4 ms·

I understand and a sympathize with his opinion, at the same time the platform must be financed somehow, no? Yeah I know Google are rich but still, from a techn

I understand and a sympathize with his opinion, at the same time the platform must be financed somehow, no? Yeah I know Google are rich but still, from a technical standpoint YT is pretty damn good. I've never had any issues watching videos or streaming, and instantly served in EU, Asia and the US. For that and the massive selection of content I'd say it's worth it for me.

rchaud 5y ago
Yes, the platform must be financed somehow. However, that 'somehow' didn't seem to be an issue for 15 years. A video series about parametric 2d/3d CAD is not going to do Logan Paul numbers, so what merit is there to jam ads into it anyway?
- EugeneG 5y ago
  Don’t like them, don’t watch/upload. Just like he did. They can put in as many ads as they want, and those who are bothered can refuse to watch.
  - rchaud 5y ago
    I'll just keep using Ublock, thanks.
- Crash0v3rid3 5y ago
  > However, that 'somehow' didn't seem to be an issue for 15 years. It has absolutely been an issue. If you listen in on the earnings call, shareholders have been asking for YouTube revenue for years. Google has to show it can be a profitable business.
  - rchaud 5y ago
    Asking about revenue is not the same as asking about profit. In any case, the 80-20 principle still applies. Monetizing already successful content categories will deliver far more profit than long-tail niche content that far fewer people see.
    - syrrim 5y ago
      It the tail is fat, then it absolutely matters to youtube that it is monetized as well. The value proposition of youtube over traditional media has long been that it offers a chance for individuals to be seen, though I don't know to what degree that is still the primary value. Even if it isn't, it costs more per view for youtube to serve less popular videos, since they still need to be distributed around the world. Even if it isn't necessary, it would still be fair for those videos to see at least as much advertising.

rchaud 5y ago

Yes, the platform must be financed somehow. However, that 'somehow' didn't seem to be an issue for 15 years. A video series about parametric 2d/3d CAD is not going to do Logan Paul numbers, so what merit is there to jam ads into it anyway?

EugeneG 5y ago
Don’t like them, don’t watch/upload. Just like he did. They can put in as many ads as they want, and those who are bothered can refuse to watch.
- rchaud 5y ago
  I'll just keep using Ublock, thanks.
Crash0v3rid3 5y ago
> However, that 'somehow' didn't seem to be an issue for 15 years. It has absolutely been an issue. If you listen in on the earnings call, shareholders have been asking for YouTube revenue for years. Google has to show it can be a profitable business.
- rchaud 5y ago
  Asking about revenue is not the same as asking about profit. In any case, the 80-20 principle still applies. Monetizing already successful content categories will deliver far more profit than long-tail niche content that far fewer people see.
  - syrrim 5y ago
    It the tail is fat, then it absolutely matters to youtube that it is monetized as well. The value proposition of youtube over traditional media has long been that it offers a chance for individuals to be seen, though I don't know to what degree that is still the primary value. Even if it isn't, it costs more per view for youtube to serve less popular videos, since they still need to be distributed around the world. Even if it isn't necessary, it would still be fair for those videos to see at least as much advertising.