LoL Google.... I thought that I was a victim of your random account deletion for a bit

> Could linux write everything to a file every 30 seconds. A bit like a keylogger

yes, but probably not a good idea?

I would pay for a software that could update my email address on all/most web services...

If you want to disable updates, it should not still be updating... I don't get your point....

This was probably done because of the (draconian) character limit imposed by HN on post titles... If it was me I would have removed the middle "e" in Addresses to comply.... aka Addrsses

Not sure whats the point of using snaps in a stable OS release, but they are fairly easy to remove: https://www.kevin-custer.com/blog/disabling-snaps-in-ubuntu-...

ie: I thought they were more useful for installing a random app that is not supported by your OS... Is it easier to include a snap then it is to create a regular package? or are there any other advantages?

I have seen how Google and Apple do things and I have seen how government do things. I would any day trust my data to something made by Google or Apple than something made or managed by the government. Yeah yeah sure the government is 'accountable' but the accountability barn door is pointless when the privacy horse has long fled, as is much likely to happen with the government's cavalier approach and practices.

Look we get the anti-big-tech angst but when it starts ignoring on-ground facts it just sounds like angry rambling.

You are forgetting that the government already has your data.

You already use you most confidential data to pay taxes and divulge all income sources. So you want to give that data to private entities as well?

God.

but Google and Apple have all that information already and the big pipe to the government is still open... just stop ignoring facts?

All the more reason to not give that data to the government, right, if they don't already have it?

Why would you recommend to use company "A" just because it doesn't need to have data "D" to provide feature "X" if it has access to data "D" through other means anyways and they share it anyways with the other entity Government "G" that you are so much against using secret laws...

dead people's copyrighted work sues for copyright issues all the time... not sure how that would help.

Can someone explain to me how copyright being valid after the original owner's death progresses healthy competition? What benefit does it have?

People work not just on their own behalf, but also of their descendants. Knowing that your spouse or kids will keep getting royalties provides an extra incentive to produce new work, much like people create businesses or make investments to leave as inheritance.

how often does it profit large corporations and not their descendants?

Rarely; it usually profits either both or neither.

It doesn't; it's just there because Disney has enough power to make it so.

"... support their heirs"

, but often some large corporations

if you see a new video with elvis presley today, you know it's not really him. the chances of mistaken identiy is low.

if the person is still alive then people might believe it's an original and the impersonated can legitimately claim that the fake is profiting from that mistaken identity.

Mistaken identity doesn't come into play here. It's copyright that got the videos removed, not publicity rights.

The point is that copyright doesn't apply to someone's image or likeness - that's trademark! Copyright only applies to a work itself (at least in the US).

A deepfake Elvis video of a song that he didn't write would be subject to copyright by the original author of the song and to trademark by the owner of Elvis's likeness. However, it seems plausible that such a trademark claim might fail because (among other things) it should be apparent to a viewer that it isn't actually Elvis.

That is Wikipedia (you know what to do)

I gave up long ago. There are guidelines for everything but it takes 1000 times the so called established editors time to enforce them. Very few people are willing to take up tasks like that. Those who do might be unable to write articles which makes their review more of an outside look. I don't see a way to progress.

Its a kind of public secret that one should avoid working on topics where editors might disagree. I find those to be the more interesting ones.

Luckily we have Trump in power, and not Hillary... I think that he will do whatever is needed.

Hahaha. Yes, the man telling us to inject bleach. Thank goodness.

Don't stop drinking your city water and you'll be alright.