5 ms·

I really hope Google keeps moving in this direction. I think it will be great for the company's long term reception and I'm excited to apply this to my own life

I really hope Google keeps moving in this direction. I think it will be great for the company's long term reception and I'm excited to apply this to my own life.

sw007 8y ago
Wonder if other companies will follow suit?
AndrewUnmuted 8y ago
Rather than giving people an exit strategy from a predatory and addictive UX, did it ever occur to Google that they may instead try to improve the UX itself so that “tools” like this don’t need to be made in the first place?
- ralusek 8y ago
  "Predatory and addictive UX" in this case just refers to the fact that they have a good algorithm and setup that correctly shows me additional related content that I actually want to see. This is like getting mad at the restaurant by your house for having food that is so good that it's making you fat and poor. Personal lack of self control is the problem, not good UX. A tool like this is attempting to assist with the problem, not bring the functionality of the site to a point that services the shortcomings of the lowest common denominator.
  - IshKebab 8y ago
    No he means stuff like autoplaying a random video after you finish watching one by default. I don't think anyone really wants that.
  - AndrewUnmuted 8y ago
    Why would you say what I meant by "predatory and addictive" instead of just asking me what I meant? Your statement is a broad oversimplification of my point, and this makes your argument intellectually dishonest. You and I may understand the need to engage in self-control and personal responsibility for sites like YouTube, but that's because you and I have an insiders' perspective on the dangers of not doing so. YouTube has precipitously catered to the lowest common denominator and took advantage of their mass gullability. It is overwhelmingly obvious that YouTube designed their site in a way that would get people addicted to the point of needing a tool like this. The fact that they auto-play videos when they know the viewer is a child is downright disgusting. YouTube did this instead of taking a more sophisticated approach of catering to directors, actors, and producers. YouTube had the chance to elevate the conversation and make digital media higher-minded, but instead decided to cater to people making content for the lowest common denominator - stupid, shlocky trash. The fact that you refer to what YouTube provides as "content" shows that you are not at all concerned with the way that YouTube has cheapened our digital media in order to get people hopelessly hooked. Just because one can do something effective to increase the immediate bottom line and revenues of their product, doesn't mean they should. I am all about personal responsibility and I do agree that the blame largely lands on the individual at the end of the day. But YouTube is obviously preying on these individuals' largesse and that is just as immoral as being a lazy slob that watches YouTube all day is. YouTube could have taken a proactive approach and showed the world how the web could enable much higher quality video, while limiting your digital footprint. But instead, they did the opposite, which is why I refuse to publish on their "platform."
    - abalos 8y ago
      > It is overwhelmingly obvious that YouTube designed their site in a way that would get people addicted to the point of needing a tool like this. The fact that they auto-play videos when they know the viewer is a child is downright disgusting. I don't personally see a significant difference here versus something like cable TV. Do you think this issue carries over into that domain as well?
      - AndrewUnmuted 8y ago
        When it comes to childrens' programming, there are similarities, but major differences, too. Broadcast and cable television is programmed ahead of time, so parents can know when shows start and end, and it's usually predictable week-to-week. This, along with interstitial/mid-roll ads, cause the impact of constant availability and immediate access to be minimized compared to YouTube. YouTube makes an effort to construct a unique and never-ending journey, filled with unpredictable outcomes. This constant "freshness" is something that they should have been a lot more careful introducing to the public. It not only makes viewing habits unpredictable, it also adds to the addictive nature of the platform. EDIT: I'll also add, that it is not at all flattering to be considered on the same level as cable television. YouTube has simply taken their awful concepts and multiplied them to the Nth degree.
      - watwut 8y ago
        With cable TV parent does not have to hover over tablet every 5 minútes to ensure 8 years old is not watching nazi propaganda gull of lies about jews. If there is such propaganda, a. ) it is predictable b.) You are fucked anyway.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
    > "Predatory and addictive UX" in this case just refers to the fact that they have a good algorithm and setup that correctly shows me additional related content that I actually want to see. Weird. My experience is that their recommendation algorithm is absolutely god awful at picking videos I actually want to see. For instance, it very often recommends videos I've already fucking watched.

I really hope Google keeps moving in this direction. I think it will be great for the company's long term reception and I'm excited to apply this to my own life.

sw007 8y ago

Wonder if other companies will follow suit?

AndrewUnmuted 8y ago

Rather than giving people an exit strategy from a predatory and addictive UX, did it ever occur to Google that they may instead try to improve the UX itself so that “tools” like this don’t need to be made in the first place?

ralusek 8y ago
"Predatory and addictive UX" in this case just refers to the fact that they have a good algorithm and setup that correctly shows me additional related content that I actually want to see. This is like getting mad at the restaurant by your house for having food that is so good that it's making you fat and poor. Personal lack of self control is the problem, not good UX. A tool like this is attempting to assist with the problem, not bring the functionality of the site to a point that services the shortcomings of the lowest common denominator.
- IshKebab 8y ago
  No he means stuff like autoplaying a random video after you finish watching one by default. I don't think anyone really wants that.
- AndrewUnmuted 8y ago
  Why would you say what I meant by "predatory and addictive" instead of just asking me what I meant? Your statement is a broad oversimplification of my point, and this makes your argument intellectually dishonest. You and I may understand the need to engage in self-control and personal responsibility for sites like YouTube, but that's because you and I have an insiders' perspective on the dangers of not doing so. YouTube has precipitously catered to the lowest common denominator and took advantage of their mass gullability. It is overwhelmingly obvious that YouTube designed their site in a way that would get people addicted to the point of needing a tool like this. The fact that they auto-play videos when they know the viewer is a child is downright disgusting. YouTube did this instead of taking a more sophisticated approach of catering to directors, actors, and producers. YouTube had the chance to elevate the conversation and make digital media higher-minded, but instead decided to cater to people making content for the lowest common denominator - stupid, shlocky trash. The fact that you refer to what YouTube provides as "content" shows that you are not at all concerned with the way that YouTube has cheapened our digital media in order to get people hopelessly hooked. Just because one can do something effective to increase the immediate bottom line and revenues of their product, doesn't mean they should. I am all about personal responsibility and I do agree that the blame largely lands on the individual at the end of the day. But YouTube is obviously preying on these individuals' largesse and that is just as immoral as being a lazy slob that watches YouTube all day is. YouTube could have taken a proactive approach and showed the world how the web could enable much higher quality video, while limiting your digital footprint. But instead, they did the opposite, which is why I refuse to publish on their "platform."
  - abalos 8y ago
    > It is overwhelmingly obvious that YouTube designed their site in a way that would get people addicted to the point of needing a tool like this. The fact that they auto-play videos when they know the viewer is a child is downright disgusting. I don't personally see a significant difference here versus something like cable TV. Do you think this issue carries over into that domain as well?
    - AndrewUnmuted 8y ago
      When it comes to childrens' programming, there are similarities, but major differences, too. Broadcast and cable television is programmed ahead of time, so parents can know when shows start and end, and it's usually predictable week-to-week. This, along with interstitial/mid-roll ads, cause the impact of constant availability and immediate access to be minimized compared to YouTube. YouTube makes an effort to construct a unique and never-ending journey, filled with unpredictable outcomes. This constant "freshness" is something that they should have been a lot more careful introducing to the public. It not only makes viewing habits unpredictable, it also adds to the addictive nature of the platform. EDIT: I'll also add, that it is not at all flattering to be considered on the same level as cable television. YouTube has simply taken their awful concepts and multiplied them to the Nth degree.
    - watwut 8y ago
      With cable TV parent does not have to hover over tablet every 5 minútes to ensure 8 years old is not watching nazi propaganda gull of lies about jews. If there is such propaganda, a. ) it is predictable b.) You are fucked anyway.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  > "Predatory and addictive UX" in this case just refers to the fact that they have a good algorithm and setup that correctly shows me additional related content that I actually want to see. Weird. My experience is that their recommendation algorithm is absolutely god awful at picking videos I actually want to see. For instance, it very often recommends videos I've already fucking watched.