3 ms·
The thing is that this argument only works if you just assume that everything people put on youtube is put there with the expectation that people will pay to se
by contravariant 3y ago
The thing is that this argument only works if you just assume that everything people put on youtube is put there with the expectation that people will pay to see it, rather than just to put it out there in whatever way is most convenient.
If they want to be paid they should just go paid and see if anyone still wants to share videos on a closed platform, if they don't want to do that why should I need to approve of every single alternative they manage to come up with?
- bloppe 3y agoIt costs Google billions of dollars every year in servers, storage, bandwidth, and electricity just to keep the lights on at YouTube. Just because a video is posted without the uploader expecting people to pay for it, does not mean it can be hosted without any cost to the infrastructure operator.