They mention deindexing from browse and search. I understand this to mean you can still visit and buy the products, and list the publisher's titles on their publisher's page.

That's far from "banning". And doesn't prevent the supporting creators and browsing their catalog - the use-case OP described.

I presume it's based on their legal cost of the three previous cases.

I agree it's very low in terms of cost of business, as legal cost, or seeking damages.

You could have at least transformed the inaccessible video form into text.

It seems like they're referring to https://github.com/Batlez/ChatGPT-Jailbroken/, where you can check the source code.

To me it looks like all that does is make some kind of placeholder replacement, and there's some kind of custom prompt storage and retrieval.

Either way, if it does what you expect it to, doing more than intended by the service provider, it only works until they fix some checks or make some UI changes, and they may hold you accountable for evading technical measures to gain more than you subscribed (and paid) for.

Personally, I wouldn't trust integrating a random third party logic on a registered service. At the very least, I would disable auto-updating or copy/fork it.

I don't see them claiming it being "safe to download". I assume you're taking the implication or assumption as advocation and a safety assessment.

Depending on what you mean by "safe", no it's not safe.

I'm not familiar with the ChatGPT service in particular.

You are right

YouTube channels can be terminated for both repeated copyright infringement and community guideline violations. In these cases, revenues are often withheld as well. It’s possible, however, that linked AdSense accounts are treated differently.

AdSense policies can be confusing, but based on additional information provided by Google’s AI, YouTube copyright bans are most likely to result in AdSense terminations too.

This is the first time I read of an AI as a source / AI being a source for an article.

https://wikileaks.org/-Leaks-.html

but "The tittle says it all" /s

Streaming can provide decent quality, but not high quality. That's simply too costly on scale.

Bit rate alone doesn't necessarily tell you quality either.

I suggest you look for downloads and look for

1. Release Groups that match your intentions (once you found favorites you may want to stick to them)
2. Screenshots on releases/info pages
3. Encoding information

To assess encoding information, you look at file type, video codec, and encoding bit-ness.

From high to low compatibility, and low to high compression ratio:

1. mp4 file, AVC/x264/h.264
2. mkv file, HEVC/x265/h.265
3. mkv file, HEVC, 10-bit
4. mkv file, AV1 [10-bit]

You can consider the triplets of the codec to be different names for the same thing.

You'll be able to play all file and codec types on a PC, but not necessarily on other devices. If you're streaming from PC to something else, that's fine too.

I'm usually looking for 10-bit HEVC releases because of their vastly superior size for quality. If that's not available, HEVC or AVC. In most cases, it doesn't matter too much to me.

A video with a lot of movement or visual detail will have bigger sizes.

If you compare an AVC release and bitrate with a HEVC 10-bit release and bitrate, they are vastly different. You can get the same quality for a fraction of file size and bitrate. More bitrate is often a waste of bandwidth and storage space.

The price this is referring to is not monetary. It's the loss of access and goods.

Did you mean to reply to a comment?

Freetube is a frontend client that uses YouTube.

It may just be coincidental. Chasing hosters and legal battles takes time.

Random instances can group, that's soll random.

Bandcamp