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

YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 550 posts

Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down

#341

Post by dvngnt_ »

xnx wrote: post #217
tasubotadas wrote: post #86

That crazy push for 10min and longer videos was a sole reason why tiktok happened. I still remember that there used to be short and super informative videos before but now everything is so stretched out with low info density

This is exactly right. Youtube has been trying so hard to turn itself into a tv network. Tiktok (for now) is a classic disrupter and has had tremendous success by making something great that people liked. Vine is the more embarassing failure, but YouTube is a close second. For those who dismis tiktok without even trying it, it is hard to convey how fun, interesting, and surprising it can be.

i'm not sure if vine was a true failure. the only difference i see between that and tiktok is the focus on music and the less rigid length requirement.

the users loved vine and it's still quoted in tiktoks

i think it's because china is able to dump money it was able to take off more

Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down

#342

Post by lolinder »

addaon wrote: post #334
joegahona wrote: post #56

I'm nervous about this. YouTube Premium is my favorite and most-used product. As long as ads stay gone and my grandfathered price doesn't change, I'm a very happy user.

The ads haven’t stayed gone, though. I would pay a substantial premium for an option to filter promotions out of videos. I would even pay to just never get promoted videos in my steam. The option to pay for no ads doesn’t exist, today, although it would be easy to ad. Instead, you get to pay to remove one advertiser, and not all the others.

A sponsorship in a video paid directly to the YouTuber is very different from a targeted ad that YouTube runs. It doesn't interrupt the content in unexpected ways (only ways planned by the creator), it's targeted based on content rather than data mining, and the creator usually tries to add a bit of personality to it. Not to mention you can skip them using the regular scrubbing controls rather than being forced to watch at least 5 seconds.

Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down

#343

Post by f1refly »

addaon wrote: post #334
joegahona wrote: post #56

I'm nervous about this. YouTube Premium is my favorite and most-used product. As long as ads stay gone and my grandfathered price doesn't change, I'm a very happy user.

The ads haven’t stayed gone, though. I would pay a substantial premium for an option to filter promotions out of videos. I would even pay to just never get promoted videos in my steam. The option to pay for no ads doesn’t exist, today, although it would be easy to ad. Instead, you get to pay to remove one advertiser, and not all the others.

Sponsorblock is a thing that exists if in-video ads annoy you.

Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down

#345

Post by seydor »

dtx1 wrote: post #35

We can all hate Youtube here for sure but when you listen to for example Linus from LTT he is very adamant that while youtube does have it's fair share of problems, when it comes to compensating creators fairly on their platform, they are much better than almost all others. And I personally enjoy Youtube very much. So much great content for free. If I need to learn about something i find myself looking into youtube f…

Sure, Youtube is talking handsome faces, and that works very well, like it did for TV back then. But AI will ruin all that because you can't beat it. Youtube had a great run, but it is optional for the future

Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down

#346

Post by myko »

josteink wrote: post #304
dahfizz wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay for youtube premium for ad-free youtube and to support creators automatically. Youtube music is not great, but its "free" to me.

That’s literally it. It’s probably inferior to both Spotify and Apple Music, but if you’re going to pay for YouTube premium anyway and are able to endure the weird UI… Then it might save you a small monthly fee you’d otherwise pay to competing services. It’d never survive in the market as it’s own service, and it’s clearly inferior even to its own predecessor Google Music. I have no idea who decided this thing was a…

Google Music was the best of the bunch and I am sad that it is gone. Google internal power struggles strike again.

Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down

#347

Post by addaon »

f1refly wrote: post #343
addaon wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ads haven’t stayed gone, though. I would pay a substantial premium for an option to filter promotions out of videos. I would even pay to just never get promoted videos in my steam. The option to pay for no ads doesn’t exist, today, although it would be easy to ad. Instead, you get to pay to remove one advertiser, and not all the others.

Sponsorblock is a thing that exists if in-video ads annoy you.

I don’t believe there’s a way to run it on AppleTV, though I would love to be wrong.

Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down

#348

Post by andsoitis »

dvngnt_ wrote: post #341
xnx wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly right. Youtube has been trying so hard to turn itself into a tv network. Tiktok (for now) is a classic disrupter and has had tremendous success by making something great that people liked. Vine is the more embarassing failure, but YouTube is a close second. For those who dismis tiktok without even trying it, it is hard to convey how fun, interesting, and surprising it can be.

i'm not sure if vine was a true failure. the only difference i see between that and tiktok is the focus on music and the less rigid length requirement. the users loved vine and it's still quoted in tiktoks i think it's because china is able to dump money it was able to take off more

> i'm not sure if vine was a true failure

it isn’t around anymore.

Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down

#349

Post by addaon »

lolinder wrote: post #342
addaon wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ads haven’t stayed gone, though. I would pay a substantial premium for an option to filter promotions out of videos. I would even pay to just never get promoted videos in my steam. The option to pay for no ads doesn’t exist, today, although it would be easy to ad. Instead, you get to pay to remove one advertiser, and not all the others.

A sponsorship in a video paid directly to the YouTuber is very different from a targeted ad that YouTube runs. It doesn't interrupt the content in unexpected ways (only ways planned by the creator), it's targeted based on content rather than data mining, and the creator usually tries to add a bit of personality to it. Not to mention you can skip them using the regular scrubbing controls rather than being forced to wa…

Yes. It is a somewhat-less-bad form of even more advertising. If you think paying to avoid some advertising is reasonable, why is paying more to avoid more advertising unreasonable?
Post reply on HN