Very bad indeed. It also works if you move the mouse very fast to the list, but it's a bit hard to achieve.

The only DRM Firefox understands "natively" is the HTML5 video DRM API (widevine by default)

Definitely stupid to use for informative videos available to the public

What browser is that? I tested Ungoogled Chromium and stock Firefox. Hovering over “direct download” shows nothing.

Mine says JavaScript when a link executes a script. I'd like to know more... But not enough to come back here and check for more.

Either it’s dependable and useful, or it’s not.

Or it’s worse yet, causes injury.

When they realize there’s (a chatbot giving) unreliable info on their website, they should scrap or replace it.

That’s not what I’m finding. You overestimate their competence, but even if they have enough competence to scrap the bot, that only fixes future outcomes. It does not remedy past blunders.

Not add fine prints explaining it’s unreliable and people shouldn’t rely on it.

You seen to not be grasping the post. Adding a disclaimer is in fact what they have done here.

In Canada, the disclaimer itself would be misinfo (that is, it IS legally binding b/c the court ruled that the airline had to comply with the bot’s words).

Stop wasting everyone’s time.

Stop wasting everone’s time with uninformative emotional drivel.

Either it's dependable and useful, or it's not.

When they realize there's (a chatbot giving) unreliable info on their website, they should scrap or replace it. Not add fine prints explaining it's unreliable and people shouldn't rely on it. Stop wasting everyone's time.

Which jurisdiction are you referring to, exactly?

Is Canada the only country to make companies responsible for what their bots agree to?

So companies now have bots on their official customer engagement channels, but they are not binding. Semi atonomous vehicles are ferrying passengers but are not liable in a crash. Bots are writing legal papers, but the precedents may or may not exist. Term papers are being written by bots, but are factually inaccurate or blatantly false. Recently an AI summary claimed Novak Djokovic had beaten Carlos alcaraz in the us open, only they are actually meeting tonight. Under what circumstances can I trust ai?

Someone tell me once again how this thing is supposed to replace humans and make our jobs easier...? Anyone?