81–90 of 119 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? They're hosting content you want to see? Can't you just watch their ads?
Some people consider ads immoral and predatory. If we're lucky enough to know how insidious they are, and have the means to block them, we should.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? They're hosting content you want to see? Can't you just watch their ads?
Some of us just genuinely hate autoplay ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also need to ban users with multiple infringements and if the problem gets large enough, implement an automated detection system. YouTube didn't build ContentID out of the kindness of their heart.
> YouTube didn't build ContentID out of the kindness of their heart. It built it to settle a lawsuit that was on appeal that it kept winning (at summary judgement, twice) against Viacom, largely because YouTube’s long term goals were better served by friendly relations with big copyright holders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of us just genuinely hate autoplay ads.
Yeah I mean who likes them? But if I like the content on a site, I'll watch them. Who knows, maybe I will see something I want to buy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's pretty simple and I always wondered why they didn't do it sooner. Reddit is already one of the most popular sites on the Internet - but since it was just an aggregator it constantly took users off their site. Now they're owning more and more of the content and keeping users there longer. Sure, video is expensive, but now they have a much bigger revenue opportunity. They can't monetize videos they don't h…
Yes, well subreddits are starting to be hostile to reddits own image service getting to the point that the service is banned on some of them. I thought that their own image service would bring back missed revenue from imgur (which it has appeared to do since it has caught on). Unfortunately to do this they designed it to disallow direct image links (and the reason that it is banned).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I mean who likes them? But if I like the content on a site, I'll watch them. Who knows, maybe I will see something I want to buy.
reddit is the only site that i have white listed because the ads on it aren't obtrusive. If i have to watch a 30 second ad for a 15 second video, i personally find it annoying and obtrusive. I'll gladly donate to reddit via other means to show my support.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The proliferation of HTML5 video support in browsers has made the player massively less of a concern than it used to be. I recently led a move of my employer's video hosting (many TBs worth of video) from a third-party platform to an in-house solution and it was quite a lot simpler than one might expect. Video is super expensive in terms of bandwidth, but the technical pipeline for ingesting, transcoding, delivering,…
>extremely simple Yet nearly every time I use a player that isn't YouTube's it stinks. Cursor doesn't disappear. Inconsistent interaction model (does double click move in/out of full screen? Do the arrow keys work? Does 'm' mute? Etc.) It's not just about the ability to play a video, you have to get the UX right as well, and most don't.
Just trying to look at images with their built-in image hosting is not the greatest experience - two clicks to view the original image, compared to one with other image hosts (yeah, I know, RES; but I browse on mobile too). Combine this with the highly frequent "we're overloaded" messages, and I'm not really looking forward to their attempt at hosting videos as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I mean who likes them? But if I like the content on a site, I'll watch them. Who knows, maybe I will see something I want to buy.
reddit is the only site that i have white listed because the ads on it aren't obtrusive. If i have to watch a 30 second ad for a 15 second video, i personally find it annoying and obtrusive. I'll gladly donate to reddit via other means to show my support.