2 ms·

Wikipedia itself is commons, regardless of what private property it's served on (which is 100% fungible.) This isn't the case with YouTube, which is the problem

Wikipedia itself is commons, regardless of what private property it's served on (which is 100% fungible.) This isn't the case with YouTube, which is the problem. When you pay someone running Wikipedia or IA, that's what you're paying for. When you pay for YouTube, you're just paying stockholders and executives, their costs are more than covered, and on top of that you have no rights and no control. I'm sorry that you can't see the difference and why that's wrong and makes your behavior irrational.

SllX 4y ago
Yeah, and donations go towards sustaining the Executives and Staff of Wikipedia more than they do the servers, but without any staff Wikipedia as we know it would cease existing. A like project could replace it and its data, but that wouldn’t be Wikipedia anymore, that would be something else. Maybe better, maybe worse? Dunno, and I’m not sure I want to find out. Getting back to YouTube: when I pay for a service, it’s called a trade. $11.99/month or $143.88/year nets me a service I rely on. I don’t particularly care where the money goes to after I pay it, but the correct answer is probably a revenue account owned by YouTube. Where that money goes after it lands on their Balance Sheet isn’t my business, because money that has left my hands is not mine anymore. I walk away feeling like I’ve gotten a good deal, and I never have my time wasted by Google Ads anywhere in the service on any device I control and some that I don’t, and I’m not limited to a specific browser setup. Your inability to see the benefits to my life does not make it irrational, nor wrong to do so. That’s true for every service or product that you or anyone pays for: you got a product or service. You didn’t maintain any equity in the dollars or euros or yen that you paid in exchange. Nor do you possess equity in any items you barter away.

SllX 4y ago

Yeah, and donations go towards sustaining the Executives and Staff of Wikipedia more than they do the servers, but without any staff Wikipedia as we know it would cease existing. A like project could replace it and its data, but that wouldn’t be Wikipedia anymore, that would be something else. Maybe better, maybe worse? Dunno, and I’m not sure I want to find out. Getting back to YouTube: when I pay for a service, it’s called a trade. $11.99/month or $143.88/year nets me a service I rely on. I don’t particularly care where the money goes to after I pay it, but the correct answer is probably a revenue account owned by YouTube. Where that money goes after it lands on their Balance Sheet isn’t my business, because money that has left my hands is not mine anymore. I walk away feeling like I’ve gotten a good deal, and I never have my time wasted by Google Ads anywhere in the service on any device I control and some that I don’t, and I’m not limited to a specific browser setup. Your inability to see the benefits to my life does not make it irrational, nor wrong to do so. That’s true for every service or product that you or anyone pays for: you got a product or service. You didn’t maintain any equity in the dollars or euros or yen that you paid in exchange. Nor do you possess equity in any items you barter away.