6 ms·

Good, it’s the time for YouTube to die for good, no more useless contents, no more “content creators” having silly faces as a thumbnail to trick the algo, maybe

by AHOHA 3y ago

Good, it’s the time for YouTube to die for good, no more useless contents, no more “content creators” having silly faces as a thumbnail to trick the algo, maybe another service will arise soon that has the same contents as the old youtube and somehow like tiktok now, an interest based, for fun and entertainment videos, posted by average cameras and normal people unlike the atrocities we see now in YT..

secretsatan 3y ago
While there is a lot of that, there's still an awful lot of good content, especially for niche interests, you don't have to watch the stuff you don't like. I don't have much, if any, come up on my feed.
eiiot 3y ago
This is a bad take. There’s a lot of genuinely good content on YouTube, it’s just that band content tends to get more attention. Even with the bad content, that’s not a reason for YouTube to “die for good.” Just because you have to spend more time seeking out good content doesn’t make the platform invaluable.
- SapporoChris 3y ago
  invaluable: of great value, priceless. Seriously, youtube is not that. Let's go with a more reasonable definition that youtube is valuable. Value of time vs value of content. I can easily see having to spend more time seeking content resulting in the platform no longer being valuable.
- prepend 3y ago
  Of course there’s good content on YouTube, but the vast majority is crap or even anti-content and YouTube pushes bad content with its algorithm. I think it’s a function of preferring longer content to show more ads so what was once a 4 minute read blog post is now a 15 minute video that meanders around and around killing time. People watch it, very much, so it’s not YouTube’s fault entirely. But I wish they would incentivize valuable content over chaff. I think there’s a lot of bloat wastage that exists only because YouTube pays more and encourages it.
hardware2win 3y ago
Uh, are those silly faces actually tricking the algo or tricking humans?

by AHOHA 3y ago

secretsatan 3y ago

While there is a lot of that, there's still an awful lot of good content, especially for niche interests, you don't have to watch the stuff you don't like. I don't have much, if any, come up on my feed.

eiiot 3y ago

This is a bad take. There’s a lot of genuinely good content on YouTube, it’s just that band content tends to get more attention. Even with the bad content, that’s not a reason for YouTube to “die for good.” Just because you have to spend more time seeking out good content doesn’t make the platform invaluable.

SapporoChris 3y ago
invaluable: of great value, priceless. Seriously, youtube is not that. Let's go with a more reasonable definition that youtube is valuable. Value of time vs value of content. I can easily see having to spend more time seeking content resulting in the platform no longer being valuable.
prepend 3y ago
Of course there’s good content on YouTube, but the vast majority is crap or even anti-content and YouTube pushes bad content with its algorithm. I think it’s a function of preferring longer content to show more ads so what was once a 4 minute read blog post is now a 15 minute video that meanders around and around killing time. People watch it, very much, so it’s not YouTube’s fault entirely. But I wish they would incentivize valuable content over chaff. I think there’s a lot of bloat wastage that exists only because YouTube pays more and encourages it.

hardware2win 3y ago

Uh, are those silly faces actually tricking the algo or tricking humans?