4 ms·

Youtube has a monopoly on online video content. It is extortion Before they had the total monopoly, they had very few ads. Now they have the monopoly, so they

Youtube has a monopoly on online video content. It is extortion Before they had the total monopoly, they had very few ads. Now they have the monopoly, so they are extorting us because of it

Zetice 3y ago
Oh man, let me help you find other content platforms! What are you interested in?! I use these non cable/network platforms: * https://dropout.tv https://dropout.tv <- comedy produced shows, hilarious * https://curiositystream.com/ https://curiositystream.com/ <- full to the brim with documentaries and educational content * https://www.pbs.org/explore/ https://www.pbs.org/explore/ <- it's PBS, but online! * https://www.britbox.com/us/ https://www.britbox.com/us/ <- British TV shows! So many good ones... And then there are the obvious platforms that aren't YT: * HBO Max * Peacock * Netflix * Paramount+ * Hulu * Amazon Prime Video * Apple TV+ So no, I don't really agree that YouTube has a monopoly. Too many alternatives that kick ass!
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  Extremely obvious case of apples not being oranges, in the sense of user-generated content not being the same as studio/production company generated content.
- Clamchop 3y ago
  Just a passerby, but content isn't fungible; no one is replacing Technology Connections with House of the Dragon or vice versa. The diversity of YouTube's content, the back catalog, its default status, network effects, integration with devices and services, and so much more make it hard to replace. And we shouldn't forget, rando users can upload whatever for sharing, which none of your alternatives do. Kind of the core idea there.
  - Zetice 3y ago
    I love Technology Connections FWIW, completely changed how I use my dishwasher! And I would disagree re: content isn't fungible. Nothing on YouTube is both necessary to specifically consume and entirely unavailable elsewhere. It's entertainment, and whatever "category" of entertainment you prefer, you can find content not on YouTube for that thing. "Random users uploading content" has not been the primary use case of YouTube for many years now. It's mostly run by content creators now, with entire companies dedicated to creating content, just the same as the platforms I've listed.
- xcv123 3y ago
  > So no, I don't really agree that YouTube has a monopoly. Too many alternatives that kick ass! None of those are YouTube alternatives. They are not even remotely similar. You haven't got a clue what YouTube is about. Here's a list of YouTube alternatives: * Rumble * Odysee * Vimeo * Twitch * BitChute But the alternatives are niche platforms with nowhere near the level of content that YouTube provides.

Youtube has a monopoly on online video content. It is extortion Before they had the total monopoly, they had very few ads. Now they have the monopoly, so they are extorting us because of it

Zetice 3y ago

Oh man, let me help you find other content platforms! What are you interested in?! I use these non cable/network platforms: * https://dropout.tv https://dropout.tv <- comedy produced shows, hilarious * https://curiositystream.com/ https://curiositystream.com/ <- full to the brim with documentaries and educational content * https://www.pbs.org/explore/ https://www.pbs.org/explore/ <- it's PBS, but online! * https://www.britbox.com/us/ https://www.britbox.com/us/ <- British TV shows! So many good ones... And then there are the obvious platforms that aren't YT: * HBO Max * Peacock * Netflix * Paramount+ * Hulu * Amazon Prime Video * Apple TV+ So no, I don't really agree that YouTube has a monopoly. Too many alternatives that kick ass!

anigbrowl 3y ago
Extremely obvious case of apples not being oranges, in the sense of user-generated content not being the same as studio/production company generated content.
Clamchop 3y ago
Just a passerby, but content isn't fungible; no one is replacing Technology Connections with House of the Dragon or vice versa. The diversity of YouTube's content, the back catalog, its default status, network effects, integration with devices and services, and so much more make it hard to replace. And we shouldn't forget, rando users can upload whatever for sharing, which none of your alternatives do. Kind of the core idea there.
- Zetice 3y ago
  I love Technology Connections FWIW, completely changed how I use my dishwasher! And I would disagree re: content isn't fungible. Nothing on YouTube is both necessary to specifically consume and entirely unavailable elsewhere. It's entertainment, and whatever "category" of entertainment you prefer, you can find content not on YouTube for that thing. "Random users uploading content" has not been the primary use case of YouTube for many years now. It's mostly run by content creators now, with entire companies dedicated to creating content, just the same as the platforms I've listed.
xcv123 3y ago
> So no, I don't really agree that YouTube has a monopoly. Too many alternatives that kick ass! None of those are YouTube alternatives. They are not even remotely similar. You haven't got a clue what YouTube is about. Here's a list of YouTube alternatives: * Rumble * Odysee * Vimeo * Twitch * BitChute But the alternatives are niche platforms with nowhere near the level of content that YouTube provides.