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

YouTube's New Hue

design.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 292 posts

Re: YouTube's New Hue

#271

Post by snakeyjake »

wrfrmers wrote: post #255
snakeyjake wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. We can talk about what kinds of ads are appropriate but the right to use YouTube without paying either in money or time spent watching ads has never, will never, and does not currently exist.

>has never This is a deeply interesting comment. Obviously, YouTube began and spent several years as an ad-free, subscription-free platform, so to state that no one has ever had the "right" to use YouTube without paying or watching ads is patently false. But why would someone make such statement? Are they too young to remember an ad-free YouTube? Do they have some vested interest in pushing the idea that the YT user…

People can offer, graciously or not, you something for free.

They can then change their mind.

You are not entitled to it, you never had any “right” to it, and no force real or imagined in the universe will make that so.

I believe that payment in “exposure” is exploitative bullshit and many of my favorite video makers rely on revenue from YouTube as a not-insignificant portion of their income, so I pay.

Re: YouTube's New Hue

#273

Post by fnqi8ckfek »

qingcharles wrote: post #197
DarkCrusader2 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, if someone is not using UBlock and Revanced, it is 100% their fault. Megacorps has very clearly told us that they want ever profits even if it destroys lives, our planet and our future.

Or paying for Premium. I do that to make sure the creators get something.

[dead]

Re: YouTube's New Hue

#274

Post by ziddoap »

recursivecaveat wrote: post #270
ziddoap wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were those 100 people working in anti-spam/bot detection?

Apparently most were working on content creator relations, a lack of which is probably #1 in "widespread issues that have been plaguing YouTube for years" if you surveyed the people who make platform what it is. You also can't convince me 0 out of 1000 google employees are capable of taking on a spam prevention role. On a long enough time scale headcount is fungible.

>You also can't convince me 0 out of 1000 google employees are capable of taking on a spam prevention role.

Similarly, you can't convince me that laying off 6 people would make any difference (let alone solve) any of the spam, bot, or content creator relations issues. So I guess we're at an impasse.

Re: YouTube's New Hue

#276

Post by kuschku »

omcnoe wrote: post #122

PC GPU architecture has special handling for cursors to ensure there is as little latency as possible. GPU's have a special buffer and position register for the cursor. But for design.google they hijack the cursor rendering and this low latency goes out the window. First it's annoying that my expected cursor is replaced by some weird circle. But then that it's a laggy circle takes the cake. On a design website too. M…

> But then that it's a laggy circle takes the cake. On a design website too. My computer has special optimizations to avoid cursor lag and your website broke them.

The best part is that it doesn't even stop there.

They could've used `cursor: url(...)` (see https://caniuse.com/mdn-css_properties_cursor_url), which just gives your GPU a different bitmap and keeps all the advantages. This has the same latency as anywhere else on the desktop.

Then there's a worse, but still tolerable method, where you force the browser to put the element onto a separate hardware layer and use only with transform: translate to position the element, which allows the element to be GPU accelerated. This has the same latency as cursors in video games and is perfectly tolerable.

But they don't even use that. They actually move the DOM element in the layout, causing terrible latency. Unless you're in Chrome, the only browser where it somewhat works.

I forcefully re-enabled the regular cursor on their site, and you can see just how far their cursor lags behind: https://i.k8r.eu/z2UuFQ.png

I've also tried setting a custom cursor image the proper way, using their favicon as example, and the differency in latency even in Chrome is still ridiculous: https://i.k8r.eu/z5VNaw.png

Re: YouTube's New Hue

#277

Post by carlosjobim »

rewgs wrote: post #167
carlosjobim wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Major television news media have been globally banned from YouTube due to war. Free debate on covid-19 and the vaccines were suppressed and banned on YouTube. Maybe still is, I don't follow that. Those are probably the biggest censorship issues with YouTube. And more are probably to come, as the world spins around.

Ah yes, YouTube, famously devoid of Covid-19 misinformation.

Are you denying that YouTube implemented censorship for Covid-related videos?

They were very open about it: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/13813322

Re: YouTube's New Hue

#278

Post by kirb »

asacrowflies wrote: post #244
x187463 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have had premium on a family plan for almost as long as it has existed. It's great to add family members who use YouTube on their televisions giving them an ad-free experience without the shenanigans of setting up blockers at a network level. I very much don't understand the opposition to paying for some of the services we use every day. I get not wanted to pay 15-20/month for something like Apple or Disney, if you…

Why do you not see the issue with some of us not wanting to give fraudulent extorting thieves money? The previous comment was pretty clear and blatant in it's example of unethical immoral even illegal advertisement...and your only reply is why not pay to stop it! What's next.... Pay this subscription or we will install malware?or break your windows?

It’s not creators’ fault the platform does this. YouTube just isn’t going away anytime soon, whether we like that or not, so it makes plenty of sense to spend a bit and give those creators a little bit more revenue from my view. It also feels maybe a bit more ethical that the revenue generated from my view comes from my pocket, rather than a scammer’s stolen funds. Or, well, just declaring for yourself that creators don’t need to be paid. (Yes, there are alternative ways of paying creators like Patreon that you should also consider using, but you also aren’t going to subscribe to the Patreon of every channel you watch.)

Re: YouTube's New Hue

#279

Post by lofaszvanitt »

Jesus, fix chrome so the selectable theme colors wouldn't look like a triplegendered person's boudoir. Meaning: fuk these pastel colors.

Youtube looks and feels the same, actually it got worse, in the last 10 years.

Re: YouTube's New Hue

#280

Post by brutal_chaos_ »

DarkCrusader2 wrote: post #145
CrimsonCape wrote: post #96

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…

At this point, if someone is not using UBlock and Revanced, it is 100% their fault. Megacorps has very clearly told us that they want ever profits even if it destroys lives, our planet and our future.

Just aheads up, one should be using uBlock Origin, not uBlock. In short, AdBlock now owns the old uBlock

https://ublockorigin.com/ https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock_Origin#uBlock

Post reply on HN