3 ms·
We don't need the government to step in, we need another video streaming company to come in and really compete with Youtube. The problem is that right now, Yout
by _fat_santa 5y ago
We don't need the government to step in, we need another video streaming company to come in and really compete with Youtube. The problem is that right now, Youtube has no direct competitors. Sure there is Vimeo and Rumble, but both aren't big enough to really threaten Youtube's bottom line.
The Rumble SPAC deal is interesting because it seems they may be the first company to have the capital to compete with Youtube. I have a strong feeling that once an actual competitor emerges, Youtube will tamp down on their censorship. They censor all day long now because they know creators don't have another option. Once that other option arises, the only thing that censorship will do for Youtube is loosing customers.
- meeech 5y ago"We don't need the government to step in, we need another video streaming company to come in and really compete with Youtube. The problem is that right now, Youtube has no direct competitors" This is incredibly naive. All that would happen is both services would use similar automated systems for moderation - it is cheaper for them. They would have no incentive to provide good support. We need regulations that require access to human judgement for digital services. When millions of people use a service, even a 1% error rate in moderation / account disabling has a real impact on a lot of peoples lives.
- joshsyn 5y agoAn easy way to provide good support would be for youtube to charge the content up-loaders for a small fee. That would be a source of revenue for them to provide support in return for monetary value. Else there is simply no incentive. Introducing regulations for every digital human interaction is a waste of taxpayers money and incredibly naive way of thinking.