Comment by sigmoid10
4 days ago
He mentions it in this talk for example: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-FENubmZGj8
It also seems like he succeeded, because the original and all reuploads except for some ultra low-quality copies are gone from youtube.
4 days ago
He mentions it in this talk for example: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-FENubmZGj8
It also seems like he succeeded, because the original and all reuploads except for some ultra low-quality copies are gone from youtube.
There's no mention in this of him trying to delete uploads (or I missed it, do you have a timestamp?).
And also, the original lecture isn't a reupload but found on the channel of his own university (both at the time of the first and the second lecture): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
He mentions it several times throughout the talk. It's been a while since I've seen it, so I don't remember the times. But the whole talk basically tries to publicly revert his earlier view from the old presentation. The low quality dupe you found was uploaded years after the original video.
> But the whole talk basically tries to publicly revert his earlier view from the old presentation.
Damn, you need to watch it again. He only updates the advice to say that one needs to be explicit about their intention to remain silent and await an attorney.
The bit about where money from the book would go was hilarious and also a great example of stereotypical attorney humor.