41–50 of 147 posts
The thing that I do see on every video that reminds me to hit the like button is seeing the counter move. I'm way more likely to see that and think "yeah I do like this video, I should hit this button" when I see the counter change than I am to have a similar reaction when explicitly told by the person in the video to do it.
Given that YouTube uses the like and subscribe buttons as inputs for its recommendation algorithm, doesn't this feature just aid and abet content creators in gaming YouTube's system?
Maybe I have just become more attentive to these things or they have become more prevalent, but I notice this blatant optimization for the Algorithm(tm) more and more. I guess this is the meta you need to play in order to stand out/make it in the torrent of content that is YT or social media in general. I also see this as an example of Goodhart's law as creators try to optimize for reach and thus likes etc. while the original intention of the YT Algorithm(tm) was (or should have been) to serve you content you will enjoy.
I know this is just a fun little easter egg, but features like this seems a little risky to me. It calls attention to the fact that Youtube isn't just serving me videos neutrally, it knows what is being said in those videos at the exact moment it is said. It highlights how much Google analyses the content of its videos in a way that more neutral features like automatic transcripts don't and in turn how much that can…
I wish they used something more than that stupid minimalist icon theme. I have again and again smashed the button only to unlike a video
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It calls attention to the fact that Youtube isn't just serving me videos neutrally, it knows what is being said in those videos at the exact moment it is said. It highlights how much Google analyses the content of its videos in a way that more neutral features like automatic transcripts don't and in turn how much that can teach Google about me based on the videos I watch. How else do you think the "up next" and "re…
Up Next and recommended videos don't require understanding the content of the videos. They could, as an example, find other users that watch similar videos and pick a video you haven't seen out of the things the other users have watched. It wouldn't surprise me if they use transcripts, but neither feature strictly requires it. I think the real risk here is users extrapolating from "YouTube can automatically respond t…
Don’t get started with the “it’s a slippery slope” kind of shit. Short of living in some society where it’s every man for himself, kids shouldn’t be playing lotteries
I don't blame creators for doing this: creators have to say this to compete (this is an example of Moloch[1]). The point isn't to hurt creators who do this, it's to remove the incentive so that creators no longer have to do this. So I think the proper way to do this is to announce that videos that ask for likes or subscribes will be penalized, and only penalize videos that come out after the announcement.
But, YouTube serves advertisers, not viewers, so they'll never do anything that benefits viewers but hurts advertisers.
[1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/
I know this is just a fun little easter egg, but features like this seems a little risky to me. It calls attention to the fact that Youtube isn't just serving me videos neutrally, it knows what is being said in those videos at the exact moment it is said. It highlights how much Google analyses the content of its videos in a way that more neutral features like automatic transcripts don't and in turn how much that can…
I have recently been wondering how it is possible that they can make features like that, and provide closed captions, but that they continue to insert ads halfway a speaker’s sentence.