Welcome to the future: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU3GzYcb1g8 Tech companies are an oligopoly with a few actors. Competitions do not offer enough pressure to make them change. Regulation is the only way forward if we do not want to end in a dystopia.
>Regulation is the only way forward if we do not want to end in a dystopia.
I don't dispute any of that. I'm saying that, as a YouTube premium subscriber, I'm not clear exactly what I'm paying for. I mean, I guess fewer ads is better than more ads but I think a paid service should be able to provide me with stronger guarantees.
To the extent that YouTube is just a user-generated content delivery platform, paying for premium makes them stop injecting their own ads. Ads that are part of the videos are outside their purview. It's a defensible, and I think reasonable position to take (and I say this as someone who hates advertising in general).
I mean, I get how Youtube works. I understand there is a distinction to be made, if I cared to make it, between Google's ads and creators' ads. My point is that Youtube premium is not ad-free and explaining how Youtube works doesn't refute that point. You may think it's fine that Youtube premium has ads because that's how Youtube works. I respect that. I still watch Youtube all the time myself.
It's the opposite for me. I've been paying for Youtube Premium since back when they were calling it Youtube Red, and the nag screens haven't gone away. When I'm signed in, Youtube still sticks up banners that remind me that I have exclusive content I don't care about. I still get reminders about all of the "cool" features I don't want. I still have to jump through hoops to archive content that I care about. I'm payin…
Hey did you know you can get notified? Just hit that bell icon. Every single damn video if it’s not the YouTube app telling me it’s the creator, or both.
How many years of human existence have been spent watching creators beg for likes, subscribes, clicking the bell, going to patreon every damn video.
YouTube Premium is literally the service HN wants: honest payment to support a Google service costs and creators publishing on it. It's a sustainable service which actually earns more for creators than ads and data mining (at least according to last CPC values I've seen for video ads). And yet, it seems like the author of this piece still feels entitled to complain about being asked to pay the price of service and th…
Unfortunately, you will pay and still get the behavioral ad tracking. There was a time when cable television's premise was "TV with no commercials!"
Back in the old days, a telephone company listening in on conversations of their customers was a deadly sin. Perhaps we should just classify these big (e.g. >1M users) media companies as telecommunications companies (which they are), and let the law deal with them. This would also solve issues involving the network effect.
The author throws Apple under the bus pointing out a forced full screen modal message advertising Apple TV+. IMO this is an unfair comparison, because the Apple TV+ modal ad came up exactly once and never again (once per Apple TV device). Whereas YouTube is nagging and interrupting the author every day, multiple times a day.
I wish there was a YouTube alternative. I dislike their Apple TV YouTube app enough that I loathe to explore videos. Yet the content creators I watch only distribute on YouTube. I won’t pay for YouTube Premium because I know the quality of the app is still the poor same.
YouTube Premium is literally the service HN wants: honest payment to support a Google service costs and creators publishing on it. It's a sustainable service which actually earns more for creators than ads and data mining (at least according to last CPC values I've seen for video ads). And yet, it seems like the author of this piece still feels entitled to complain about being asked to pay the price of service and th…
No, it's literally the service a monopolist would naturally come to after it killed all competition. First, kill everyone in the field by offering a service for less than what it costs; once the field has been cleared, begin harassing people for their money. This is absolutely despicable. Break Google up, it's way past time.
YouTube Premium is literally the service HN wants: honest payment to support a Google service costs and creators publishing on it. It's a sustainable service which actually earns more for creators than ads and data mining (at least according to last CPC values I've seen for video ads). And yet, it seems like the author of this piece still feels entitled to complain about being asked to pay the price of service and th…
No, it's literally the service a monopolist would naturally come to after it killed all competition. First, kill everyone in the field by offering a service for less than what it costs; once the field has been cleared, begin harassing people for their money. This is absolutely despicable. Break Google up, it's way past time.
Why can't we want to break up Google and fund creators without ads at the same time? Neither of these preclude the other.
Welcome to the future: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU3GzYcb1g8 Tech companies are an oligopoly with a few actors. Competitions do not offer enough pressure to make them change. Regulation is the only way forward if we do not want to end in a dystopia.
>Regulation is the only way forward if we do not want to end in a dystopia. but what kind of regulation? The Access Act?[0] [0]: https://www.scribd.com/document/431507473/GOE19968
Good ol' friggin' Sherman Act. Break them up, all of them, to small pieces.
How would antitrust here look like? It's a subscription for a direct service... what's the monopoly solution here? Ordering Google to store and serve videos for free?
How about breaking up Google? Seems like that'd solve a lot more problems than it'd create.
Which problems mentioned in the original article would that solve? Concretely? Would stand alone YouTube not want payment for their service?