Debian or Alpine would be perfect. Debian has bigger repos, better hardware compatibility, and maybe a bit more stability. Alpine is scary lightweight and a small ISO download.
If they did that then they'd have to re-encode videos for each veiwer (which would require an insane amount of processing power), or give up on tracking and have contextual only ads.
Their only real option is to have ads as separate files and then use the magic JavaScript to tell your computer to play one file then the next, which is where adblock comes in like "naw, let's not do that".
As much as I love making fun of Apple, isn't it all Apple silicone made in house? If they're not coming with Nvidia cards and Apple is not open to the idea of people modifying their computers it shouldn't matter how easy it is to install Nvidia graphics (not to mention Nvidia Drivers are a pain on Linux sometimes too).
POSIX is just a set of Unix-like standards for software. Mac is based on BSD if I recall correctly, they had Xorg and stuff as an option to install and things aren't 1 to 1 compatible but closely related.
robust networking
Dude you just gave me flashbacks to traumatic times trying to get Wifi to work on Linux
As weird as it sounds you can (with poor performance). With something like Limbo or Termux you can actually get Windows or any x86 OS running underneath Android on a phone.
Fun project maybe, but not really utilitarian though. Never used apple so can't actually report on how well their emulation and/or translation layer is working on Arm.
I think the issue is that Netflix always had a lot of debt and thought they could grow a lot more. They had a really solid income, then suddenly their catalog was shrinking thanks to the million other streaming services while they simultaneously started declining in subscriptions right when the cost of debt skyrocketed (even if some of their debt is still at lower rates).
Not that I'm cheering on the price increase by any means, nor am I currently a subscriber. Still though in some way I can see why they're doing it and have a feeling we're just at the tip of the iceberg in how bad tech corporate services are going to get for a bit.
On an unrelated note, VPNs and/or I2P are cool things to check out.
Edit: One thing too to bring up is that password sharing may still be a breeze. If you set up a VPN - not a commercial one but you setup yourseld on either on a VPS or on your home network - as long as anybody is on it they'll look like they're from the same household.
My understanding is that they mostly haven't, with a couple exceptions like a few ISPs offering to priorities to pings for gaming (as FeelThePower mentioned), throttle certain protocols (e.g. Torrenting), or refuse to carry traffic for certain sites (e.g. Kiwi Farms). All of this would be prevented under net neutrality.
As far as I'm aware though, an extremely overwhelmingly portion of traffic (like you'd have to do a lot of digging to find an example otherwise) already adheres to net neutrality since it's pretty pointless for a company to spend resources and goodwill to mess with traffic.
I don't think too much will change. It is nice in the sense it will prevent an ISP from doing things against specific sites, although like mentioned above most of the protections are theoretical ATM.
I'm not on IOS, but I've heard Brave browser on IOS has adblock so that might be a way to avoid ads. Sites like various Invidious instances run in any browser would also be a way to dodge ads.
Any browser that accepts plugins would also work, but I'm not sure if they exsist or not.
Shh, nobody mention that half your apps are probably rendered in chromium.
Unfortunately there's ads in Firefox too, and they're opt out instead of opt in. I'm certainly not a fan of it, but outside of LibreWolf until servo becomes a thing I think should be right but we're stuck choosing lesser of multiple evils.
I'm not quite sure social media accounts and the Nobel Prize make a good comparison. I get what you're saying about the exclusivity idea, but in my mind "exclusive" social media can't really be that much of a draw if there's a million alternatives and it doesn't bring anything new to the table (it's not decentralized or federated if you need approval from a central authority).
I do find it a bit funny that their adblock-block is to my knowledge just client side JavaScript. Ya' know, the kinda stuff adblock is built to cutout.
Unless they're going to be splicing up videos to put the ads into the same file (which would be astronomically resource intensive) or only allow YouTube in app and in seriously locked down Web-Environtment-Integrity browsers it'll be impossible prevent a device from running or not running code as the user see's fit.
I didn't mean like they just strait up embed video.mp4 on page for the video, but as far as I understand on their backend they still have actually video files of various resolutions and such that they serve to you.
Even if the page isn't giving you a copy of a strait up file in the way it might in 2000, the player is still pulling a copy of a pre processed video file stored on YT's servers, and in order to have the ads as part of that same file in order to make adblock very hard to implement they'd need to re-process it any time they want to show an ad that hadn't been already inserted into the video.
I could be completely wrong tho, I don't work at YouTube and haven't built a video sharing site before.