3 ms·

> Do you not think YouTube will penalize channels for choosing to present less ads? I know that I go with their suggested defaults, on the assumption that I wil

> Do you not think YouTube will penalize channels for choosing to present less ads? I know that I go with their suggested defaults, on the assumption that I will be punished if I depart from that. Sounds like grounds for an investigation that could develop into a lawsuit.

crazygringo 3y ago
A lawsuit based on what law? I don't know why it would be illegal for YouTube to use its recommendation algorithm to favor videos with ads. It's a for-profit business after all.
- Applejinx 3y ago
  Yes, it would fall under the category of 'dark patterns'. If you're not allowed to block ads, you sure as hell don't have a right to be promoted while refusing to RUN ads. I've assumed the worst for years now.
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    There isn't a law against "dark patterns", and selective/weighted recommendations aren't even generally considered an example of a dark pattern. The FTC has brought lawsuits against deceptive practices, like tricking people into signing up for something they didn't mean to -- that might be what you're referring to? But I don't see any deceptive practice here. YouTube favoring more profitable videos is no different from grocery stores putting candy next to you while you wait to check out. Companies are trying to manipulate you into selecting the most profitable thing all the time, that's the norm. But you still get to choose which video to click on, the same as it's your choice whether or not to buy the candy at checkout.
- Buttons840 3y ago
  The court current hold that growing a plant on your own land to feed to your own animals is "interstate commerce"[0]. Lawyers can squeeze some kind of case out of this. You might not win in the courts, but such a lawsuit can also build political support for things like anti-trust enforcement, data protection laws, advertising regulation, etc. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

crazygringo 3y ago

A lawsuit based on what law? I don't know why it would be illegal for YouTube to use its recommendation algorithm to favor videos with ads. It's a for-profit business after all.

Applejinx 3y ago
Yes, it would fall under the category of 'dark patterns'. If you're not allowed to block ads, you sure as hell don't have a right to be promoted while refusing to RUN ads. I've assumed the worst for years now.
- crazygringo 3y ago
  There isn't a law against "dark patterns", and selective/weighted recommendations aren't even generally considered an example of a dark pattern. The FTC has brought lawsuits against deceptive practices, like tricking people into signing up for something they didn't mean to -- that might be what you're referring to? But I don't see any deceptive practice here. YouTube favoring more profitable videos is no different from grocery stores putting candy next to you while you wait to check out. Companies are trying to manipulate you into selecting the most profitable thing all the time, that's the norm. But you still get to choose which video to click on, the same as it's your choice whether or not to buy the candy at checkout.
Buttons840 3y ago
The court current hold that growing a plant on your own land to feed to your own animals is "interstate commerce"[0]. Lawyers can squeeze some kind of case out of this. You might not win in the courts, but such a lawsuit can also build political support for things like anti-trust enforcement, data protection laws, advertising regulation, etc. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn