5 ms·

That may be true, but if you don't like YouTube, go somewhere else. The argument that it's your machine and you choose what to run on it no longer holds when Y

That may be true, but if you don't like YouTube, go somewhere else. The argument that it's your machine and you choose what to run on it no longer holds when YouTube clearly no longer wants people with ad blockers as visitors. So watch ads, pay up, or go somewhere else. I always get downvoted for stating the obvious, but YouTube's monopoly was helped by adblockers, because alternatives, like Vimeo, couldn't differentiate themselves by being ads-free.

davidhyde 3y ago
Some people would be ok with paying but you cannot pay and still be an anonymous user. You need to be logged in and trust that Google won’t track you if you ask them not to.
epgui 3y ago
You can’t just “go somewhere else” your way out of social networks the same way you can with things and places that have linear impact/presence.
ath3nd 3y ago
How about no? There are anti competitive practices at place here and we are not supposed to just sit and take it, not all of us are Americans that accept unrestricted capitalism with the no breaks. I suppose you were also fine with Unity's change of toś and pricing, but many others weren't. We sent a strong enough message to the company so that their CEO resigned and hit them hard in the wallet and now they know better. As should you. What happened here is they cornered the market (a monopoly), and now are rising prices and making it impossible to use their product without giving them both your data AND money. The same thing can happen to your water, electricity and phone bills, if the governments didn't mandate anticompetitive practices in law. That is the same reason Verizon in the US is so expensive yet so bad in terms of value for money. Stop pushing your 'accept it or move on' mentality on others. There is lot to be done here with collective action and government support, not every country is 'everybody on their own' and 'Big Corp rule' like the US. So stop it. We don't want to go somewhere else unless we can help it, and are willing to fight for a better internet.
- CubsFan1060 3y ago
  I'm curious -- what do you want to happen in this situation? What is your best desired outcome? It sounds like you are arguing that video sharing sites are a utility?
  - ath3nd 3y ago
    Video sharing sites of the size/impact of Youtube, similarly to social platforms like Facebook/Instagram/Twitter whatever, and platforms like Google Search/Maps, etc have a tremendous impact on society. They have become a major way of how people communicate, make daily choices, purchasing decisions, vacation plans, etc. When a company is that big and that impactful (despite being a for-profit company), it is in interest to the general public that there are some checks and balances in place. For me, the best scenarios is governments involve themselves as they involve themselves in other areas of business: - telecommunications and utilities (Verizon) - transport (Uber has different treaties/operating models in different countries) - online marketplaces (Google) Only through treating these behemoths as providers of "public goods/utilities" via our governments, can we have them not regressing to what any monopoly would naturally regress to: arrogant hands-twisting thugs, not afraid to exploit their users for every penny. Keep in mind that governments already DO involve themselves in the business (mal)practices of these tech giants. For example, Tesla's new cybergarbage is unlikely to pass a scruitiny in the EU due to pedestrian safety/impact concerns. Google/Facebook/Instagram all have to respect the GDPR and its US cousin the CCPA, etc, etc. If it wasn't for measures like this, you'd not have "do-not-track" options in your browser, nor would you have adblockers in the Google play store... I simply want MORE, quicker and better government involvement into anticompetitive practices that (mostly) US tech giants use.
    - CubsFan1060 3y ago
      So what, specifically, do you want to see different about Youtube?
      - ath3nd 3y ago
        Three things: - go to it's pre-aggressive-ablocking-removal state - pay the content creators better - moderate better so people like Andrew Tate, Alex Jones, etc don't get a platform

davidhyde 3y ago

Some people would be ok with paying but you cannot pay and still be an anonymous user. You need to be logged in and trust that Google won’t track you if you ask them not to.

epgui 3y ago

You can’t just “go somewhere else” your way out of social networks the same way you can with things and places that have linear impact/presence.

ath3nd 3y ago

How about no? There are anti competitive practices at place here and we are not supposed to just sit and take it, not all of us are Americans that accept unrestricted capitalism with the no breaks. I suppose you were also fine with Unity's change of toś and pricing, but many others weren't. We sent a strong enough message to the company so that their CEO resigned and hit them hard in the wallet and now they know better. As should you. What happened here is they cornered the market (a monopoly), and now are rising prices and making it impossible to use their product without giving them both your data AND money. The same thing can happen to your water, electricity and phone bills, if the governments didn't mandate anticompetitive practices in law. That is the same reason Verizon in the US is so expensive yet so bad in terms of value for money. Stop pushing your 'accept it or move on' mentality on others. There is lot to be done here with collective action and government support, not every country is 'everybody on their own' and 'Big Corp rule' like the US. So stop it. We don't want to go somewhere else unless we can help it, and are willing to fight for a better internet.

CubsFan1060 3y ago
I'm curious -- what do you want to happen in this situation? What is your best desired outcome? It sounds like you are arguing that video sharing sites are a utility?
- ath3nd 3y ago
  Video sharing sites of the size/impact of Youtube, similarly to social platforms like Facebook/Instagram/Twitter whatever, and platforms like Google Search/Maps, etc have a tremendous impact on society. They have become a major way of how people communicate, make daily choices, purchasing decisions, vacation plans, etc. When a company is that big and that impactful (despite being a for-profit company), it is in interest to the general public that there are some checks and balances in place. For me, the best scenarios is governments involve themselves as they involve themselves in other areas of business: - telecommunications and utilities (Verizon) - transport (Uber has different treaties/operating models in different countries) - online marketplaces (Google) Only through treating these behemoths as providers of "public goods/utilities" via our governments, can we have them not regressing to what any monopoly would naturally regress to: arrogant hands-twisting thugs, not afraid to exploit their users for every penny. Keep in mind that governments already DO involve themselves in the business (mal)practices of these tech giants. For example, Tesla's new cybergarbage is unlikely to pass a scruitiny in the EU due to pedestrian safety/impact concerns. Google/Facebook/Instagram all have to respect the GDPR and its US cousin the CCPA, etc, etc. If it wasn't for measures like this, you'd not have "do-not-track" options in your browser, nor would you have adblockers in the Google play store... I simply want MORE, quicker and better government involvement into anticompetitive practices that (mostly) US tech giants use.
  - CubsFan1060 3y ago
    So what, specifically, do you want to see different about Youtube?
    - ath3nd 3y ago
      Three things: - go to it's pre-aggressive-ablocking-removal state - pay the content creators better - moderate better so people like Andrew Tate, Alex Jones, etc don't get a platform