3 ms·

No justification for her actions, but Google does act as a serf master over the entire internet. It can single handedly decide who succeeds, who fails, and ther

by mudil 9y ago

No justification for her actions, but Google does act as a serf master over the entire internet. It can single handedly decide who succeeds, who fails, and there is no recourse. There is no recourse, no appeal. Some 20 year old dude in Menlo Park decides, and your website, your life, your work, your future, is changed forever. Here's our account: https://www.medgadget.com/google https://www.medgadget.com/google

mudil 9y ago
Why downvoting? We have an honest website since 2004! That's more than 14 years. We do interviews, reviews, conferences reports. Medical technologies: no politics, no controvertial content. All our staff is US and European-based MDs and PhDs, hard working professional people. And starting with Panda update by Google, we can barely survive... Read our account: the story is true and is very honest.
- mudil 9y ago
  Maybe before downvoting people need to realize that Google, instead of fostering a better internet, by working on promoting honest and hard working publishers and creators, decided that it will concentrate on goals of increasing its own profitability? Do you see new publishers popping up on the internet? Have you heard of such as thing as VC investment rounds in start ups in publishing? No? Maybe Google has something to do with it. And internet is poorer, as a result, and your experience on internet is poorer.
  - Jesus_Jones 9y ago
    well google is a money making enterprise, so is say medium, the blogging service. medium aren't doing anything to help other publishers, just themselves, right? i think google has done some stuff to help the world, the internet, but they are so big when they make changes to reduce spam say, millions or thousands of people get pushed out of the way too.
- CaliforniaKarl 9y ago
  I didn't up or downvote, but speaking only for myself, as someone who's not working in the space your site covers, your post looked to me like an ad for your site, and that kindof rubbed me the wrong way. Some of the wording ("serf master", for example) also rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe that's just me, though.
mc32 9y ago
People need to realize that using "free" platforms, means they are beyond your control and your fate is up to their vagaries. I'm against censorship (private censorship which takes political sides especially) but ultimately, unless you're hosting your own content, just enjoy what you get for free while you can and don't bank on it. YT is not there to make _you_ money. They are there to make money for themselves. If you get in the way of that (via potential boycotts, online bandwagoning, etc.) they will likely cut you loose. PS most of the censorship is done overseas, mostly SEAsia, not San Bruno, etc.
- nailer 9y ago
  Agreed, but the sudden change of the rules - when a lot of people use the platform for their income - is causing a lot of heartache. I follow a mainstream comedy channel about fitness hosted by a satirical gym guy (brosciencelife) that's fairly mainstream comedy - you'd see darker, less classy comedy in regular TV watching Stephen Colbert discussing Trump philating Vladmir Putin - but the writers, Mike and Gian, are demonotised all the time because there's no granularity in 'controversial'. Meanwhile big channels like Jake Paul were bothering corpses and YouTube didn't care until other creators caused an uproar. There was a similar case where a new female rapper had a sexy video, and it got demonetised, comparing it to a bunch of more explicit videos from well known rappers which YouTube didn't care about. It's exactly like Twitter - rules aren't being enforced consistently and it drives people nuts.
- Nuzzerino 9y ago
  > People need to realize that using "free" platforms, means they are beyond your control and your fate is up to their vagaries. People need to realize that there is no such thing as free. Nobody is getting anything for free here, because usage of the service generates analytics data, and it goes into a thick file connected to your account. Those so-called "free" platforms also monopolize the market space, creating less incentives for alternative implementations and competing platforms. Few alternatives are therefore developed, further monopolizing the space, and further cementing the fact that having a choice in the matter isn't in the cards.
  - 9y ago

by mudil 9y ago

mudil 9y ago

Why downvoting? We have an honest website since 2004! That's more than 14 years. We do interviews, reviews, conferences reports. Medical technologies: no politics, no controvertial content. All our staff is US and European-based MDs and PhDs, hard working professional people. And starting with Panda update by Google, we can barely survive... Read our account: the story is true and is very honest.

mudil 9y ago
Maybe before downvoting people need to realize that Google, instead of fostering a better internet, by working on promoting honest and hard working publishers and creators, decided that it will concentrate on goals of increasing its own profitability? Do you see new publishers popping up on the internet? Have you heard of such as thing as VC investment rounds in start ups in publishing? No? Maybe Google has something to do with it. And internet is poorer, as a result, and your experience on internet is poorer.
- Jesus_Jones 9y ago
  well google is a money making enterprise, so is say medium, the blogging service. medium aren't doing anything to help other publishers, just themselves, right? i think google has done some stuff to help the world, the internet, but they are so big when they make changes to reduce spam say, millions or thousands of people get pushed out of the way too.
CaliforniaKarl 9y ago
I didn't up or downvote, but speaking only for myself, as someone who's not working in the space your site covers, your post looked to me like an ad for your site, and that kindof rubbed me the wrong way. Some of the wording ("serf master", for example) also rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe that's just me, though.

mc32 9y ago

People need to realize that using "free" platforms, means they are beyond your control and your fate is up to their vagaries. I'm against censorship (private censorship which takes political sides especially) but ultimately, unless you're hosting your own content, just enjoy what you get for free while you can and don't bank on it. YT is not there to make _you_ money. They are there to make money for themselves. If you get in the way of that (via potential boycotts, online bandwagoning, etc.) they will likely cut you loose. PS most of the censorship is done overseas, mostly SEAsia, not San Bruno, etc.

nailer 9y ago
Agreed, but the sudden change of the rules - when a lot of people use the platform for their income - is causing a lot of heartache. I follow a mainstream comedy channel about fitness hosted by a satirical gym guy (brosciencelife) that's fairly mainstream comedy - you'd see darker, less classy comedy in regular TV watching Stephen Colbert discussing Trump philating Vladmir Putin - but the writers, Mike and Gian, are demonotised all the time because there's no granularity in 'controversial'. Meanwhile big channels like Jake Paul were bothering corpses and YouTube didn't care until other creators caused an uproar. There was a similar case where a new female rapper had a sexy video, and it got demonetised, comparing it to a bunch of more explicit videos from well known rappers which YouTube didn't care about. It's exactly like Twitter - rules aren't being enforced consistently and it drives people nuts.
Nuzzerino 9y ago
> People need to realize that using "free" platforms, means they are beyond your control and your fate is up to their vagaries. People need to realize that there is no such thing as free. Nobody is getting anything for free here, because usage of the service generates analytics data, and it goes into a thick file connected to your account. Those so-called "free" platforms also monopolize the market space, creating less incentives for alternative implementations and competing platforms. Few alternatives are therefore developed, further monopolizing the space, and further cementing the fact that having a choice in the matter isn't in the cards.
- 9y ago