4 ms·
It probably wasn't even a choice some person at Google made, it was just a computer program deciding that this show is over. There's no sign at all that Google
by andrewstuart 5y ago
It probably wasn't even a choice some person at Google made, it was just a computer program deciding that this show is over.
There's no sign at all that Google has the slightest interest in its many years of abusing its customers and users.
When true competitive choices arise to Google products, people will jump at them.
The real outcome here is that Google must offer creators the ability to backup/download their videos. Does that exist already?
There might be an opportunity for a startup to create a service that downloads YouTube videos as backups for the owners of the channels.
- datavirtue 5y agoThe creators have, or had, all of the data when they uploaded the video to have it mangled by YouTube. Why would they throw out the masters, and why should YouTube (or anyone else) be in the business of worrying if creators still have their masters? Here we are again, counselling users to backup their own shit...20+ years later they are now using someone else's computer to store files and act dumbfounded when their data is lost.
- ai_ja_nai 5y agoDoesn't this apply at least to live streamed data? I mean, is there content that is born right on the plaftform without masters? Just asking
- datavirtue 5y agoYes, but the streaming client can capture a master...and should.