• SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    9 months ago

    I would have been a begrudging subscriber if they hadn’t removed the dislike count and forced ads on unmonetized creators and took all the money from those ads. But because they did that, I got a subscription to Nebula instead.

    • Syntax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Do you realise how ridiculously expensive it is for Google to store all these videos? To be honest I’m surprised how long they’ve survived, without charging.

      You essentially get unlimited free video storage using YouTube, yes I suspect 90% of it is crap. But it’s amazing that Google still offer that. Running YouTube must be significantly more expensive than any other similar services like Netflix, YouTube, Instagram etc.

      • dustyData@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        9 months ago

        Well, guess what. Poor Google knew and should’ve thought about that before buying YouTube. Nobody forced them to.

      • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        They’ve been profitable since 2015. I’m fine with some ads on the videos, they need to make money somehow, and I really like how they do give YouTubers a majority of the revenue.

        However, many of their recent-ish decisions are incredibly greedy and disgusting, like what I mentioned previously, and the retroactive taking away your revenue if the system flags your video as demonetized after it already made some revenue.

        Plus, instead of adding useful features for viewers and creators, they spend that money on fEaTuReD cOnTeNt and oH lOoK wE cHaNgEd ThE uI (read: We pointlessly moved stuff around, removed features, and made the experience take 1.5x as much resources as before)