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

Susan Wojcicki has died

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 523 posts

Re: Susan Wojcicki has died

#381

Post by wruza »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #108
somenameforme wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This saying never made sense to me as a game is only a game if there are players.

The point of the saying is that the player is not necessarily in position to change the rules, or at least not in the immediate short term. How far one wants to accept this as acceptable reasoning is a subjective matter.

You can offset basically anything with it. It's another way to say "it's just a collection of atoms working by the laws of nature".

Most of these proverbs are just selling bs.

Re: Susan Wojcicki has died

#382

Post by tsimionescu »

SoftTalker wrote: post #377
tsimionescu wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It never got around to incentivize creators to produce concise content and to this day creators keep producing massive 30 min diatribe that could have been done in 3 mins. Why on Earth would you want shorter videos? The best thing about YouTube is that it's one of the only places you can find quality medium-to-long-form content.

YouTube videos were originally limited to 5 or 10 minutes I think. And probably 480p or so. You have to remember when it started, video on mobile didn't exist and there was absolutely no bandwidth for it. So people watching YouTube were watching it on their PC, probably with a 1024x768 CRT screen, and that's assuming they had something faster than dial-up internet.

Oh, I do remember, I was around in the early days. I think (but maybe that came later?) longer form videos did exist, but only paying accounts could post them.

Re: Susan Wojcicki has died

#383

Post by tsimionescu »

Blot2882 wrote: post #309
tsimionescu wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It never got around to incentivize creators to produce concise content and to this day creators keep producing massive 30 min diatribe that could have been done in 3 mins. Why on Earth would you want shorter videos? The best thing about YouTube is that it's one of the only places you can find quality medium-to-long-form content.

Maybe not what the commenter was saying, but there is a difference between great multi-hour essays and pointless rants stretching out their length to meet a minimum ad requirement. I like watching a lot of multi hour videos, but you can tell the difference between one with substance and one repeating the same thing over and over so they can "clock out." That's all due to changes by YouTube to reward length and freque…

I agree that there are a lot of inflated videos to hit some ad target. But the solution is not to encourage people to create short videos, or at the very least, not the way TikTok did, making it almost impossible to popularize anything longer than 3 minutes.

And despite all the dredge, there is a lot of good content on YouTube, at least in certain niches. Video essays on media and politics, lots of video-game analysis and other fan communities, history content, lots of e-sports to name just a handful that I personally enjoy.

Re: Susan Wojcicki has died

#384

Post by yas_hmaheshwari »

lchengify wrote: post #73

Was shocked to hear this news. I worked for Google years ago but I was in the NYC office, so we didn't run into the YouTube folks much. Opinions about YouTube may be mixed here on HN, but it is objectively one of the most successful businesses in tech or media to emerge in the past 15 years. If it weren't buried inside Alphabet, Youtube would be worth on the order of $400 billion, more than Disney and Comcast combine…

Well said! Having used almost all video learning platforms (Oreilly, skillshare, pluralsight, Coursera etc.), I now believe that YouTube is the superset of all platforms.

> Whatever is here, is found elsewhere. But what is not here, is nowhere

Re: Susan Wojcicki has died

#385

Post by MajimasEyepatch »

shortrounddev2 wrote: post #193
sumedh wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are getting aware of it more due to social media.

No, there is a rise in colon cancer among people in their 20s and 30s, and scientists are saying it's probably ultra processed foods

Overall, the incidence of cancer in the US among people under the age of 50 rose from 95.6 per 100,000 to 103.8 from 2000 to 2021.[ Colon cancer is one of the biggest drivers, but there are also a few others like kidney and thyroid that have seen big increases. Some of this, like thyroid cancer, might just be due to better detection of smaller, less serious cases. Fortunately, there are also some positive trends, like much lower rates of lung cancer (due to less smoking and cleaner air, presumably) and a decline in melanoma (skin) cancer after an increase in the early-to-mid 2000s (related to the rise and fall of tanning salons, I assume).

https://seer.cancer.gov/statistics-network/explorer/applicat...

Re: Susan Wojcicki has died

#387

Post by yyyfb »

noncoml wrote: post #112
yyyfb wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two things can be true. Money does buy comfort and care. Also, it does not make one immortal. We can choose what we take away from events. I could choose to feel unlucky that I haven't made as much money as someone else, and I would be justified in it, because being rich absolutely makes a difference. I just choose to feel lucky to be alive instead, and I'm just as justified. You are free to choose your own perspecti…

“remember that only health and family matter” Those were your exact words. But nice backpedal. Edit: I don’t want to get into an argument but just beware that your original post rubs a lot of people the wrong way. I respect that’s the pain and sorrow of a loss are the same but please don’t dismiss the power and need of money. It makes a world of a difference in the process of dying. You don’t want to sound like someo…

Let me put it this way. I don't think you and I are fundamentally disagreeing: money matters, to the extent that it allows to buy statistically better health outcomes and quality time with family. I don't personally think it matters more than that.

Re: Susan Wojcicki has died

#388

Post by AmericanChopper »

tourmalinetaco wrote: post #339
AmericanChopper wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alphabet has engaged in many anti-competitive business practices to promote YouTube's monopoly. To name a few, Alphabet is currently being sued by the DoJ for illegally monopolising digital advertising technology. That technology, which directly integrates with youtube (and which you or I could not integrate with our own competing youtube-like product), is one of the key reasons that youtube has become as successful…

The irony is that despite all of this monopolization and lying to advertisers about the reach of their ads YouTube is still not profitable.

Alphabet don’t publish YouTube’s profit margins, so I don’t think you know that to be a fact. I’d personally be rather surprised if it wasn’t profitable though.

Re: Susan Wojcicki has died

#389

Post by takinola »

kylec wrote: post #282
ethbr1 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Younger folks forget that YouTube launched (2005) a few years before both the iPhone launched and Netflix pivoted to streaming (2007). In that weird era, (a) average home Internet connections became fast enough to support streaming video (with a healthy adoption growth rate), (b) the most widely deployed home recording device was likely still the VCR (digitizing analog video from cable to burn to DVD was a pain), (c)…

That was also an era where bandwidth to serve content was extremely expensive, I still don't know how 2005 YouTube was able to find a way to make serving user-uploaded videos for free financially viable, but that was a HUGE component of their success.

I think the secret was being acquired by Google. Without the deep financial pockets and strategic patience of Google, I doubt they would have been able to become what they are today.

Re: Susan Wojcicki has died

#390

Post by aaomidi »

saagarjha wrote: post #25
fells wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No? The person on Threads does not appear to be her husband. They're merely posting a screenshot of her husband's Facebook post.

The link now points at Facebook fwiw

Huh I swear when I was looking at this post it was the Facebook thread
Post reply on HN