6 ms·

Counterpoint: the amount of advertisements needed to sustain video production ultimately hinders the value of the video. If I'm watching an hour long video abo

Counterpoint: the amount of advertisements needed to sustain video production ultimately hinders the value of the video. If I'm watching an hour long video about X, and I have to watch 40 mid-roll ads, I'm way more likely to turn it off. I'd much rather directly support creators via Patreon, and Adblock everything else.

izacus 6y ago
YouTube Premium will not show any Ads. You just need to pay for the service you're receiving. Since when is that an unreasonable ask?
- pas 6y ago
  [Could anyone who downvoted izacus' comment explain why?]
  - gcb0 6y ago
    i did not but i do not pay youtube premium. Mostly because all that money will go to RIAA and other DMCA backers, not content creators. Specially not the ones everyone here watches. Nobody uses youtube because they love it. Everyone uses youtube because google effectively killed all the competition by sliding billions of investor money to DMCA backers. And well, this one time it worked out nice for them, i guess. But it is not a business practice I will support. Fortunately, i'm technical enough to play their cat and mouse game to consume creators who are hostage to their monopoly on discovery.
  - drbacon 6y ago
    Ha! People are downvoting your comment too. I am also interested in a civil discussion about why people believe they are entitled to the content and service without contributing back. Maybe downvotes are easier than thoughtful replies.
    - ferzul 6y ago
      See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880582 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880582
- throwaway8941 6y ago
  Well, if you want an example, the premium subscription is not available in my country. I send a small sum (small by Western standards and pretty substantial to me) once or twice a year directly to the creators of two channels I am interested in.
  - izacus 6y ago
    Yeah, I think it's fine if you can't pay because the service provider is being dumb. It's a whole different matter when you can pay, the service provider asks you to pay and then you release an app that deliberately bypasses that ask.
  - lukaa 6y ago
    Same for me, I support channels with superchat. I think best compromise would be bitcoin miners. No ads and creators and developers earn their money.
- drbacon 6y ago
  The entitlement among the general population is a little nuts. We expect things for free, without ads, and with high reliability. In this case we also want additional features like not logging in, downloads and background playback. Side note: Is it any wonder that journalism is dying when no one wants to pay for it (or be subject to advertising)? YouTube is asking that their users either watch ads or pay money. That's how YouTube and creators can keep the lights on. I think that's a fair model. There are other models, like Vimeo, where the uploader pays for the hosting. It certainly seems like the future is one where we expect access to everything and pay for nothing. That worries me. /soapbox
  - specialist 6y ago
    So you're saying Google (YouTube) should share some of their lion's share of cheddar with content creators?
    - drbacon 6y ago
      Definitely. Creators do get the lion share of YouTube's gross revenue. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/032615/how-youtube-ad-revenue-works.asp https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/03261...
      - specialist 6y ago
        Ok. Color me surprised. I assumed the payout was much less. Thanks.
      - specialist 6y ago
        YouTube just showed me a COVID-19 hoax ad. I forgot I paused ad blocking. Fuck YouTube.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwaway2048 6y ago
    I doubt Google is in any danger of not making outrageously huge sums of money off youtube.
- GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
  YouTube makes a profit, after all operational costs are accounted for, they aren't paying creators what they're owed. Why would I support a company who regularly short changes the creators who work hard to produce quality content?
  - minhazm 6y ago
    I don't think it's clear that YouTube actually makes a profit.
  - izacus 6y ago
    Hmm, YouTube pays out massive amount of money every year to creators (if I remember their revenue report, it's majority of their revenue), so I'm not sure what exactly are you talking about?
  - Kiro 6y ago
    Content creators get 55% of the ad revenue so that is simply not true.
- Kiro 6y ago
  People on HN always dismiss ads with "Just let me pay for the service." but only when that's not an option.
  - ferzul 6y ago
    in the olden days, i could walk into a newsagent/video shop, pick up a product, exchange some plesantries, put down some coins, and walk out. no-one would know my name or anything about me. nowadays, if you want to pay for a newspaper article or a video, you have to fork over all your pii and oblige yourself to paying a certain sum in the future unless you do something to cancel it. there is no fairness in commerce any more. they treat us like hostiles, and we have to treat them like hostiles. the current choice isn't between paying for it or pirating it, it's between handing over your identity and future income or actively hiding. one party to this commercial transaction doesn't need to eat and has an income the size of hundreds of thousands of the other side. NewPipe doesn't need to be trusted where Google actively requires you to trust them - yet repeatedly acts untrustworthily. If they want me to happily give them money, let me do it without trusting those who do not deserve my trust. I shouldn't have to trust corporations.
    - drbacon 6y ago
      Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I appreciate it, ferzul. I 100% agree that personal data has unfortunately found its way into a transaction in which it should not belong. I respect the fact that you push back on this point, though I do find "treat them like hostiles" as an extreme position. Other entities offer transactions that I find abhorrent, and I simply just refuse to interact with them. If paying for physical media (be it movies or newspapers or anything else) with "coins" is still valuable to you, I encourage you to continue to practice that behavior, and encourage others as well. It is still mostly possible in many cases. > ...Google actively requires you to trust them... ... I shouldn't have to trust corporations. Regarding YouTube, you can still interact with them in a trustless environment. Browse in incognito mode in a non-Google browser. Google gets to show an ad to an anonymous user and you get to watch a video. End of transaction.
  - anoncake 6y ago
- wintermutestwin 6y ago
  I'd be more than happy to pay google for add free youtube if they weren't also stealing my data. Bottom line is that I should be able to set the price for my data and they wouldn't want to pay me what it is worth to me.
VikingCoder 6y ago
Should it be your choice or the creator's choice how you support them?
- GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
  That's a good question, ideally the creator should provide as many options for support as they can, in order to capture as much revenue for their work. It's then on the consumer to decide which they're most comfortable with, whether it's advertisement, or direct support, etc.
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  While an interesting question, 99% of people are just looking for free content, not for alternate ways to support content creators. So it's not all that relevant of a question.

izacus 6y ago

YouTube Premium will not show any Ads. You just need to pay for the service you're receiving. Since when is that an unreasonable ask?

pas 6y ago
[Could anyone who downvoted izacus' comment explain why?]
- gcb0 6y ago
  i did not but i do not pay youtube premium. Mostly because all that money will go to RIAA and other DMCA backers, not content creators. Specially not the ones everyone here watches. Nobody uses youtube because they love it. Everyone uses youtube because google effectively killed all the competition by sliding billions of investor money to DMCA backers. And well, this one time it worked out nice for them, i guess. But it is not a business practice I will support. Fortunately, i'm technical enough to play their cat and mouse game to consume creators who are hostage to their monopoly on discovery.
- drbacon 6y ago
  Ha! People are downvoting your comment too. I am also interested in a civil discussion about why people believe they are entitled to the content and service without contributing back. Maybe downvotes are easier than thoughtful replies.
  - ferzul 6y ago
    See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880582 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880582
throwaway8941 6y ago
Well, if you want an example, the premium subscription is not available in my country. I send a small sum (small by Western standards and pretty substantial to me) once or twice a year directly to the creators of two channels I am interested in.
- izacus 6y ago
  Yeah, I think it's fine if you can't pay because the service provider is being dumb. It's a whole different matter when you can pay, the service provider asks you to pay and then you release an app that deliberately bypasses that ask.
- lukaa 6y ago
  Same for me, I support channels with superchat. I think best compromise would be bitcoin miners. No ads and creators and developers earn their money.
drbacon 6y ago
The entitlement among the general population is a little nuts. We expect things for free, without ads, and with high reliability. In this case we also want additional features like not logging in, downloads and background playback. Side note: Is it any wonder that journalism is dying when no one wants to pay for it (or be subject to advertising)? YouTube is asking that their users either watch ads or pay money. That's how YouTube and creators can keep the lights on. I think that's a fair model. There are other models, like Vimeo, where the uploader pays for the hosting. It certainly seems like the future is one where we expect access to everything and pay for nothing. That worries me. /soapbox
- specialist 6y ago
  So you're saying Google (YouTube) should share some of their lion's share of cheddar with content creators?
  - drbacon 6y ago
    Definitely. Creators do get the lion share of YouTube's gross revenue. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/032615/how-youtube-ad-revenue-works.asp https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/03261...
    - specialist 6y ago
      Ok. Color me surprised. I assumed the payout was much less. Thanks.
    - specialist 6y ago
      YouTube just showed me a COVID-19 hoax ad. I forgot I paused ad blocking. Fuck YouTube.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway2048 6y ago
  I doubt Google is in any danger of not making outrageously huge sums of money off youtube.
GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
YouTube makes a profit, after all operational costs are accounted for, they aren't paying creators what they're owed. Why would I support a company who regularly short changes the creators who work hard to produce quality content?
- minhazm 6y ago
  I don't think it's clear that YouTube actually makes a profit.
- izacus 6y ago
  Hmm, YouTube pays out massive amount of money every year to creators (if I remember their revenue report, it's majority of their revenue), so I'm not sure what exactly are you talking about?
- Kiro 6y ago
  Content creators get 55% of the ad revenue so that is simply not true.
Kiro 6y ago
People on HN always dismiss ads with "Just let me pay for the service." but only when that's not an option.
- ferzul 6y ago
  in the olden days, i could walk into a newsagent/video shop, pick up a product, exchange some plesantries, put down some coins, and walk out. no-one would know my name or anything about me. nowadays, if you want to pay for a newspaper article or a video, you have to fork over all your pii and oblige yourself to paying a certain sum in the future unless you do something to cancel it. there is no fairness in commerce any more. they treat us like hostiles, and we have to treat them like hostiles. the current choice isn't between paying for it or pirating it, it's between handing over your identity and future income or actively hiding. one party to this commercial transaction doesn't need to eat and has an income the size of hundreds of thousands of the other side. NewPipe doesn't need to be trusted where Google actively requires you to trust them - yet repeatedly acts untrustworthily. If they want me to happily give them money, let me do it without trusting those who do not deserve my trust. I shouldn't have to trust corporations.
  - drbacon 6y ago
    Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I appreciate it, ferzul. I 100% agree that personal data has unfortunately found its way into a transaction in which it should not belong. I respect the fact that you push back on this point, though I do find "treat them like hostiles" as an extreme position. Other entities offer transactions that I find abhorrent, and I simply just refuse to interact with them. If paying for physical media (be it movies or newspapers or anything else) with "coins" is still valuable to you, I encourage you to continue to practice that behavior, and encourage others as well. It is still mostly possible in many cases. > ...Google actively requires you to trust them... ... I shouldn't have to trust corporations. Regarding YouTube, you can still interact with them in a trustless environment. Browse in incognito mode in a non-Google browser. Google gets to show an ad to an anonymous user and you get to watch a video. End of transaction.
- anoncake 6y ago
wintermutestwin 6y ago
I'd be more than happy to pay google for add free youtube if they weren't also stealing my data. Bottom line is that I should be able to set the price for my data and they wouldn't want to pay me what it is worth to me.

VikingCoder 6y ago

Should it be your choice or the creator's choice how you support them?

GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
That's a good question, ideally the creator should provide as many options for support as they can, in order to capture as much revenue for their work. It's then on the consumer to decide which they're most comfortable with, whether it's advertisement, or direct support, etc.
hombre_fatal 6y ago
While an interesting question, 99% of people are just looking for free content, not for alternate ways to support content creators. So it's not all that relevant of a question.