Corporate content streaming giant thinks you shouldn't just do it yourself. Honestly this should be obvious but it's nice to have people highlighting concrete examples as people never want to hear this kind of thing.
Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
421–430 of 803 posts
Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
#422Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah because if it wasn’t for COVID YouTube, Facebook, et al would never have removed any content on their platform, unlike what they had been doing all this while… There are so many issues with this. Being able to pick what content they host is fundamental to freedom of speech for private entities. The real problem is twofold. 1. A few platforms hold monopoly positions. Who else can compete with Youtubr? And the rea…
I think their real edge is a practically free and practically infinite bandwidth/capacity global CDN setup. There's no real technical reason for this still to be the case, but bandwidth costs are significant for people relying on other services to provide such. Or they're cheap and slow/capped. This is the main reason I think alternative sites have a hard time competing. Play anything on YouTube from anywhere and if…
Plainview: You gonna change your shipping costs?
Tilford: We don't dictate shipping costs. That's railroad business.
Plainview: O-oh! You don't own the railroads? Course you do. Of course you do.
Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
#423I'm just waiting for the day Youtube permanently blocks me from using an adblocker.
It's so kind of them to at least make me wait for 5 seconds to acknowledge that using an adblocker is illegal.
Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
#424What does rhymes with "car"
Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
#425Reading through all this has been eye-opening with so many thoughtful comments that made me think, even if some parts are a bit discouraging.
I’ve been toying with the idea of jumping on the content creation wagon with storytelling, vlogging life experiences, that sort of thing, but now I’m wondering: Is it still worth building on YouTube if there’s a real risk of getting banned later for unknowingly crossing some unclear content line?
I’m not focused on monetization right now, just hoping to share and connect, but I’d hate to build something meaningful only to watch it vanish overnight.
Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
#426Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, you can absolutely claim correlation there and say something like "information making people hesitant to get the vaccine may have increased risk of death." That's wildly different than claiming that misinformation killed people. Comparing country level statistics is also pretty inaccurate. The populations aren't controlled at all, here you are assuming the only meaningful difference in the populations are vacci…
> the data itself isn't reliable due to differences in reporting and testing That is why The Economist used excess-death estimates, skipping right over the whole "death caused by COVID" vs. "death caused by comorbidity" debate. Since COVID was arguably the only worldwide difference between 2019 and the following years, a presumption that the very-statistically-significant excess deaths were largely due to COVID was t…
Measuring excess deaths doesn't skip that debate. e.g. consider a world where the only populations that died were very old people and morbidly obese people, and everyone else experienced mild or no symptoms. In that world, it would be fair to say that being very old or morbidly obese caused people to die from what was otherwise a mild cold; i.e. those comorbitities were "the cause". Then it would be fair to say excess deaths are a measurement of how prevalent those groups are.
Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
#427A bit off topic, but still: Why do we need YouTube and other "Video Hosting" platforms at all? Simply upload your video (webm, or MP4) to any static Webserver and embed in HTML5. Plays nicely and no adds. I don't get why some sites still embed their movies stored on YouTube.
As others said, creators are often relying on AdSense from YouTube, and even if they did run ads on their own website, how would it be discovered? Let's say a creator decided to move to some non-YouTube platform that pays exactly the same as YouTube, via ads and premium subscriptions, whatever that platform is, it will have nowhere near the size of the audience that YouTube has, meaning the creator will be losing out…
From what i've heard from creators youtube ads are such a small fraction of revenue that they don't count it - maybe horrible clickbait content mills depend on it but world would be better off without them.
Mostly it comes from patreon or equivalent, sponsorship deals and merch sales.
Youtube exists only because discoverability, and ads profit goes mostly to YT itself.
Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
#428> In that case, I was happy to see my appeal granted within an hour of the strike being placed on the channel. (Nevermind the fact the video had been live for over two years at that point, with nary a problem!) Looks like some L-(5|6|whateverthefuck) just got the task to go through YT's backlog and cut down on the mention/promotion of alternative video platforms/self-hosted video serving software. Quick appeal grant…
> I really wonder where the internet goes in this age.
Self-hosting? (Whoops!)
Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
#429Since Youtube started to show me funny "TURN OFF THE ADBLOCKER!!!" notices, I just started slamming links in yt-dlp and watching them offline. No drawbacks so far.
It will become harder to ignore the possible retaliation Google can make against your/your family’s Google accounts.
It really would be nice if they weren’t allowed to create the equivalent of the digitally unbanked by unilaterally wielding this power without any kind of due process.
Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube
#430Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You just can’t shout fire in a crowded cinema This meme needs to die. You absolutely can shout fire in a crowded theatre. If there is a fire or some other emergency or you have a reasonable belief that there is a fire or other emergency.
Quite - the nature of the speech has to bear some resemblance to reality. There's people complaining about the crackdown on completely false mis-information that gets shared amongst right-wing circles that ended up causing the Southport riots. Clearly that's hate-speech that is aiming to incite violence and it's only fair that people should be held to account for that. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zshjs82
Except the official report stated something different.
Report here: https://hmicfrs.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/publications/pol...
The below from the FSU page:
> However, HMICFRS explicitly found “no conclusive or compelling evidence” that the disorder “was deliberately premeditated and co-ordinated by any specific group or network.” Most offenders were local, often young, and had no ties to extremism. The report also cites the Children’s Commissioner, who similarly concluded that conversations with those arrested “do not support the prevailing narrative… that online misinformation, racism or other right-wing influences were to blame.” Although ‘harmful’ online content may have circulated, the report acknowledges the causal factors were “more complex than were initially evident,” including longstanding social deprivation, loss of trust in policing, and generalised political disaffection.
Found via: https://freespeechunion.org/southport-riot-report-undermines...