3 ms·

> And no one whines that they don't get free conference admission or airline tickets or printer paper or whatever Those are terrible analogies. YouTube offers

by ng12 8y ago

> And no one whines that they don't get free conference admission or airline tickets or printer paper or whatever Those are terrible analogies. YouTube offers free hosting with the ability to opt out of monetizing your videos -- features that they will apparently punish you for using. That is absurdly user-hostile.

ajross 8y ago
Meh. And we've come full circle. It seems to my eyes that they only "punish" you for not advertising if you have the means to pay other expenses but want to freeload on youtube specifically. And I don't see why I should care about that. It's very likely that Blender is going to have the same problem with Dailymotion and Vimeo too. No one wants to (or has the means) to be a dumping ground for hosting other people's content. We all have to share in this world. As it happens advertising is the mechanism YouTube offers for sharing revenue.
- ng12 8y ago
  You're missing the point. Why offer the option to opt out of ads at all other than to bait-and-switch?
  - saint_fiasco 8y ago
    Same reason a coffee shop might offer to let you charge your phone/laptop batteries for free and then take that away when they see you are running an extension cord to your office.
    - ng12 8y ago
      So in this analogy opting out of ads is for who, exactly? Videos nobody watches anyways?
      - ajross 8y ago
        It's for you. And me. And any person or organization that wants to put up a video for the public to see. But it's not for people and organizations who are being funded to put up those videos. If you are deriving revenue from that video stream, whether or not it's a "profit" legally, then it's not unreasonable for you to be expected to pay for it. Advertising with shared revenue is the standard mechanism for paying for youtube videos.
        ng12 8y ago
        > If you are deriving revenue from that video stream By opting out of ads you're also opting out of your share of the revenue so by definition you're avoiding a potential profit stream. I think you'd have a fair point if it was a publicly-listed company complaining about ads hosted for free on YouTube but come on -- these are free, educational videos hosted for the explicit purpose of democratizing knowledge. Again, you're not wrong. YouTube is within their rights to do this. I just think it's an incredibly disappointing move from Google.
        ajross 8y ago
        > hosted for the explicit purpose of democratizing knowledge. That's outrageously spun. They're Blender evangelism. Having those videos out there helps Blender get users and visibility and (here's the important part) donations, that they can then use to make Blender better by paying for stuff that Blender needs to get better. Except for video hosting. You think they shouldn't be required to pay for video hosting the same way they are for member reimbursements. Because... I dunno, Google is evil or something.
        ng12 8y ago
        > That's outrageously spun No more outrageous than you trying to spin Blender as some corporate behemoth looking for a free pass.
- abnry 8y ago
  You make fair points. The biggest issue here is YouTube's recurrent communication problem. Blender and MIT Open Courseware, I am almost sure, were blindsided by this change. They would have worked out a plan ahead of time otherwise. Just like so many other Youtubers blindsided by all the new rules, so were they. That, fundamentally, is user hostile.

by ng12 8y ago

ajross 8y ago

Meh. And we've come full circle. It seems to my eyes that they only "punish" you for not advertising if you have the means to pay other expenses but want to freeload on youtube specifically. And I don't see why I should care about that. It's very likely that Blender is going to have the same problem with Dailymotion and Vimeo too. No one wants to (or has the means) to be a dumping ground for hosting other people's content. We all have to share in this world. As it happens advertising is the mechanism YouTube offers for sharing revenue.

ng12 8y ago
You're missing the point. Why offer the option to opt out of ads at all other than to bait-and-switch?
- saint_fiasco 8y ago
  Same reason a coffee shop might offer to let you charge your phone/laptop batteries for free and then take that away when they see you are running an extension cord to your office.
  - ng12 8y ago
    So in this analogy opting out of ads is for who, exactly? Videos nobody watches anyways?
    - ajross 8y ago
      It's for you. And me. And any person or organization that wants to put up a video for the public to see. But it's not for people and organizations who are being funded to put up those videos. If you are deriving revenue from that video stream, whether or not it's a "profit" legally, then it's not unreasonable for you to be expected to pay for it. Advertising with shared revenue is the standard mechanism for paying for youtube videos.
      - ng12 8y ago
        > If you are deriving revenue from that video stream By opting out of ads you're also opting out of your share of the revenue so by definition you're avoiding a potential profit stream. I think you'd have a fair point if it was a publicly-listed company complaining about ads hosted for free on YouTube but come on -- these are free, educational videos hosted for the explicit purpose of democratizing knowledge. Again, you're not wrong. YouTube is within their rights to do this. I just think it's an incredibly disappointing move from Google.
        ajross 8y ago
        > hosted for the explicit purpose of democratizing knowledge. That's outrageously spun. They're Blender evangelism. Having those videos out there helps Blender get users and visibility and (here's the important part) donations, that they can then use to make Blender better by paying for stuff that Blender needs to get better. Except for video hosting. You think they shouldn't be required to pay for video hosting the same way they are for member reimbursements. Because... I dunno, Google is evil or something.
        ng12 8y ago
        > That's outrageously spun No more outrageous than you trying to spin Blender as some corporate behemoth looking for a free pass.
abnry 8y ago
You make fair points. The biggest issue here is YouTube's recurrent communication problem. Blender and MIT Open Courseware, I am almost sure, were blindsided by this change. They would have worked out a plan ahead of time otherwise. Just like so many other Youtubers blindsided by all the new rules, so were they. That, fundamentally, is user hostile.