• ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    27 days ago

    Bad title. The destruction is part of their super shitty method of scanning them, not an afterthought.

    • Mirshe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      27 days ago

      Yup. All because non-destructive scanning is slightly slower and more expensive.

      • lad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        25 days ago

        The way I heard it, it was mostly to satisfy copyright requirements, albeit destructive scanning is easier, indeed