• pufferfischerpulver@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m not going to be popular saying this but how is the service supposed to survive without a revenue stream? It takes a shit ton of bandwidth and storage to keep YouTube running, that ain’t free.

    I get that the ads are incredibly annoying but if you truly watch as much YouTube as some people in this thread are claiming, maybe it’s worth paying for it? I bit the bullet and for basically the price of my cancelled Spotify subscription I now have no ads in YT and an okay streaming service with yt music.

    Of course Google could do things better. And actually I think it would be important to have a competitor. But I wouldn’t expect that one to be free either.

    • Fosheze@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If youtube fixed their content ID system and stopped falsely demonitizing all the creators I watch then I would hapily pay for youtube red (or whatever they call it now). As it is though I’m not giving them my money just for them to pay copyright trolls with some of it. I’d rather give my money to noone than risk having some of it go to the people leaching off the completely broken content ID system.

    • SasquatchBanana@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      How many people are using Piped, revanced, or the like? I doubt it is the majority. This move is highly likely more greed than anything.

      Does Google care about our user experience? The short answer is no. Look at the intrusive ads, how long they are, them suggesting DRM, right wing pipeline, and more.

      Look at how they treat their content creators. Demonetization, channel and copyright strikes, etc.

      The list goes on. Youtube should and needs to be public. Internet is a utility and needed to survive by everyone. A video hosting service like Youtube is needed as well. Through every perspectice, Google is, ultimately, wrong in doing this.

    • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is c/privacy. Are you really advocating for pouring money on the company (Google) that’s doing everything it can to get to know everyone and use the information for showing deceiving ads, among other things? Or the company that supports false political propaganda? (In the form of paid advertisements). Support your creators, thats a very good thing, but for the love of god please do not fund this data mining machine.

      • pufferfischerpulver@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I really am! If they don’t get money, and they don’t get data, and they (obviously) don’t get donations, how are they supposed to run the service? Out of the goodness of their hearts?

        • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          They get enough money already. They are even spending on military tech research (google ventures), lobbying, and of course on their investors who have an unfulfillable hunger for money.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Leave us nerds an opening. The 99% that can’t figure out how to put in an adblocker should be able to cover us nicely.