71–80 of 130 posts
YT couldn't care less if creators are unhappy with anything at the moment. There is no real competition, so creators have to just deal with it. I hope for a real competition, where there will be a mass exodus.
This is becoming less true, TikTok is a major competitor. Yeah there is Youtube shorts, but its largely just reuploaded TikTok videos.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They haven't sorted it out, but it's also fundamentally not really something that Google can sort out. They have a legal responsibility to respond to these copyright claims, with major penalties if they don't -- this is from DMCA and its successors, from an era of... I don't want to say "copyright maximalism," but something closer to copyright maximalism than the balance is today. We need to reform the legal responsi…
why do they have a legal responsibility to respond but are somehow exempt from the legal liability from acting in a harmful manner while failing to assert the legality of the claim?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It sure does. They enabled 10min videos, and at this point it's a meme that creators are getting roasted for doing part 2's. (I.e. breaking up a long video into multiple parts for no reason.) Not only that, but lots of tiktok accounts are literally just reuploading full youtube videos from channels like Kurzgesagt. Not happy about that, but it's also a sign of a successful platform. Facebook had the same situation go…
> just reuploading full youtube videos from channels like Kurzgesagt (...) it's also a sign of a successful platform No, not really. Ripping Youtube content is trivial, so you basically have a raidable pool of high-quality content that you can re-upload and monetise, that you didn't have to pay for in any way. If you're seeing a lot of Kurzgesagt vidoes on TikTok, all that means is that someone found out their moneti…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only a seriously out-of-touch elite dude will claim that something which organically became popular shouldn't exist. By your brilliant logic, Hacker News shouldn't exist.
People are upset about Spotify trying to own the podcast market. Meanwhile Web video is already in the position everyone dreads podcasts reaching, and has been for its entire existence . Assuming folks aren't wrong about RSS-based host-anywhere podcasts being better than having the entire market controlled by one provider, seems obvious video'd be better with the same model.
YT couldn't care less if creators are unhappy with anything at the moment. There is no real competition, so creators have to just deal with it. I hope for a real competition, where there will be a mass exodus.
This is becoming less true, TikTok is a major competitor. Yeah there is Youtube shorts, but its largely just reuploaded TikTok videos.
I honestly don't think something like YouTube ever could be profitable without destroying the product that exists today. I don't believe the primary purpose of TikTok is to make money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's a really, really tough sell to move people off YouTube. The network effects are just too good. I might be projecting my preferences onto the masses here, but I suspect this is a common feeling. I've been watching quite a few videos from a fairly popular Youtube channel, tldrnews. At the beginning of a lot of their videos, they've been advertising an alternate video platform, Nebula, with exclusive and mo…
> I know it's greedy and irrational, but I want everything centralized into one service so I don't have to think about where to go to watch a thing. I want a monopoly, but without the problems that come with a monopoly, and I suspect a large enough percentage of users feel the same way that other platforms just can't get off the ground. Podcast model. Client handles discovery and "subscriptions" and all that. Hosting…
From a tweet: https://twitter.com/TeamYouTube/status/1546419223466999809#m > & thx for your patience as we sorted it out But they haven't really sorted it out, have they? False copyright strike claims have been plaguing creators for years. This is just another case of someone needing social media and a huge reach or an inside connection to Google employees to get human eyes on a situation and "resolve" it, with no re…
Exactly. Google is not paying my Admob money even after 5 months has passed (no violation, self-close of account) Through the Kafkaesque maze of non-existent Adsense support, my case (they say) finally got escalated to a payment person at Google. Yet, I didn't hear update for the past month. You can't ask anything about your case and you can't get any time projection on when you'll hear anything back. If you don't ha…
This was (and still is) the IBM model for B2B software; and it was also the industry-standard model for game developers (interacting with the platform owner through a "publisher" — essentially taking the role here of an integrator.) It's probably still the industry-standard model for musicians to engage with big record labels.
I'm honestly not sure why Google doesn't push for this model. Their focus on "scaling services as much as possible using as few human support staff as possible" means this model is essentially perfect for them. But they ignore it. Maybe because they think it'd make them look like a dinosaur?
(I know they do do it in some places — we use GCP, and apparently, to be able to switch from card-based billing to invoice-based billing, we're required to also switch from direct GCP support, to a support-contract with a GCP reseller. So we'd be paying the reseller — the invoices would be riding as accounts-receivable on the reseller's books, rather than on Google's!)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. Google is not paying my Admob money even after 5 months has passed (no violation, self-close of account) Through the Kafkaesque maze of non-existent Adsense support, my case (they say) finally got escalated to a payment person at Google. Yet, I didn't hear update for the past month. You can't ask anything about your case and you can't get any time projection on when you'll hear anything back. If you don't ha…
In the old days, bigcorps just wouldn't engage with ISVs directly at all. Instead, as an ISV, you'd engage the services of an 'integrator' or 'reseller' — a smaller-scale but still-large entity that you'd have a support contract with — where the integrator would then have a support contract with the bigcorp. If you were having an issue with the bigcorp's product, you'd complain to the reseller, and then they'd compla…
Isn't this kinda what multi-channel networks are?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's pretend for a minute that Google's DMCA system is actually necessary to comply with the law (other commenters below poke a number of holes in that claim, I don't need to repeat them here), and that it's the DMCA that's the primary method by which copyright strikes happen (also questionable and discussed in other comments). Even given those things, Google is complicit in the legal landscape being what it is toda…
You miss the context of "in the face of anti Section-230 and worse bills". How is defending /not/ filtering being complicit anyway? That is about as strong a "personal choice" a stance a company can take.
A much stronger statement would be defending their right not to do it and then, crucially, not doing it.
It's a pretty terrible situation for folks that build their livelihood curating a channel to have to accept the risk that their channel could be taken down at any moment due to a false positive regarding copyright violation. Making matters worse, it sounds like there's no real recourse beyond taking your grievance onto social media and hoping your channel has enough clout to get Youtube's attention. In this case, it…
> Seems like there's gotta be a better way. Video "channels" should be like podcasts: hosting and discovery largely separate. Subscription, client-side. YouTube shouldn't exist.
Bitcoin is an exception to this and it was most likely made by one guy as a FOSS payment solution which would compete against Visa/Mastercard, commercial banks and central banks all at the same time. On the other hand Satoshi could've patented his ideas and go straight to the VISA and try to sell them the Blockchain story but he decided to make it FOSS and truly decentralized.