211–220 of 396 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is their monopoly power over video distribution on the internet: disgruntled users have nowhere else to go. All alternatives are stifled by the monopoly.
People have tons of alternatives. The problem is that ad subsidies pay more than most viewers are willing to pay after generations of internet users have been conditioned to think of content as free.
The problem is not the content of the video, crypto or not. The problem is not that YT moderates aggressively (it doesn't do enough IMHO) or even how it moderates. The problem is that there is no serious appeals process, and no third party oversight of moderation decisions. This is true for all the big platforms. How do we fix that, IDK, but probably at the government level.
Without class action lawsuits google (and other faangs) won't fix it's censor and appeal process. Maybe even on the European court. That's it's doable you can see with GitHub, which does have proper support for it's huge userbase.
> I am a paid Youtube Music subscriber The saying goes that if you don't paid for it then you are the product. So I subscribed to YouTube Music family plan, thinking I won't be the product. But my wife's account will always return an error saying that she is in a different country or something. I tried to reach the support for help but never got any reply. In the end I cancelled the subscription. Google is simply too…
yeah thats the tricky thing. Google makes $256/user per year domestically in ad revenue. That's $21/month. https://mondaynote.com/the-arpus-of-the-big-four-dwarf-every... it's really hard not to be the product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As cliche as it sounds, YouTube creators are not the customer, the advertisers are.
I've been paying for YouTube Premium for years. I pay for YouTube TV. I pay for Google Photos. I pay for Google Apps for Business. In all, I pay Google north of $1,000 every year. Whether Google likes it or not, I AM their customer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this like a parody of the Dropbox thing? Web3 is beyond the hill of magic vs technology for me currently, it's on the tolearn list. Is that actually the alternative to YouTube?
It's an alternative to centralized video hosting, I wouldn't go as far as call it an alternative to youtube because it's the video platform you go to if you want the exposure, accessibility, and possibly monetization. That said, there's other (centralized) video hosting solutions you can go to if you're less technically inclined. Vimeo is a popular choice.
It's the web3 part that's not on my radar yet, honestly I'm happy with YouTube as-is until someone figures out discoverability
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a professional programmer and like....I understand some of those words? If I had to guess, I'd say this is a joke, purely because of how nonsensical it sounds. Host it on what? Pair it with ETH? Like...the cryptocurrency? How does that work? How does that make money? Maybe I'm getting old. Scary world out there.
Well, then I guess you can be a professional at something and still be unaware of all the tools at your disposal. Also just because you don't know something as a "professional" doesn't mean anything :D it's more like, oh I don't know what that I'd, im gonna go read the docs. But instead, I've never heard of it, its dumb...
I guess for a different comparison you could be a professional truck driver and still be completely unaware that we have cars that almost drive themselves with the right tech and conditions. It's just not something you normally come across in your line of work.
The problem is not the content of the video, crypto or not. The problem is not that YT moderates aggressively (it doesn't do enough IMHO) or even how it moderates. The problem is that there is no serious appeals process, and no third party oversight of moderation decisions. This is true for all the big platforms. How do we fix that, IDK, but probably at the government level.
I don't believe "This is true for all the big platforms." I saw lots of stories here about Google, but I don't remember see one about how Microsoft blocks user account. Did I miss? Anyway. Couple years ago, I received several email notifications from Microsoft about someone tried to reset my account password. I got a little bit concerned and eventually sent a feedback to Microsoft asking what I need to do. Surprise!…
Paid email has many great providers like fastmail..
Microsoft doesn't offer a video platform so it doesn't really apply.
The problem is not the content of the video, crypto or not. The problem is not that YT moderates aggressively (it doesn't do enough IMHO) or even how it moderates. The problem is that there is no serious appeals process, and no third party oversight of moderation decisions. This is true for all the big platforms. How do we fix that, IDK, but probably at the government level.
Sue them in small claims court for the value of your music library.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The key is knowing enough about the technology to know that none of that works. IPFS doesn’t solve the storage or bandwidth problems people use YouTube to avoid, so you’re still going to need to pay for hosting, which could be done cheaper without the blockchain overhead. Similarly, an NFT doesn’t prevent everyone from accessing it so you can’t force people to pay for the cost of their access and it doesn’t protect y…
> [...] you’re still going to need to pay for hosting, which could be done cheaper without the blockchain overhead. IPFS has no blockchain, and the overhead of transferring files is incredibly low thanks to lib-p2p. > Similarly, an NFT doesn’t prevent everyone from accessing it so you can’t force people to pay for the cost of their access and it doesn’t protect your ownership — that’s done by copyright laws enforced…
Filecoin does, however, while you'll note was proposed as part of this. The problem with IPFS is the general one with P2P: there aren't enough people who are going to use their storage + network capacity to provide a CDN for strangers, especially with the personal legal risks to do so, and it's slower than a high-quality professionally-managed service like YouTube or Vimeo. That means that if you care about long-term availability, you need to pay for hosting and that likely will also require paying for bandwidth if the content becomes popular and/or you want to provide a competitive experience rather than simply pure archival.
> > Similarly, an NFT doesn’t prevent everyone from accessing it so you can’t force people to pay for the cost of their access and it doesn’t protect your ownership — that’s done by copyright laws enforced by the government.
> By itself it does not, coupled with other mechanisms, it can.
Yes, but that's like saying that if you buy a chainsaw and a loaf of bread you can make sandwiches. Either way you need to build and operate a system to store the video and provide authenticated access so the NFT is simply making that more expensive and adding additional failure modes.
> Access control to personal files is very much removed from where I expect government to exercise their own control.
This is like saying you don't expect the government to control access to your house. That's technically true but only if you define the problem so narrowly to omit the fact that the government provides the legal framework and enforcement which allows you to do so reasonably. For example, if you're trying to get paid for content someone will likely try to snag a copy and present it somewhere else with their ads; blockchains can't prevent that and will limit revenue only to the extent that the viewers care to validate an NFT. What does work is that you can send something like a DMCA request and get a prompt response from a hosting service because they know that the penalties for not doing so are enforced by the government rather than just your personal clout.