• TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Honestly?

    Not my monkeys, not my circus.

    I don’t care what YouTube wants to do or how they do it, they need viewers and if they can’t figure out how to keep em, ah well. They gotta create a service that caters to my behavior, not the other way around.

    • deranger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s a flippant response when you were asked specifically to pretend they were your monkeys.

    • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, actually, they have to create a service that caters to people who bring them revenue. If that isn’t you, they don’t have to, and actively shouldn’t, cater to you at all.

      You’re just saying “I don’t have an actual answer” in a roundabout way.

      • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Well, I don’t, but it isn’t my problem.

        Google makes enough money as is, I don’t really care if the make poor decisions and end up with an unviable business model. I’ll do other things with my time.

        I don’t really care about Google’s wellbeing. I pay directly to the content creators I like and I hate seeing ads anywhere in my life and I’m willing to put in time and effort to make sure I see as few as possible.

        If they say that the marketing data they scrape from user activity isn’t enough for em, well, sucks to suck I guess.

        • TheMauveAvenger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          For someone who doesn’t care and has no viable responses to the questions here, you sure do have a lot to say.

        • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t really care if the make poor decisions and end up with an unviable business model. I’ll do other things with my time.

          Alternatively, they’ll take steps towards a more viable business model, and you’ll also find other things to do with your time.

          I’m willing to put in time and effort to make sure I see as few as possible.

          You can zap all ads forever with a few minutes and a credit card, if you’re willing.

          • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That’s the thing with ads. They’re a thorn in my side. That Google puts there.

            If you were charging me to remove the thorns you put in my side, I’d be belligerent towards you. And I ain’t gonna give ya money.

            Is YouTube running at a loss, anyway? Or is Google just trying to squeeze more money outta its products? Maybe they should be content with the profits they got. Some quick searching says it generates somewhere in the realm of $29,000,000,000 in revenue annually. I imagine it’s likely they can afford to not be so damn greedy.

            • candybrie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              We have no idea if YouTube operates at a loss or is profitable. Google won’t say. Revenue really tells you very little when you look at what it takes to run something like YouTube. It’s a huge reason why an open competitor is so hard to make work.

      • drkt@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        The reason I don’t bring them revenue is because they continue to make the experience worse. Paying isn’t going to make that stop, it’s just going to temporarily shift the bar a little; the bar is however still moving towards a shittier experience for all.

        Why would I look at this and go “Yes, I’ll pay!” There are a lot of services I would genuinely pay for if I didn’t have an impending dread that the service is just about to get worse again regardless of if I pay or not. It’s not like paying is a magic bullet, either, it comes with a ton of different issues like privacy. They still sell your soul to advertisers if you pay them.

        • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ultimately, they have no obligation to provide you something of value for free, and given that you do apparently use YouTube, they are objectively providing you something of value. They’re completely within their rights to not do that.

          • drkt@feddit.dk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’ll gloss over that you either missed my point or ignored it; I don’t use YouTube because it’s too shit, actually.

            I don’t pay for any Google services, not that I’m using any with any consistency anymore, for the same reason that I don’t use them anymore. Google cannot be trusted to provide a good service, paying costumer or not. If you punish me for using the free product, why would I ever trust you? Steam doesn’t slap me across the face at every chance it gets when I don’t spend money on their store for a long period of time, yet I have no issue paying for the games I do want to play despite piracy being completely risk-free by comparison.

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

              If you aren’t getting paid for your content, they’d probably be glad to not have to host it anymore. Anyone with content where it’s worth them hosting it is getting paid.

      • roo@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I paid for Lynda.com, and it could have easily taken in more business if YouTube wasn’t working so hard for Google ads. There are a lot of paid (and free) services that suffer because of YouTubes ad-money business model.

        Netflix could use the extra business. There are plenty of services failing to thrive while YouTube exists. Peertube would be wide open if YouTube went the way of most of Google’s stable of apps. PeerTube is wide open even if YouTube doesn’t go away anyway.

        People genuinely hate ads. It’s a high degree of enshitification. YouTube could divide into paid content and free content in a simple Freemium model.

        Or, add third tier with ads, which any user can opt out of in the same way contributers can. I’d be happy to click subscribe on an ad free experience with less content available to me.

        Or, add an option for a couple of free tier items per month, week, or day. Like Medium’s business model.

        It’s not hard to stop sucking!