281–290 of 302 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And all reports are that YouTube is still barely break even…
> And all reports are that YouTube is still barely break even… A company can often tweak business metrics to give the message that the company wants the world to believe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm really sorry I posted a price I found on a simple Google search. Let's say you're right and SSDs are actually $150/TB. Now our 1 PB is still just $150k. Not even a fraction of revenue worth worrying about.
If the question was "how much would it cost to buy 1 PB worth of consumer grade SSDs" $150k sounds like a great answer. Going on the 1 PB/day Number that's ~$55M/year for some raw disk. Add another order of magnitude for needing more than just a raw disk to store 1 PB/day, as already explained, and that's ~500M/year on storage related costs. If you're hellbent on saying this half billion/year doesn't matter because t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you rather Google police content and not allow native ads that the content producer includes?
> Would you rather Google police content and not allow native ads that the content producer includes? Why not downrank such videos a little bit - just like Google attempts to downrank pages that look like made by content farms? Since a lot of YouTube creators are very concerned about their ranking, this should decrease the problem of sponsored segments/videos a lot.
Why not just not watch content from content creators that make videos that have content that you don’t like?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, I have a choice. I can buy YT Premium. Or I can run adblockers. What portion of video I decide to skip watching on my device and which HTTP calls I make and which I don't is something I can decide and it has nothing to do with ethics or morality IMHO. Watching a free YouTube video is something like getting a magazine copy for free. There is no moral obligation to look at the ads there, I can just skip those pag…
Then why complain? I don’t complain about how crappy public access cable tv is (ie YouTube). I just don’t watch crappy public access TV.
I only complain if someone tries to make it an ethical/moral issue, that I use one.
I also understand that was not your point in your comment, I am not trying to strawman you :)
The ads are genuinely one of my most frustrating experiences when using the Chromecast with Google TV. And seeing this kind of pattern makes it more likely that I’ll never sign up for premium YouTube (whatever it is called) and just use YouTube less. Also, I swear they do this - If you click on the try YouTube premium for 14 days, once the 14 days end you are bombarded with extra ads. And ads that are usually not ski…
For all the kvetching about ads I see regarding YouTube, most people really could just pay Google and make it go away. I mean, I don’t like paying for things either, but it’s not worth the headache of ad blockers (which aren’t available on every device) and philosophically, I would rather the internet get away from ads everywhere and I’ll help that happen if I can. It helps that $10 is worth the many hours of use I g…
For a family of two it’s either two times €6.99 or a €17.99 family account. That’s more expensive than Netflix, who besides stream their content also have to produce/lease it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this kind of add-skipping is worse. It is 'stealing' from the content creators rather than youtube. Besides, these ads are not based on surveillance capitalism but much less invasive old-school methods. Finally, there is much easier recourse against these ads. Don't watch content creators that have annoying adds. There are not many alternatives to youtube, but there are many alternatives to any given channel.…
If I can fast-forward a VHS tape (yes, I'm that old), to skip the recorded ads, why not fast-forward the ads in youtube videos?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this kind of add-skipping is worse. It is 'stealing' from the content creators rather than youtube. Besides, these ads are not based on surveillance capitalism but much less invasive old-school methods. Finally, there is much easier recourse against these ads. Don't watch content creators that have annoying adds. There are not many alternatives to youtube, but there are many alternatives to any given channel.…
Which right is higher up on the hierarchy? Content creators' right to serve me adds, or my right to decide what software to run/not run on my general purpose computer. I know what I would answer to that.
In other words. Just because you have a right to run software that blocks creators apps does not mean it is right (in the sense of right vs wrong) to run that software.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this kind of add-skipping is worse. It is 'stealing' from the content creators rather than youtube. Besides, these ads are not based on surveillance capitalism but much less invasive old-school methods. Finally, there is much easier recourse against these ads. Don't watch content creators that have annoying adds. There are not many alternatives to youtube, but there are many alternatives to any given channel.…
Creators are making so much money, we should not suffer poor user experience out of sympathy. Has anyone run the math as to how much these ppl make? Hint: a lot. CPMs are crazy high, in addition to product placement. IMHO, in-video ads are worse than the usual ads, because they subversive and break the flow. When I'm watching a math video I don't want to hear about how Euler could have used a VPN.
If numberphile starts running annoying ads, I can easily stop watching them, or manually skip them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this kind of add-skipping is worse. It is 'stealing' from the content creators rather than youtube. Besides, these ads are not based on surveillance capitalism but much less invasive old-school methods. Finally, there is much easier recourse against these ads. Don't watch content creators that have annoying adds. There are not many alternatives to youtube, but there are many alternatives to any given channel.…
>"It is 'stealing' from the content creators rather than youtube." I'm not so sure, from what I understand these creators are typically paid upfront to embed the sponsorship in the video and they are given some promocode or url to present to watchers and that's how these sponsors track engagement. I don't think they check the watch time or the skip rate.
Especially the second is scary. Creators being able to run these ads makes them much more independent from youtube, which I consider quite important.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And all reports are that YouTube is still barely break even… A company can often tweak business metrics to give the message that the company wants the world to believe.
So why would a company want to “tweak” metrics showing a business unit that’s over a decade old not making any money?
German Wikipedia on YouTubers Union: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youtubers_Union
Website: https://youtubersunion.org/