141–150 of 292 posts
Ha! My first reaction from this article is that someone is up for the next promotion cycle.
Come on, it was a team effort. It took at least six designers to come up with that new color.
> Robyn: To give YouTube a sense of motion, we created a dynamic red-to-magenta gradient. For the second color, orange and yellow were strong contenders, but magenta felt like the most natural pairing with our new red. Interestingly, magenta doesn't often appear in the natural world, so it symbolizes the imagination and evolution that YouTube embodies. We also placed the gradient at a 45-degree angle with magenta on…
I'll leave you with this particular critic's review of a piece of music by Gottschalk (a famous 19th century American composer). They are like "chants of the New World, chants which bring tears to our eyes, so much do they breathe of sadness and simplicity. One transports us to forests. . . another represents faithfully the indolent Creole swinging in his hammock. .. and what shall we say of the third? Does it not seem to be overwhelmed by that solemn silence and that solitude which one feels traversing those vast prairies at the foot of the Rocky Mountains?"
IMHO the reason LLMs are so proficient at these kinds of vapid flights of fantasy is that they must have ingested the entire fanfic library on Wattpad.
How to say you’re a monopoly without saying you are a monopoly, “Our refresh journey began by pinpointing YouTube’s most outdated elements through research. Color ranked in the top three, so we knew that evolving our palette would make an immediate and significant impact.”
Sorry, how exactly is that implying a monopoly? They're talking about the color palette... If anything this just means YouTube is relatively "finished" software. Of course i don't disagree that they are in fact a monopoly. I just don't think this post about colors is somehow a dog whistle for it.
An ad interrupted my video today, it was Tom Hanks in a podcast talking about his prostate. The ad was (not so obviously) AI generated; both an AI clone of his voice and an AI-generated face-swap/ lip replacement. This seemed pretty surprising because it was fairly convincing. He looks like he is saying the dialog of the ad. It's surprising because there's no way the creator of the ad got Hanks' approval to use his l…
Is it a reasonable argument to say you can pay $20/month or whatever it is in your country and avoid ad's altogether?
An ad interrupted my video today, it was Tom Hanks in a podcast talking about his prostate. The ad was (not so obviously) AI generated; both an AI clone of his voice and an AI-generated face-swap/ lip replacement. This seemed pretty surprising because it was fairly convincing. He looks like he is saying the dialog of the ad. It's surprising because there's no way the creator of the ad got Hanks' approval to use his l…
YT's user interface has been user hostile for over a decade. The secret to sanity is to never use YT's interface to consume YT content.
No mention that the YouTube logo had a gradient in 2011.
> Robyn: To give YouTube a sense of motion, we created a dynamic red-to-magenta gradient. For the second color, orange and yellow were strong contenders, but magenta felt like the most natural pairing with our new red. Interestingly, magenta doesn't often appear in the natural world, so it symbolizes the imagination and evolution that YouTube embodies. We also placed the gradient at a 45-degree angle with magenta on…
After reading justifications like that, I find it hard not to feel cynical about people who suggest and promote such changes. Am I missing something important, or is this really just a fig leaf covering busywork, promotions, and internal politics? Every time I’ve had to implement a "fresh redesign" as a developer, it always seemed to be about scratching an itch for a higher-up or a designer.
On the other, something about the particular gradient used makes me deeply uncomfortable. Just obvious enough to catch your eye, but indistinct enough to make you feel like something's wrong with your eyes.
A change that accomplishes nothing and a change that degrades the experience are in theory mutually exclusive, yet somehow this feels like both.