6 ms·

But you're not going to pay because it is quite literally the biggest library of high quality videos ever existed? It is so weird how people can buy ridiculousl

But you're not going to pay because it is quite literally the biggest library of high quality videos ever existed? It is so weird how people can buy ridiculously expensive coffee but cannot fathom paying 2x that monthly for a service that they use almost 24/7 for music, videos and most importantly, for archiving. As it stands, Youtube have absolutely zero obligations to store any videos indefinitely. If Youtube "owes" its user some service, which it provides for free, then it might as well be state funded or become non-profit. I keep asking people the same question; if YOU are the owner of Youtube, how would you stay afloat? Good will of the people to donate money? lol. inb4 they make so much money from ads!! Well, there you go, theres the answer. They (and we) need ads to keep Youtube afloat.

kazinator 3y ago
Archiving? Wut? If you find anything you really like on YT, you better download it before it disappears.
duluca 3y ago
2x? More like one cup in this economy.
zinclozenge 3y ago
I specifically started paying for youtube premium because spotify just didn't have nearly as much of the music I listen to, and specifically the artists I listen to, and the youtube music app was good enough. The fact that I can watch youtube without ads is a nice little bonus. For my purposes, youtube premium is 100% worth it.
- politelemon 3y ago
  I'm actually not super familiar with Spotify. Does it not allow users to upload their own music? I understand YouTube, it's easy to upload to it, so all an artist needs to do it add some cover art and upload the music. Surely Spotify wants to encompass the SoundCloud functionality. As a listener, I use yt because it's easy to find new things similar to what I just heard. And people also do mixes of many different pieces together, like a mixtape from someone I don't know. Those are great for uninterrupted listening. Can you do that on Spotify?
dclowd9901 3y ago
I watch maybe 6 YouTube videos a month. We’re talking videos shorter than 10 minutes It’s not exactly what I’d call dedicated watching. If you think I’m going to pay $10 for maybe an hour of video, I think we just have different standards of expense.
- ss1996 3y ago
  Their comment was not targeted at you. It's not even worth the effort for you to install YouTube Vanced, etc since you watch 6 videos a month. Their comment was to people who watch a lot of YouTube, but still whine about the $14 cost.
- anon-3988 3y ago
  What about musics? And all the videos that you indirectly watched through links on the wider internet? It is pretty impressive to only watch 60 minutes of Youtube per month, unless you consume media from other places. Otherwise, good on you for not spending as much time staring at videos. I use Youtube to watch Frontline, PBS, news, etc etc so its not just for entertainment.
- dragonmost 3y ago
  Then I don't the 6x 5sec of ads a month should be a problem either
- Cloudef 3y ago
  This, with sponsorblock that also skips all the hardcoded ads and filler, the playtime is even shorter. Highly recommend sponsorblock and clickbait remover
johnea 3y ago
[flagged]
Sabinus 3y ago
I would love YouTube to be state owned. The same with a state backed digital identity and social media.
- romanovcode 3y ago
  Because state owned media platforms has such a great track record across the world, right? Go watch Chinas CCTV or Russias RT if you like state-owned media outlets.
  - Sabinus 3y ago
    Australia, the UK, France, Germany, Qatar and many many other countries have state media companies with high quality content. They have bias, but so do private companies. State owned media outlets are only awful if the state is awful.
joshelgar 3y ago
People sometimes forget this - people don't pay just because they use something. And sometimes, like with Youtube, many people wish they didn't use it. It's hard to get people to pay for something they wish they didn't use.
- slimsag 3y ago
  Yup - why would I pay for it when I'd prefer not using it at all and getting that time back? They're helping me with that.
yipbub 3y ago
Places like Youtube are now a public platform serving many important purposes. Designing for addiction, vague policing, and arbitrary trends is a problem. Are the videos on YouTube worth a payment? Yes, but there is an arbitrarily frustrating and exploitative user experience that comes with it. I pay for premium, but have stopped watching Youtube out of frustration with the addictive nature. I will probably stop paying for it soon as it is currently harming me and designed to do so in exactly that way. I would pay more for something where I have more control over the content I receive and has a more transparent way of governing content creators, and slightly less power over content creators. Moderation is well and good and necessary, but Youtube has failed unrepentantly many times in this regard.
- miohat 3y ago
  You definitely have control over what you get from YouTube. You can delete certain type of videos from your watch history so that such video will disappear from the recommended list. Pretty easy. As for regulation, mega-platforms like YouTube are facing pressure from governments from all over the world, and each government has its own concern and requirements. It is pretty hard (or impossible) to come up with an explicit policy that satisfies every user and government.
  - yipbub 3y ago
    To me, it seems to be merely the illusion of control. Sure, you can teach it what topics you prefer, but it'll always be tempting you with what is truly addictive and crap. Trying its luck like an adversary. It also punishes creators who create their content at a pace that's more sustainable for both producer and consumer. There's plenty of really good bait, but in the end a trap is a trap.
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  > Designing for addiction As if people haven't been addicted to watching TV for the past five decades. You decide for yourself what kind of content to get from YouTube, they don't force you into harmful habits.
jancsika 3y ago
If Government Ran Youtube: This vital service is slow as hell, goes to show government never does anything right Current Youtube: Well obviously this vital service needs to be slow-as-hell because ads, what are you gonna fund it by donations lol
ozim 3y ago
If you make something free at first to get people hooked that is a scam and is called bait and switch. Only thing different is that google is doing that in terms of decades. No wonder it’s like no one wants to pay after decades of free access and no ads added to videos.
- vore 3y ago
  If your choice is between no YouTube vs ad-supported + premium YouTube, what would you rather have? How would you keep YouTube afloat?
  - ozim 3y ago
    Should be premium from the start. It would probably not be as popular so no YouTube would be the answer.
avarun 3y ago
Speak for yourself. Most normies I know are not using Youtube anywhere near 24/7.
whateveracct 3y ago
I'm building a locally hosted app I use to download videos async. So the downside is I can't watch videos instantly. The upside is I can't be advertised to. You realize YT isn't special, right? They are piggybacking on user content more than users are on their infra.
- anon-3988 3y ago
  I think being able to host petabytes upon petabytes of videos and serving them at a pretty good speed is pretty special. > They are piggybacking on user content more than users are on their infra. Are you sure? How many people host their own content now? People that do that will soon become irrelevant because for half of humanity YT is THE video hosting site with the rest being Huabao, niconico or something. So in that regard it is special.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
treme 3y ago
agreed. youtube is allowing so many people to make decent income as independent content provider. I'm quite tired of these hipster posts making egregious demands from youtube. Make your own youtube.

kazinator 3y ago

Archiving? Wut? If you find anything you really like on YT, you better download it before it disappears.

duluca 3y ago

2x? More like one cup in this economy.

zinclozenge 3y ago

I specifically started paying for youtube premium because spotify just didn't have nearly as much of the music I listen to, and specifically the artists I listen to, and the youtube music app was good enough. The fact that I can watch youtube without ads is a nice little bonus. For my purposes, youtube premium is 100% worth it.

politelemon 3y ago
I'm actually not super familiar with Spotify. Does it not allow users to upload their own music? I understand YouTube, it's easy to upload to it, so all an artist needs to do it add some cover art and upload the music. Surely Spotify wants to encompass the SoundCloud functionality. As a listener, I use yt because it's easy to find new things similar to what I just heard. And people also do mixes of many different pieces together, like a mixtape from someone I don't know. Those are great for uninterrupted listening. Can you do that on Spotify?

dclowd9901 3y ago

I watch maybe 6 YouTube videos a month. We’re talking videos shorter than 10 minutes It’s not exactly what I’d call dedicated watching. If you think I’m going to pay $10 for maybe an hour of video, I think we just have different standards of expense.

ss1996 3y ago
Their comment was not targeted at you. It's not even worth the effort for you to install YouTube Vanced, etc since you watch 6 videos a month. Their comment was to people who watch a lot of YouTube, but still whine about the $14 cost.
anon-3988 3y ago
What about musics? And all the videos that you indirectly watched through links on the wider internet? It is pretty impressive to only watch 60 minutes of Youtube per month, unless you consume media from other places. Otherwise, good on you for not spending as much time staring at videos. I use Youtube to watch Frontline, PBS, news, etc etc so its not just for entertainment.
dragonmost 3y ago
Then I don't the 6x 5sec of ads a month should be a problem either
Cloudef 3y ago
This, with sponsorblock that also skips all the hardcoded ads and filler, the playtime is even shorter. Highly recommend sponsorblock and clickbait remover

johnea 3y ago

[flagged]

Sabinus 3y ago

I would love YouTube to be state owned. The same with a state backed digital identity and social media.

romanovcode 3y ago
Because state owned media platforms has such a great track record across the world, right? Go watch Chinas CCTV or Russias RT if you like state-owned media outlets.
- Sabinus 3y ago
  Australia, the UK, France, Germany, Qatar and many many other countries have state media companies with high quality content. They have bias, but so do private companies. State owned media outlets are only awful if the state is awful.

joshelgar 3y ago

People sometimes forget this - people don't pay just because they use something. And sometimes, like with Youtube, many people wish they didn't use it. It's hard to get people to pay for something they wish they didn't use.

slimsag 3y ago
Yup - why would I pay for it when I'd prefer not using it at all and getting that time back? They're helping me with that.

yipbub 3y ago

Places like Youtube are now a public platform serving many important purposes. Designing for addiction, vague policing, and arbitrary trends is a problem. Are the videos on YouTube worth a payment? Yes, but there is an arbitrarily frustrating and exploitative user experience that comes with it. I pay for premium, but have stopped watching Youtube out of frustration with the addictive nature. I will probably stop paying for it soon as it is currently harming me and designed to do so in exactly that way. I would pay more for something where I have more control over the content I receive and has a more transparent way of governing content creators, and slightly less power over content creators. Moderation is well and good and necessary, but Youtube has failed unrepentantly many times in this regard.

miohat 3y ago
You definitely have control over what you get from YouTube. You can delete certain type of videos from your watch history so that such video will disappear from the recommended list. Pretty easy. As for regulation, mega-platforms like YouTube are facing pressure from governments from all over the world, and each government has its own concern and requirements. It is pretty hard (or impossible) to come up with an explicit policy that satisfies every user and government.
- yipbub 3y ago
  To me, it seems to be merely the illusion of control. Sure, you can teach it what topics you prefer, but it'll always be tempting you with what is truly addictive and crap. Trying its luck like an adversary. It also punishes creators who create their content at a pace that's more sustainable for both producer and consumer. There's plenty of really good bait, but in the end a trap is a trap.
carlosjobim 3y ago
> Designing for addiction As if people haven't been addicted to watching TV for the past five decades. You decide for yourself what kind of content to get from YouTube, they don't force you into harmful habits.

jancsika 3y ago

If Government Ran Youtube: This vital service is slow as hell, goes to show government never does anything right Current Youtube: Well obviously this vital service needs to be slow-as-hell because ads, what are you gonna fund it by donations lol

ozim 3y ago

If you make something free at first to get people hooked that is a scam and is called bait and switch. Only thing different is that google is doing that in terms of decades. No wonder it’s like no one wants to pay after decades of free access and no ads added to videos.

vore 3y ago
If your choice is between no YouTube vs ad-supported + premium YouTube, what would you rather have? How would you keep YouTube afloat?
- ozim 3y ago
  Should be premium from the start. It would probably not be as popular so no YouTube would be the answer.

avarun 3y ago

Speak for yourself. Most normies I know are not using Youtube anywhere near 24/7.

whateveracct 3y ago

I'm building a locally hosted app I use to download videos async. So the downside is I can't watch videos instantly. The upside is I can't be advertised to. You realize YT isn't special, right? They are piggybacking on user content more than users are on their infra.

anon-3988 3y ago
I think being able to host petabytes upon petabytes of videos and serving them at a pretty good speed is pretty special. > They are piggybacking on user content more than users are on their infra. Are you sure? How many people host their own content now? People that do that will soon become irrelevant because for half of humanity YT is THE video hosting site with the rest being Huabao, niconico or something. So in that regard it is special.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

treme 3y ago

agreed. youtube is allowing so many people to make decent income as independent content provider. I'm quite tired of these hipster posts making egregious demands from youtube. Make your own youtube.