61–70 of 219 posts
Google, the company that runs gmail, can't filters a little spam? That's their excuse for removing accessibility features? What utter shitheads.
Gmail doesn’t filter spam all that reliably either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, so in this version you have thirty-five million people who could agree on what is offensive. That's a daunting task without the "million" involved to begin with.
When you get hired as a regulation enforcer in any other scenario, it’s not your opinion but the actual regulations that determine your recourse. If it’s up to the opinions of the enforcement regime, that’s because the rules are unclear or opaque.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I didn’t say that there’s any legitimacy to the attacks from the right. But nonetheless they exist and they are a waste of resources to address and are a convenient excuse for a hostile government administration to harass the company.
community-contributed subtitles are an essential part of the appeal of YouTube for me, particularly with non-English videos from small operations who may not have the resources to provide quality transcriptions/translations. I don't think this functionality was as little-used as the support post represents. Clearly more options exist for managing spam than just shutting down the feature altogether.
> I don’t think this functionality was as little used Based on what? Because you used this feature a few times, it became widely used? We have no idea if this feature was used by more or less than 1 channel in a thousand, or these accounted for more than 1 view in a thousand. > Clearly more options exist for managing spam Yeah, I’ve heard this one before from well meaning people who start out with “why don’t you just…
Apart from the last statement "Clearly more options exist for managing spam than just shutting down the feature altogether." the person you replied you was obviously stating their opinions, and not claiming them to be facts.
> "an essential part of the appeal of YouTube for me"
> I don't think this functionality was as little-used
Emphasis mine, in both cases.
As for the final statement, which is presented as fact, I think it probably is factually accurate that there are more possible options for YouTube than shutting the feature down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You realize that revenue and profit are distinct? Uber has massive revenues as do many other capital intensive businesses. That doesn't make them profitable.
Last time I checked, YouTube ads were a very profitable business. The parent to your comment chose revenue likely to note that Google makes money from the bed ie. it's not a service given away for free.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/03/google-still-isnt-telling-us...
Alphabet said YouTube ad revenue in the first quarter reached $4.7 billion, while cloud sales came in at $2.6 billion. The company broke those numbers out for the first time, but it’s still not disclosing profit figures for the units.
community-contributed subtitles are an essential part of the appeal of YouTube for me, particularly with non-English videos from small operations who may not have the resources to provide quality transcriptions/translations. I don't think this functionality was as little-used as the support post represents. Clearly more options exist for managing spam than just shutting down the feature altogether.
> I don’t think this functionality was as little used Based on what? Because you used this feature a few times, it became widely used? We have no idea if this feature was used by more or less than 1 channel in a thousand, or these accounted for more than 1 view in a thousand. > Clearly more options exist for managing spam Yeah, I’ve heard this one before from well meaning people who start out with “why don’t you just…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their automated CC sucks, always has, and I check multiple times a year only to see that it still sucks, most recently last month. I’ve never had the best hearing, so I usually turn CC on when I can, particularly with ESL speakers with heavy accents; but if the only option on a YouTube video is the automated captions, then the only option is crap and I’ll go without. On the other hand channels with a large dedicated…
To be fair, the Live Caption feature on Pixel phone (which can transcribe videos you are watching) is great. Maybe they plan on rolling that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not quite. It seems like creators have until September 28 to choose to publish existing community contributions, and if they don't, it seems like they will all disappear. That's how I interpret, "You have until September 28, 2020 to publish your community contributions before they’re removed."
https://support.google.com/youtube/thread/61967856?hl=en If you have contributions currently saved as drafts, these will be available for the next 60 days (until Sept 28 2020), and you have until then to publish them before they’re removed. Any already published contributions (titles, descriptions, captions, etc) will continue to show up on videos and can be managed by Creators in YouTube Studio.
community-contributed subtitles are an essential part of the appeal of YouTube for me, particularly with non-English videos from small operations who may not have the resources to provide quality transcriptions/translations. I don't think this functionality was as little-used as the support post represents. Clearly more options exist for managing spam than just shutting down the feature altogether.
> I don’t think this functionality was as little used Based on what? Because you used this feature a few times, it became widely used? We have no idea if this feature was used by more or less than 1 channel in a thousand, or these accounted for more than 1 view in a thousand. > Clearly more options exist for managing spam Yeah, I’ve heard this one before from well meaning people who start out with “why don’t you just…