Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube Will Remove Videos of Creators Who Don’t Sign Its Red Subscription Deal

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 201 posts

Re: YouTube Will Remove Videos of Creators Who Don’t Sign Its Red Subscription Deal

#171

Post by krotton »

scrollaway wrote: post #149
intopieces wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"As such, the only way language could change to accommodate this usage would be if "loose" became an alternate spelling for "lose" The comment I replied to mentioned that the mistake had been made "consistently upstream" -- I took this to mean that he has seen this mistake made multiple times by multiple people, which would indicate an alternate spelling has emerged, or that the two words have come to be spelled the…

> I took this to mean that he has seen this mistake made multiple times by multiple people, which would indicate an alternate spelling has emerged "I've seen this happen many times" doesn't mean a new spelling has emerged, by several orders of magnitude. If my pals and I decided to go wander around online forums, spelling "fish" with -sch, that wouldn't make it magically correct.

An entire nation has long ago decided to go with this spelling, so I'd say it's quite correct in some circles ;).

Re: YouTube Will Remove Videos of Creators Who Don’t Sign Its Red Subscription Deal

#173

Post by mattlutze »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #77
ars wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yah, Google did the right thing here. You can't say "this service has no ads, then include ads", and you can't say "if you subscribe you see less videos". They really had no other good choice except force them to sign up, or loose revenue sharing status.

I think it will make YouTube much smaller - if a channel has been abandoned then content is also gone. Too bad, I like to see lectures and documentaries, or some old and forgotten music, so all this will also go ... Maybe they want all the rarely viewed videos gone so that they can cut on storage costs? Also if you ripped and posted some old disk then you are not holding any rights so this content is also gone.

At least a few years ago, thinner media catalog with deeper viewership ends up being better financially. Some friends and I looked at what it'd take to put up a competing service and there's a lot of cost in all the CDN traffic, when a video gets dropped off from a regional distribution node then has to be pulled again from storage. I'm sure YouTube don't need to worry about it so much, but a higher eyeball-per-MB means more ad revenue per MB and lower infrastructure costs, I think.

Re: YouTube Will Remove Videos of Creators Who Don’t Sign Its Red Subscription Deal

#174

Post by scrollaway »

Merovius wrote: post #164
scrollaway wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is (not my personal channel obviously). And I couldn't care less how they ask me, I care about how it affects the users. And frankly, your thinly veiled attempt to defend them asking me if I'm unhappy that they "didn't wine & dine" with me is utterly disgusting. This is a bad move for users and a bad move for content creators. Blindly defending Google is very passé, you know.

> And I couldn't care less how they ask me, I care about how it affects the users. And frankly, your thinly veiled attempt to defend them asking me if I'm unhappy that they "didn't wine & dine" with me is utterly disgusting. This is a bad move for users and a bad move for content creators. Why? You haven't yet explained what's bad about it. > Blindly defending Google is very passé, you know. Blindly attacking Google,…

> Why? You haven't yet explained what's bad about it.

The other comments do a great job of that. I don't need to repeat them.

Re: YouTube Will Remove Videos of Creators Who Don’t Sign Its Red Subscription Deal

#176

Post by scrollaway »

bad_user wrote: post #169
scrollaway wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is (not my personal channel obviously). And I couldn't care less how they ask me, I care about how it affects the users. And frankly, your thinly veiled attempt to defend them asking me if I'm unhappy that they "didn't wine & dine" with me is utterly disgusting. This is a bad move for users and a bad move for content creators. Blindly defending Google is very passé, you know.

I don't understand. How does it affect users? Or seems to me that this is a pro-user action. People are gradually using ad-blockers because video ads are fucking annoying. People (like myself and my wife) are also using YouTube downloaders to have some content available offline. YouTube Red is exactly what I wanted and if it didn't happen, oh well, I can go back to being a pirate.

If you looked at my comment history you'd see I'm extremely against ad-driven business models so I welcome the idea of this subscription service. What I don't welcome is how they go about it. Forcing your channels to adopt your policy and silently removing videos you could have accessed yesterday is awful.

And you seem to forget that users are often content creators as well on youtube. This is akin to saying "This doesn't affect users on our website, just a subset of them".

Re: YouTube Will Remove Videos of Creators Who Don’t Sign Its Red Subscription Deal

#177

Post by intopieces »

scrollaway wrote: post #149
intopieces wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"As such, the only way language could change to accommodate this usage would be if "loose" became an alternate spelling for "lose" The comment I replied to mentioned that the mistake had been made "consistently upstream" -- I took this to mean that he has seen this mistake made multiple times by multiple people, which would indicate an alternate spelling has emerged, or that the two words have come to be spelled the…

> I took this to mean that he has seen this mistake made multiple times by multiple people, which would indicate an alternate spelling has emerged "I've seen this happen many times" doesn't mean a new spelling has emerged, by several orders of magnitude. If my pals and I decided to go wander around online forums, spelling "fish" with -sch, that wouldn't make it magically correct.

>"that wouldn't make it magically correct"

It wouldn't make it standard, but I argue that if the person you mean to receive the message recieves it using that combination of letters, what's considered "correct" by x number of people is irrelevant.

Hence "correcting" someone when you knew what they meant is absurd.

Re: YouTube Will Remove Videos of Creators Who Don’t Sign Its Red Subscription Deal

#178

Post by eva1984 »

anonbanker wrote: post #175

Youtube is ripe for disruption right now. All these attempts to monetize will simply drive their users elsewhere.

If youtube fails to monetize, I think any sane VCs should avoid dumping any money into this area, period.

Re: YouTube Will Remove Videos of Creators Who Don’t Sign Its Red Subscription Deal

#180

Post by eva1984 »

lmedinas wrote: post #170
eva1984 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think youtube gaming is decent, why do you think it is screwed up?

First of all it's only available in US :) second the comment system is weak compared to Twitch not to mention that they will never be able to make a community around it like Twitch did.

Forget about the US only thing...Cann't argue with that really.
Post reply on HN