Live data from Hacker News

YouTube monetization analysis

docs.google.com

1–10 of 168 posts

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#2
One thing I haven't figured out from the section 2:

Those tweets claim that demonetized videos don't reach anyone on the homepage. Do they reach anyone on the Subscriptions page?

For me, the Subscriptions page pretty much replaced the homepage, and it would be bad for me as a consumer if the channels I subscribe to don't end up on that page once they upload new content.

Also, I'm mildly annoyed by the lack of consistency with spelling of the word "YouTube" in this analysis. It's neither "Youtube" nor "youtube" (both of those spelling are used multiple times), it's YouTube.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#3
I think it is right to „soft“-censor in this way (i.e. the information is accessible but not promoted). Reality without sorting and filters would be inhuman because market incentives to grab people’s attention would maximally exploit our tribal instincts and thereby completely destabilize our societies. This is already happening and it needs to stop immediately.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#6
The other day I stumbled upon this project:

https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube

It's a federated tube that uses ActivityPub and WebTorrent. I think this platform should be invested in and creators should consider moving. The interests of YouTube and its creators will never be entirely aligned.

Post reply on HN