA app on every device I got.

Zero ad + Decent UI + Access to highest video quality

https://invidious.io/

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Heads up, "I've" is not grammatically correct when "have" is your verb. Using "have" in a contraction when you're using past-perfect tense. For example, "I've been" is an acceptable shortening of "I have been".

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Is it actually incorrect? I don't think it's necessarily wrong, but it just sounds bizarre or Shakespearean if you use it when it's not an auxiliary verb.

"I've no need for that." is a perfectly cromulent sentence.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, not "incorrect," just non-standard. The yardstick is: did your interpretation match the intended one? Clearly, he was able to get there so it's firmly in "acceptable use." Any further whinging about grammar is likely to just be construed as gatekeeping.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The yardstick is: did your interpretation match the intended one?

I think that's just you. There's a few examples of rules in English that aren't required to get a point across, but sentences that break them sound grating. One such example is adjective order

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think you're conflating correctness with comprehension. Even if it isn't correct, you could still be understood.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Per your previous comment:

Yeah, not "incorrect," just non-standard. The yardstick is:

Clearly, he was able to get there so it's firmly in "acceptable use."

I'm not the one conflating the two concepts.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago

Don't worry, one day you'll understand.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Will this change on YouTube's side affect Invidious instances?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

I wonder too.

If they go full "only google certified browsers and clients" I will just not watch youtube anymore

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Since this change from google I have constant buffering issues on my home invidious instance, need to try updating my docker when I get home.