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

YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

hollywoodreporter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 237 posts

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#131

Post by NoPicklez »

froobius wrote: post #4

YouTube has so much questionable content on it that gets millions of views... Parents who've found ways to monetize their kids. Dangerous / unpleasant pranks being pulled on members the public. Conspiracy theories. Fake game shows where the winners being given money are actually friends of the host. Or where the host pretends contestants are doing something dangerous, but actually it's CGI, (misleading young viewers…

The internet itself is no different, its whether you choose to engage with that content or not. I have been watching Youtube for well over a decade and still have my channel subscriptions which drives the extent of the content I watch.

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#132

Post by sinhalo »

Melonai wrote: post #118
zingababba wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me personally piracy made a comeback when everyone memory-holed "The Speech" episode from IT Crowd. I had even paid for it on a separate platform when Amazon removed it, only to find the platform I paid for it on removed it also. Say what you will about Graham Lineham, I still think it's one of the funniest IT crowd episodes, on par with "The Work Outing". I'd rather not have media I personally enjoy rug-pulled f…

Yeah Graham Linehan was a great comedy writer (past tense because I don't think he's writing more, not that he is a horrible writer now), and even though IT Crowd had some really weird episodes towards the end, it's really interesting to see how much his views shifted (in my biased opinion, for the worse) after the show was done. For people not in the know, Linehan is nowadays a very outspoken voice against "transgen…

[flagged]

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#133

Post by Gigachad »

softwaredoug wrote: post #21

My personal theory on this is prestige TV is in a recession. After Game of thrones season 8, people wonder why they should invest into a show when there’s a high chance it won’t pay off. Even for a good show it can feel like work. That plus the high cost for studios and over abundance of supply, meant studios pulled back. Instead we’re seeing a reemergence of low effort TV. And YouTube plays nicely into that. At some…

YouTube has a ton of decent effort content. Like it’s not nearly as expensive as traditional TV episodes but it’s not total slop.

I can watch hour long videos of people building impressive projects, engineering products, performing interesting tests, etc. The kind of content you never would have got on traditional TV.

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#134

Post by Gigachad »

speak_plainly wrote: post #24

There was a time when the algorithm was truly amazing and the recommendations were smart, spot-on, and mostly high quality. I don't know what happened but you have to search now for decent content. The recommendations part of YouTube just seems to give me old content or will show me things I've already watched. Despite it feeling almost user-hostile, I still use Youtube,

They seem to give totally different suggestions based on platform. On the TV app I get great high quality content every time and I love it. While on mobile it just pushes junk and shorts.

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#135

Post by pentagrama »

estimator7292 wrote: post #127

I just don't really care for TV that much, but my husband was on at least three streaming services. I would occasionally manually pirate shows and movies when he asked, but a while back I hooked up radarr to my jellyfin server. Now he's canceled all our streaming services and gone full pirate. Our entire tv and movie budget is now condensed into a single subscription: the VPN behind my torrent box. And also all the n…

Can you share a good resource on how to set up Radarr with Jellyfin? I tried but couldn’t get it to work. I just want to have it running on my PC (not a dedicated server), my computer is connected to my TV via HDMI and that’s all I need.

Right now, for pirated content, I use the Stremio app for Windows [1] with the Torrentio [2] and PirateBay+ [3] addons. It’s a “sandboxed,” relatively safe way to pirate. Stremio itself is a legal piece of software (for now), and I feel safe using those illegal addons without worrying that they might inject malware into my PC. It works well for most movies, but not always for older or more obscure ones. There’s also a UX issue: you have to choose between different pirated versions of the same movie and test several to find one that works properly.

Also, I don’t need a VPN because in my country ISPs don’t really care about that (yet), so a lot of people just pirate content, it would be a nightmare otherwise.

[1] https://www.stremio.com/

[2] https://stremio-addons.net/addons/torrentio

[3] https://stremio-addons.net/addons/thepiratebay+

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#136

Post by Gigachad »

benbristow wrote: post #71
giobox wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sponsor block is much less useful now Premium subscriptions have the "skip commonly skipped section" feature, which is always the sponsored content. With the addition of this, you can avoid ads and sponsors well enough now on Premium for me. I was pleasantly surprised YouTube came out with a first party tool to skip sponcon. > https://dataconomy.com/2025/07/30/youtubes-ai-powered-jump-a...

I can imagine creators aren't going to be happy about that. Can't see it lasting long.

It only shows up for YouTube premium users, and premium user views pay more than ad supported views.

I’m sure they would much rather a premium user watches and skips the sponsor section than the usual HN viewer who has ads and sponsor sections blocked.

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#137

Post by toasterlovin »

INTPenis wrote: post #7

In my circle, piracy is making a comeback. We're tired of having to hunt down streaming services, and be extorted for hundreds of euro a month, just to see ads for their own programs. Streaming was fun for a while, but as always these greedy execs are ruining it.

From the point of view of content owners, an moderate amount of piracy is ideal, since it implies that they’re extracting maximum value from everyone who isn’t pirating.

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#138

Post by zaphirplane »

benbristow wrote: post #114
Tadpole9181 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why are you acting like you have a right to unlimited access of all content made, regardless of the economics, for $20 a month at the highest quality of service through one platform? Things cost money, that's the world we live in. You don't have to like it, but it is what it is. The unethical option is actually illegal and, as more people do it, only game theories everyone else into having to pay more. Feel free…

Because it's totally possible? They've done it with Spotify for music. No reason the same shouldn't be done for films and TV.

Making a movie or a series is way more expensive than record a song

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#139

Post by mouse_ »

deaux wrote: post #110
mouse_ wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those extensions are ostrich hats https://calisphere.org/clip/500x500/26157/0c7951eaf2251821c1...

They're very different. If everyone bought an ostrich hat, the problem in the cartoon would grow only bigger, more and more victims being claimed. If everyone used those extensions, the exact opposite would happen - the problem would be solved, there would be no more victims. Sure, it would become a cat and mouse game, but the premise still holds.

I suppose you're right.

Re: YouTube Just Ate TV. It's Only Getting Started

#140

Post by analog8374 »

pstuart wrote: post #46
analog8374 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was a billionaire I would prioritize identifying, monitoring and controlling the underclass.

I think that's a fait accompli -- it's merely a matter of who has access to the data. The funny thing is that the clear anti-democratic leanings of our technolords are based upon not trusting the vote of the masses has unfortunately been somewhat validated (case in point: the current admin). There's just one small problem: the technolords themselves have only one vision and skill: enshittification in the quest of per…

If you were a billionaire, what practical reason would you have for promoting democracy?
Post reply on HN