15 ms·

> Not just fabricated for the views, but reactions too I regard videos which include the word "reacts" in the title as having a huge red flag. The signal-to-n

> Not just fabricated for the views, but reactions too I regard videos which include the word "reacts" in the title as having a huge red flag. The signal-to-noise on this junk content is simply appalling.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
viraptor 4y ago
I meant reactions in general, not just the reaction videos. "hey, look at this stupid video I've found" is a click as well.
hef19898 4y ago
The one reason I still have Youtube, after getting rid of everything else Google, is the effort I out over time into getting rid of a whole bunch crappy content proposals on my attached account. Every once in a while I have to block some channels, overall it is acceptable. Once in a while I end up on Youtube without being logged in, man is it a mess. As bad as the proposals on Internet Explorers starting page I see at work.
- jermaustin1 4y ago
  My wife thinks it is weird that I watch so much YouTube, because when she goes to YouTube (not signed in), she is inundated with so many spammy/scammy videos. I told her it has taken me almost 15 years to curate the feed I have. And some days I have no new videos I want to watch, so I rewatch old ones.
  - hef19898 4y ago
    And that curation is an on-going effort... YouTube music is better in that regard, and is the second YouTube app I still have on my phone.
t_mann 4y ago
Really? I kinda like the '[discipline X professional] reacts to [relevant movie clips]'-type videos (like 'Navy pilot reacts to new Top Gun movie'). You find them so terrible?
- tpxl 4y ago
  That's simply an appeal to authority, right in the title. I'm an programming professional and most react videos I could make about the art would be better served in another format. Not to mention it's tailored to clickbait.
  - t_mann 4y ago
    Appeal to authority is a good point. In terms of clickbait, I feel that applies only when the content doesn't live up to what's promised, and I found the content quite decent in several cases.
- logifail 4y ago
  > I kinda like the '[discipline X professional] reacts to [relevant movie clips]'-type videos (like 'Navy pilot reacts to new Top Gun movie'). Those are exactly the ones I'm talking about > You find them so terrible? Yes. All noise, no signal! If you want to watch videos about Navy pilots doing their jobs, go right ahead. Why watch Navy pilots "reacting" to a Hollywood movie? The average Navy pilot must know as about as much about filmmaking and acting as Tom Cruise knows about actually flying a fast jet (as opposed to being filmed sitting in the back seat and not being allowed to touch anything[0]) ? [0] https://fortune.com/2022/05/26/top-gun-maverick-studio-paid-navy-11000-hour-fighter-jet-rides-tom-cruise-not-allowed-to-touch-controls/ https://fortune.com/2022/05/26/top-gun-maverick-studio-paid-...
  - t_mann 4y ago
    Tom Cruise is a really bad example, because he actually does have a pilot license since 1994 and is allowed to fly some jets. [0] I'm not looking for advice on how to make a good movie (or how to fly a plane, for that matter), but on some perspective how (un)-realistic those movies are. I think overall that sort of scrutiny does some good in terms of making movies less unrealistic (compare 80's action movies like Rambo to modern productions), producers consulting not only ex-soldiers but also physicists, doctors,... [0] https://inews.co.uk/culture/film/tom-cruise-can-fly-fighter-jets-when-pilot-licence-how-much-top-gun-flying-real-1652812 https://inews.co.uk/culture/film/tom-cruise-can-fly-fighter-...

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

viraptor 4y ago

I meant reactions in general, not just the reaction videos. "hey, look at this stupid video I've found" is a click as well.

hef19898 4y ago

The one reason I still have Youtube, after getting rid of everything else Google, is the effort I out over time into getting rid of a whole bunch crappy content proposals on my attached account. Every once in a while I have to block some channels, overall it is acceptable. Once in a while I end up on Youtube without being logged in, man is it a mess. As bad as the proposals on Internet Explorers starting page I see at work.

jermaustin1 4y ago
My wife thinks it is weird that I watch so much YouTube, because when she goes to YouTube (not signed in), she is inundated with so many spammy/scammy videos. I told her it has taken me almost 15 years to curate the feed I have. And some days I have no new videos I want to watch, so I rewatch old ones.
- hef19898 4y ago
  And that curation is an on-going effort... YouTube music is better in that regard, and is the second YouTube app I still have on my phone.

t_mann 4y ago

Really? I kinda like the '[discipline X professional] reacts to [relevant movie clips]'-type videos (like 'Navy pilot reacts to new Top Gun movie'). You find them so terrible?

tpxl 4y ago
That's simply an appeal to authority, right in the title. I'm an programming professional and most react videos I could make about the art would be better served in another format. Not to mention it's tailored to clickbait.
- t_mann 4y ago
  Appeal to authority is a good point. In terms of clickbait, I feel that applies only when the content doesn't live up to what's promised, and I found the content quite decent in several cases.
logifail 4y ago
> I kinda like the '[discipline X professional] reacts to [relevant movie clips]'-type videos (like 'Navy pilot reacts to new Top Gun movie'). Those are exactly the ones I'm talking about > You find them so terrible? Yes. All noise, no signal! If you want to watch videos about Navy pilots doing their jobs, go right ahead. Why watch Navy pilots "reacting" to a Hollywood movie? The average Navy pilot must know as about as much about filmmaking and acting as Tom Cruise knows about actually flying a fast jet (as opposed to being filmed sitting in the back seat and not being allowed to touch anything[0]) ? [0] https://fortune.com/2022/05/26/top-gun-maverick-studio-paid-navy-11000-hour-fighter-jet-rides-tom-cruise-not-allowed-to-touch-controls/ https://fortune.com/2022/05/26/top-gun-maverick-studio-paid-...
- t_mann 4y ago
  Tom Cruise is a really bad example, because he actually does have a pilot license since 1994 and is allowed to fly some jets. [0] I'm not looking for advice on how to make a good movie (or how to fly a plane, for that matter), but on some perspective how (un)-realistic those movies are. I think overall that sort of scrutiny does some good in terms of making movies less unrealistic (compare 80's action movies like Rambo to modern productions), producers consulting not only ex-soldiers but also physicists, doctors,... [0] https://inews.co.uk/culture/film/tom-cruise-can-fly-fighter-jets-when-pilot-licence-how-much-top-gun-flying-real-1652812 https://inews.co.uk/culture/film/tom-cruise-can-fly-fighter-...