Kizuna Ai had a concert?
Never mind, of course she did.
1 Like
FACTS
Also this
Shit-thinking about making an app thatās basically identical to Instagram v1.
1 Like
I just had a youtube ad get through ublock origin.
I updated the UBO lists and reloaded the page. No ad. Spooky.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.3982/ECTA17674
ā¦The ROI analysis shows negative ROIs at the margin for more than 80% of brands, implying over-investment in advertising by most firms. Further, the overall ROI of the observed advertising schedule is only positive for one third of all brands.
1 Like
Theyāre only testing this offer in a few places. Seems like a good idea. Pay %40 less than the current price, just block ads (which is all you want to do anyway) and you donāt get YouTube Music or whatever.
In addition to not including YouTube music, it also does not include the two other main features of YouTube Premium. It doesnāt include the feature that allows you to download YouTube videos to a local device to watch later. It also doesnāt include the ability to put YouTube videos in the background and have them keep playing (usually for music listening). The first feature Iāve only used maybe twice. The second feature I do use occasionally, but could probably live without if it meant saving %40 of the price.
Iād like to get it to support video makers I watch
but Iām never logged into Google or use the youtube app, but watch videos in my rss reader (my adblocker works there), so I guess it would just go into the money pool?
So I guess I can just stick to supporting them on patreon?
If I didnāt pay for it, I think I would be much like you. Only watching YouTube in browsers that have ad blockers and such. But using the official app is really quite nice (when ads are blocked). So paying for that is kinda worth it to me.
how does it compare to just a video embed in mobile safari?
I really like, that in feedbin, youtube channels are handled just like any other rss feed, without any algorithm determining what it will show me, and no need to subscribe/bell/etc
Itās much better than video embed since you get all the YouTube controls and such. Try it for free and see.
Also, YouTube subscriptions are basically just an RSS feed. The subscription page shows me every uploaded video from every channel I sub, in reverse chronological order. The algorithm is only for the YouTube homepage, recommendation sidebars, etc.
2 Likes
If that becomes available in Germany Iām downgrading in an instant.
I would go with cheaper Premium but having videos continue in the background is actually a big deal.
I thought Iād use the background videos feature a lot, but it turns out I itās a very very minor use case for me. Same with offline videos.
What videos do you find yourself playing in the background? Music? Instructional videos?
Iām probably the person full Premium is for, but Video essays that are essentially podcasts is the big one for my playing in the background.
I also used Google Music before they folded it into Youtube, so the algorithm and I have an understanding of each other.
Still, I think this is probably really nice for people who just donāt want ads. Iāve kind of forgotten that Youtube has ads aside from sponsorships in videos.
1 Like
What YouTube should do is require all videos to specifically mark the section that is the in-video sponsored ad, and/or use machine learning to mark it. If video uploaders donāt mark it, or try to mess with it, threaten them with demonetization. Then if someone pays for YouTube Premium, give them the option to automatically skip those portions of videos. Block not just the YouTube ads, but all the ads.
Scott those in-video sponsorships are there because the youtube Ad-revenue is so garbage for anyone that isnāt regularly trending the front page that sponsorships are the most reliable, lucrative way to make a living on the site for anyone with a small to medium sized audience.
I canāt fathom liking someone enough to watch their content but also wanting google to obliterate their ability to make money on the platform.
Frankly, people take for granted that YouTube pays out at all. They donāt have to pay shit if they donāt want to. Does Twitter pay you for your tweets? If you host a blog on Wordpress.com (instead of self-hosting) does Worpress pay?
YouTube is giving away free unlimited video hosting. Holy shit, can you imagine what that would cost if you had to pay for it or host it yourself? The fact that they sometimes pay people to upload, holy shit, that is NEGATIVE COST video hosting.
They could easily have made YouTube a normal hosting service like Vimeo. There is no right to make money on YouTube. If Google obliterated peopleās ability to make money on YouTube, not only would I not be upset, Iād be thrilled. It would be a great boon to society in terms of getting rid of so much of the trash videos and algorithm-gaming. Instead, people would only make videos they cared to make.
1 Like
Would it clean up a bunch of junk/clickbait videos? Undoubtedly.
Would it also wipe out the ability for a vast number of creative people making niche content found nowhere else to be able to have the time/resources to be able to make this unique content/art/original thoughts? Also, yes.
Every single āsuccessfulā youtuber I follow in the 50-500k subscriber range is able to make it work because of a combination of patreon subs, in-content advertising and the youtube ad revenue. All of them have stated in metavideos/Q&As that the in-video ads are by far the largest source of their operating revenue.
Iām perfectly willing to set through the nth spot for squarespace, brightcellars, eat fresh, etc. if it means I get to keep watching the lovingly made video essays, explainer vids, and research videos I normally watch on youtube. When a channel has overly long/aggressive brand in-content ads it turns me away and I stop watching. Most channels I follow tend to not have this problem so it all works out. I get content I want to watch at the cost of 1 minute of my eyeball time and they get to make a living making that content.
The problem with art made simply out of love is very few people can afford to do so/have the time if they have to work to make a living with all their other obligations on top of it. Being able to make a living off of their art while also maintaining creative freedom is not a bad thing at the cost of 1 in-video ad.
To get at your āITS FREEā hosting, thatās because youtube is using your videos and the user activity for intense data mining to sell off as they do for all their other ventures whereas VIMEO is a video platform where the host paying for the hosting retains complete control over their video and access to it for all time basically. On youtube creators and viewers are both the product being sold upchain.
2 Likes
Under capitalism your free time is āpaidā for by having enough money to not work. If doing things you enjoy can be monetized that affords you the ability to keep making them. Under capitalism, all de-monetizing art does is make it unsustainable to produce.
5 Likes
YouTubeās model is not the way. Public funding of the arts is.
4 Likes
The sponsorships youāre railing against are the fault of Youtubeās model failing. Sponsors and ābrought to you byā are a fact of even public funding of the arts.
Yes, all public funding of arts is maybe a way to go. But how do you live and experience art in the meantime? Iām going to go out on a limb here and say most people canāt really afford to piece-meal their media consumption totally ala-carte.
Also, how do you justify what art is worth funding? Blanket public funding isnāt feasible unless weāre fully transitioned to a post-scarcity model of society. And weāre not there yet.
And I donāt think you can get there from here.
3 Likes