It is indeed a fascinating topic, and it’s completely changed content (for the worse, in my opinion) in the last ten years. I always wonder though, does the dead-eyed creepy smile factor into his metrics analysis? it must, or he wouldn’t do it. something has always felt a little “off” about that guy, but if your entire adult waking life is devoted to the whims of the massive YT content space, I guess you’d probably seem a little kooky.
In the belly of the MrBeast
31–40 of 410 posts
Re: In the belly of the MrBeast
#32First of all – the essay is phenomenal and his book is available online for free – https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/youtube-apparatus/36... > “Communication within the YouTube Apparatus has no meaning.” The rapid feedback loop between creators and audiences (as constructed by platform metrics) means that the system more and more responds to itself. Rather than trying to go somewhere (as is the case with politi…
Baudrillard just gets more relevant every day. Honestly I find it hard to imagine how someone could have media literacy in the modern day without coming to an intuitive understanding of semiotics, whether they know it or not!
Re: In the belly of the MrBeast
#33Watching YouTube anonymously with different browsers and cycling VPNs frequently, I see it quickly ends up suggesting the same videos during the same week. Not similar videos but the same ones. Many of those videos are below 1M and not particularly notable. This is after only watching a couple of videos and those videos are different every session. Either it has some magic fingerprinting I am not aware of (and I go to lengths to avoid this) or it quickly puts me in a bin of generic results.
It feels like the YouTube algorithm is either way more manual than we think or it has rules that end up showing the same things. Or both. Or something more sinister.
I've never, ever clicked on short videos with girls in skimpy clothing doing something "based" and yet it keeps trying to hook me up on those. Even after clicking around very different videos (infosec, low level code, workshop). It's like it refuses to learn what I want to watch.
When watching with my account on YouTube mobile app it keeps trying to push dumber content. I wasted years giving it feedback with "not interested" and "Don't recommend channel". It only keeps pushing videos of channels I liked 1 video 1 time long ago. If I like a DefCon video the algo will pester me with garbage shock content for infosec.
Recently, I liked a cppcon wait free programming presentation and then YouTube started pestering me (again) with the Indian programming 101 videos with terrible sound and rushed video. I had to give it like 10 "not interested" / "Don't recommend channel" for it to stop.
Ironicaly, about a year ago, I started watching a really good ML channel by an Indian guy with great animations an in-depth explanations. Top level. And YouTube rarely suggested his content. I had to go to his channel to look for things or search the channel name and some keywords. It feels like YouTube punishes sophisticated content.
I think there is no true algorithm. Or that it has rules to never suggest me the content I actually want to watch.
And don't get me started with YouTube search.
Sadly most of the content I want to watch is hidden deeply in the garbage pile of YouTube.
Re: In the belly of the MrBeast
#34Not entirely related to MrBeast but related to YouTube. I genuinely miss the older algorithm where after watching a video you would go progressively further down a hole of videos somehow related to the one you just watched. It was quite entertaining and really uncovered fascinating videos.
I don't miss watching a video about a dog herding sheep, and then getting nothing but dog herding sheep videos the next week, heh. But I also don't like the new algorithm, it is as if youtube has assigned me to a demographics and really wants me to watch what other techy males around 30 y.o. watch, constantly trying to give me some rage political content to test the waters.
Re: In the belly of the MrBeast
#35Not entirely related to MrBeast but related to YouTube. I genuinely miss the older algorithm where after watching a video you would go progressively further down a hole of videos somehow related to the one you just watched. It was quite entertaining and really uncovered fascinating videos.
I don't. My experience with their algorithm between 2014 and ~2020 was that autoplay would quickly turn into a form of video diarrhea composed largely of Jordan Peterson and Lex Fridman. Was pretty bizarre because I only watched a few Peterson videos in the beginning, mostly his "Maps Of Meaning" videos which I think are mostly poppycock, and ever since then YouTube would quickly bring me back to his content even tho…
I think they can be paid to do that, but I'm not sure quite how it was arranged.
That, or the Peterson pipeline is a good representation of a local maximum: a fairly obvious way a set of videos can direct people to related videos and increase the appetite for them. That'd produce algorithmic reinforcement without anybody getting paid. Apart from Youtube, content-agnostically hungering for being paid in views on their platform.
It could have sent a very strong signal that 'this content maximally sends a statistically significant number of viewers down MASSIVE youtube rabbitholes never to emerge, therefore take the gamble and try to show everyone the content, ???, profit!'
Re: In the belly of the MrBeast
#36Not entirely related to MrBeast but related to YouTube. I genuinely miss the older algorithm where after watching a video you would go progressively further down a hole of videos somehow related to the one you just watched. It was quite entertaining and really uncovered fascinating videos.
I have no clue how to use YouTube. It seems like as soon as it latches on 3-4 interests of mine, the entire home page is exclusively filled with videos relating to that. I can mark videos as "not interesting" but it doesn't do much. I will see exactly the same videos on the home screen, ones that I'm not interested in and don't plan on watching, for weeks or months sometimes. I'm sure there's plenty of interesting co…
Don't use the homepage, use the subscriptions page
Re: In the belly of the MrBeast
#37So formula for success on YouTube is to be constantly making crazy and then even more crazier videos and hope they become viral so more people discover you? I knew that even 15 years ago when I was watching crazy pranks pulled by French YouTuber Rémi Gaillard[0]....he was so popular back in the day on YouTube. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9mi_Gaillard
The formula for success is more basic than that.
Make people watch more YouTube.
Crazy videos might become passe or burn people out, at which point the 'formula' will change, but the underlying reality is the same. It's a paperclip maximizer. To succeed at YouTube make people watch more YouTube.
Re: In the belly of the MrBeast
#38It's interesting how this is happening in software engineering YouTube content as well. It seems like things like "go sucks rust is great! Now rust sucks and zig is great!!" get way more views since it is basically clickbait for nerds.
It's too bad that nuanced discussion doesn't do too well on social media.
Re: In the belly of the MrBeast
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
It also explains why there's been an alarming trend over the last 10 years of people just getting more vehement about everything.
I think human nature dictates that this opens up a literal market for the opposite. People aren't served by exhausting hysteria, it's just a cheap date, a way to grab low hanging fruit. The more that's focussed on, the more an opportunity arises to cover abandoned needs and wants. The question becomes, is YouTube's algorithm good enough to itself pick up on this new market and serve it? I see no reason it couldn't. I…
> is YouTube's algorithm good enough to itself pick up on this new market
Something I find interesting is that there are good channels producing very high quality (non-extreme or non-intense) content for many interests on YouTube and they coexist with the hyperbolic large channels. I suppose that they make less money, but they do so without a large production crew. I think the algorithm is supporting both types of content (content for myriad mindless viewers, and content for the fewer discerning viewers) and accommodates both scales.
Re: In the belly of the MrBeast
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
It also explains why there's been an alarming trend over the last 10 years of people just getting more vehement about everything.
10? We’ve been getting steadily more polarized since at least the 80s.
So basically since when cable TV came into mainstream existence.