Something strange on Youtube/Google/Gmail

Puppy related raves and general interest that doesn't fit anywhere else
Message
Author
ITSMERSH

Something strange on Youtube/Google/Gmail

#1 Post by ITSMERSH »

Hi.

I have a You tube account (my signature) which was created using the equal email address used for my RSH account on this here forum. I couldn't log into the RSH account and since requesting a new forum password didn't work, I tried to register by a different mail address.

So, I created and chose a mail address at gmail.com to register again to the forum. This didn't work - so far, so known by a few of you members.

I discovered lately: after creating this gmail account, my login into Youtube changed from that RSH mail address to the gmail address. Even though I did NOT register anywhere else, I'm now able to upload Pictures/Images to Google (via the Google Apps popup menu), and am also able to share them and/or to keep them private. :shock:

I don't understand this. Anyone any clue of what happened?

Is there some more I'm, registered to by now?

User avatar
6502coder
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon 23 Mar 2009, 18:07
Location: Western United States

#2 Post by 6502coder »

When you signed up for a Gmail account, you were assimilated into the Google universe, and since Google owns YouTube, your Gmail account became associated with YouTube.

I have had a similar experience. Before Google acquired YouTube, I had a non-Gmail mail account that I used to log into YouTube. Sometime after Google acquired YouTube, I got a Gmail mail account and now I can use both my non-Gmail mail account and my Gmail account to log into YouTube.

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#3 Post by mikeb »

Yes thats what they do ever since they bought you tube...did something similar to me many years ago but was the password. It seemed like it was done through cookies at the time...so if it had been a shared computer then that would have been fun as my password would have been given to someone else's you tube account

I closed our Youtube and later Gmail account.... they are not safe or respectful in how they handle private data basically.

mike

User avatar
greengeek
Posts: 5789
Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2010, 09:34
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

#4 Post by greengeek »

All HTML5 enabled browsers permit Google to snipe any/all of your personal information.

Any time you access a Google owned site (eg YT) or any Google-Analytics associated site your cookies and personal data are passed to Google.

They choose to use dark patterns to then force you to use their preferred login methods to access YT and other Google offerings.

I tried to log into YT using a friends original email address (associated with their YT channel) and it kept trying to force me to reveal (or connect with) their gmail or Facebook identity.

I did not do so (as I did not have their permission to do so) and then I used the browser "back" button to see if there were other alternatives - then lo and behold - it jumped me into their YT page (presumably suddenly deciding to accept the previously supplied non-Gmail address).

If i had accepted the myopic path Google put before me I would have signed in with the Gmail or Facebook account requested - however - Google did (somehow) actually permit me to ignore their dark pattern.

They just seem creepy these days - only slightly paranoid minds (like mine :-) ) are permitted freedom of choice.

Normal people trying to do what's normal get abused by Googles mirages.

User avatar
perdido
Posts: 1528
Joined: Mon 09 Dec 2013, 16:29
Location: ¿Altair IV , Just north of Eeyore Junction.?

#5 Post by perdido »

They just seem creepy these days - only slightly paranoid minds (like mine Smile ) are permitted freedom of choice.

Normal people trying to do what's normal get abused by Googles mirages.
Its the same pattern that dope dealers use, give free samples, addict the users and then cut them off.

I feel sorry for the google addicts.

.

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#6 Post by mikeb »

If similar techniques were used to gain your paypal login information for example the police would be brought into play to deal with fraudulent illegal activity.

mike

User avatar
rufwoof
Posts: 3690
Joined: Mon 24 Feb 2014, 17:47

#7 Post by rufwoof »

Google is spyware. Period. To hinder that one of the Answers in this link shows how to add /etc/hosts entries to block google IP's https://superuser.com/questions/1135339 ... hosts-file

Also ensure you're not using 8.8.8.8 or other Google owned/controlled name resolvers (DNS). My ISP hub is fixed ... uses its (ISP's) DNS, but I have another router than connects to that hub that all other devices are then fed, and where that router permits setting the DNS (that is set to use one of the privacy based alternative DNS IP's i.e. neither our ISP nor Google).

Without google, even non-google web pages can be much much quicker. Yahoo news/finance for instance web pages are near unusable normally, but with google blocked in /etc/hosts they're more like 'normal' web pages (indicative of the extent of google spyware).

/etc/hosts can be swapped in/our, so keeping two versions and moving one/other into /etc/hosts as/when desired facilitates still being able to use google sites if/when there is a need to do so.

I add Steven Blacks and others hosts file entries in addition to that ... so as good as a adblock'er
[size=75]( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) :wq[/size]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1028256#1028256][size=75]Fatdog multi-session usb[/url][/size]
[size=75][url=https://hashbang.sh]echo url|sed -e 's/^/(c/' -e 's/$/ hashbang.sh)/'|sh[/url][/size]

scsijon
Posts: 1596
Joined: Thu 24 May 2007, 03:59
Location: the australian mallee
Contact:

#8 Post by scsijon »

I was pointed at this some time ago and know it works as someone from the dark net tried to trojan me and failed.

http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm

and it works for all systems.

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#9 Post by mikeb »

Yep bocking in hosts is a winner....gets my vote. As soon as I added a couple of their domains one site I use regularly was much snappier.
I also found blocking facebook removed a fair number of ads too.
Look at the page source in the headers for possible candidates seems to work for me.

I used to block in the router but now I only have a broadband dongle which tends to a bit wide open so I use the hosts method instead. Easy enough to make a list and add it on all yer machines (who on here does not have at least 4 computers and twenty operating systems :wink: )

mike

User avatar
Colonel Panic
Posts: 2171
Joined: Sat 16 Sep 2006, 11:09

#10 Post by Colonel Panic »

Thanks for this! I'm going to give it a try soon as I've noticed some of the sites I visit loading shedloads of adverts, pop-ups etc., and slowing things down to a crawl.

"who on here does not have at least 4 computers and twenty operating systems?"

Mike; just one machine in my case, but at least a dozen operating systems at the moment; (what else do you do with 320 GB and no Windows to fill the hard drive? :) ). Unlike Windows too it's free to try a Linux distro apart from the cost of a DVD-R disk.

There's another, similar file at this link though I haven't tested it yet to see how well it works;

https://someonewhocares.org/hosts/

[EDIT: I've just installed the hosts file in my /etc folder and can see the difference immediately; news sites load much more snappily.]
Gigabyte M68MT-52P motherboard, AMD Athlon II X4 630, 5.8 GB of DDR3 RAM and a 250 GB Hitachi hard drive running Ubuntu 16.04.6, MX-19.2, Peppermint 10, PCLinuxOS 20.02, LXLE 18.04.3, Pardus 19.2, exGENT 200119, Bionic Pup 8.0 and Xenial CE 7.5 XL.

User avatar
rufwoof
Posts: 3690
Joined: Mon 24 Feb 2014, 17:47

#11 Post by rufwoof »

Simple wget/ftp of https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Steve ... ster/hosts as a initial /etc/hosts works for me. Later I add others to that and keep 2 versions, one that includes google/fb being blocked, another than doesn't, along with a script to flip between the two.
[size=75]( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) :wq[/size]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1028256#1028256][size=75]Fatdog multi-session usb[/url][/size]
[size=75][url=https://hashbang.sh]echo url|sed -e 's/^/(c/' -e 's/$/ hashbang.sh)/'|sh[/url][/size]

User avatar
Colonel Panic
Posts: 2171
Joined: Sat 16 Sep 2006, 11:09

#12 Post by Colonel Panic »

rufwoof wrote:Simple wget/ftp of https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Steve ... ster/hosts as a initial /etc/hosts works for me. Later I add others to that and keep 2 versions, one that includes google/fb being blocked, another than doesn't, along with a script to flip between the two.
Thanks for the info. I don't know all the links for blocking google, but here are those for blocking twitter and facebook;

https://gist.github.com/djaiss/85a0ada83e6bca68e41e

[EDIT: here's the google blocking file, but it's big;

https://superuser.com/questions/1135339 ... hosts-file
]
Gigabyte M68MT-52P motherboard, AMD Athlon II X4 630, 5.8 GB of DDR3 RAM and a 250 GB Hitachi hard drive running Ubuntu 16.04.6, MX-19.2, Peppermint 10, PCLinuxOS 20.02, LXLE 18.04.3, Pardus 19.2, exGENT 200119, Bionic Pup 8.0 and Xenial CE 7.5 XL.

User avatar
Colonel Panic
Posts: 2171
Joined: Sat 16 Sep 2006, 11:09

#13 Post by Colonel Panic »

For completeness's sake here's a link to an enormous hosts file (over 17 MB), which is somewhat older than the other ones linked to so far (March instead of October this year). I haven't yet found any advantages to using this one instead of the 460 KB one but somebody else might.

http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download
Gigabyte M68MT-52P motherboard, AMD Athlon II X4 630, 5.8 GB of DDR3 RAM and a 250 GB Hitachi hard drive running Ubuntu 16.04.6, MX-19.2, Peppermint 10, PCLinuxOS 20.02, LXLE 18.04.3, Pardus 19.2, exGENT 200119, Bionic Pup 8.0 and Xenial CE 7.5 XL.

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#14 Post by mikeb »

Great stuff and some interesting information at those links.

Well computers are useful though the ratio of 2 to one here may be deemed overkill now.
And yes the huge drives demanded for windows now mean oodles of room.... I mean 6GB for hibernate and swap on the library windows 7 machines seems silly to me.(NT4 was 80MB installed) A guy in a computer shop looked at me funny as I wanted a 64GB one and he only had 256GB...as in how could you possibly run anything on that.
I failed to see the point in mentioning what I did on a 4 GB scsi drive or even no drive at all and only a cd recorder. :wink:
Do smartphones count? Thing is they are subject to nearly as much crud but unless rooted are harder to block sites with...I tried a couple of methods but failed.

mike

User avatar
Burn_IT
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sat 12 Aug 2006, 19:25
Location: Tamworth UK

#15 Post by Burn_IT »

The space required for true hibernate has NOTHING to do with the OS being run.
It is just a dump of the memory to disk and depends on how much memory is installed NOT the OS.
"Just think of it as leaving early to avoid the rush" - T Pratchett

User avatar
Colonel Panic
Posts: 2171
Joined: Sat 16 Sep 2006, 11:09

#16 Post by Colonel Panic »

mikeb wrote:Great stuff and some interesting information at those links.

A guy in a computer shop looked at me funny as I wanted a 64GB one and he only had 256GB...as in how could you possibly run anything on that.
64GB? I used to have 80 GB on my Dell Optiplex machine (which I had between 2012 and 2014) and really for me that was enough to manage with.
mikeb wrote:I failed to see the point in mentioning what I did on a 4 GB scsi drive or even no drive at all and only a cd recorder. :wink:

Do smartphones count? Thing is they are subject to nearly as much crud but unless rooted are harder to block sites with...I tried a couple of methods but failed.
So far I've resisted getting a smartphone, but I do know there's a market for additional storage;

https://www.toptenreviews.com/computers ... ge-review/
mikeb wrote:NT4 was 80MB installed.

mike
Didn't know that Mike, but I do recall that NT was considered a resource hog in its day. Microsoft Office 4.3 (for Windows 3.1) was about 28 MB, and there isn't much I need from an office suite that it didn't do (apart from maybe recognise and respond to web links and e-mail addresses).

On the subject of hosts files, I've settled on Andy Short's one for the time being as it seems to work well and, although big, isn't 17.2 MB. It can be found at;

https://hostsfile.mine.nu/

Andy also provides some helpful information on his page about hosts files and how to install the one he provides in different operating systems (Windows XP doesn't like big hosts files, for example, but he provides a workaround for that).
Gigabyte M68MT-52P motherboard, AMD Athlon II X4 630, 5.8 GB of DDR3 RAM and a 250 GB Hitachi hard drive running Ubuntu 16.04.6, MX-19.2, Peppermint 10, PCLinuxOS 20.02, LXLE 18.04.3, Pardus 19.2, exGENT 200119, Bionic Pup 8.0 and Xenial CE 7.5 XL.

ITSMERSH

#17 Post by ITSMERSH »

Wow! :shock:

Lots of replys! :)

Thanks for all that information! :)

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#18 Post by mikeb »

The space required for true hibernate has NOTHING to do with the OS being run.
It is just a dump of the memory to disk and depends on how much memory is installed NOT the OS.
Never said it did...the simple point was the large amount of space gobbled up by 'modern' windows.
Hibernate is a clunky workaround for a grossly bloated operating system...i dont see puppy needing it and my XP boots in 20 seconds from off on a pentium 3 which seems comparable to opening up from hibernate on a quad core item.

The topic suggests that web pages run faster with less data to handle.... I believe that is a general rule for computing devices. Large files are created from somewhere...large amounts of ram have to be filled from somewhere, bloated webpages have to transfer data from somewhere etc.... all takes time and all that data has to be handled...more data = more processing.if that data is superfluous to the task in hand its a hindrance.

Take a Porsche and fill its boot/trunk with concrete and it tends a bit less sporty.

Ah analogy joy :)

mike

User avatar
Galbi
Posts: 1098
Joined: Wed 21 Sep 2011, 22:32
Location: Bs.As. - Argentina.

#19 Post by Galbi »

Thanks to this script:
https://host-flash.com/
my hosts file now weights 41.5 MiB, :shock:
despite that, everything seems to run fine.

Saludos.
Remember: [b][i]"pecunia pecuniam parere non potest"[/i][/b]

User avatar
Burn_IT
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sat 12 Aug 2006, 19:25
Location: Tamworth UK

#20 Post by Burn_IT »

Mike
Can you actually create a post without pouring shit over Windows?? or is it an obsession with you??
"Just think of it as leaving early to avoid the rush" - T Pratchett

Post Reply