4 ms·

I don't know why you're getting downvoted. Efficiency projects like the transcoding ASIC are a big part of pushing YouTube to profitability, as well as the alt

I don't know why you're getting downvoted. Efficiency projects like the transcoding ASIC are a big part of pushing YouTube to profitability, as well as the alternate revenue streams and heavy increases in monetization. Video serving is extremely expensive and difficult compared to everything else Google does. Ruth Porat has been on record many times indicating that YouTube wasn't profitable in the 2010's. I think her public statements have only indicated that YouTube was free cash flow positive as of the 2020's, but I haven't found exactly where that happened - Google has experimented with a lot of different kinds of breakdowns of its finances. I assume that hiding the economics of YouTube is part of this (as well as protection against a zealous DOJ saying that Google's businesses are separable).

serial_dev 2y ago
> I don't know why you're getting downvoted. Because I'm not here to read a wall of text generated by ChatGPT.
- AlbertCory 2y ago
  Why are you here, then? Download the financial statements. It's not like they're behind a paywall.
  - Marsymars 2y ago
    > Why are you here, then? Different user, but I'm here to read what people are writing. IMO, pasting GPT content is about on par with replying to something with a LMGTFY link.
    - AlbertCory 2y ago
      LMGTFY is equivalent to "you could look it up, so go do it." I'm not your research service.
- pclmulqdq 2y ago
  I normally hate the ChatGPT spam on this forum, but this was not a bad use for it (assuming it wasn't lying).
  - fragmede 2y ago
    > assuming it wasn't lying that's the key issue with this kind of ChatGPT writing. Code you can relatively easily check for correctness - just run it. For analysis on this level, it really had to be based on facts and reality, not generated by a bullshit generator to be of actual use.
    - pclmulqdq 2y ago
      I actually went back to the source it pointed out - SEC filings and the call transcripts are all public. It isn't citing the most recent statements on YouTube by far, but the citation of 2017 was at least correct. In this case, digging through all the material to find the factual basis is the hard part, and corroborating it is not (for those who care).

serial_dev 2y ago

> I don't know why you're getting downvoted. Because I'm not here to read a wall of text generated by ChatGPT.

AlbertCory 2y ago
Why are you here, then? Download the financial statements. It's not like they're behind a paywall.
- Marsymars 2y ago
  > Why are you here, then? Different user, but I'm here to read what people are writing. IMO, pasting GPT content is about on par with replying to something with a LMGTFY link.
  - AlbertCory 2y ago
    LMGTFY is equivalent to "you could look it up, so go do it." I'm not your research service.
pclmulqdq 2y ago
I normally hate the ChatGPT spam on this forum, but this was not a bad use for it (assuming it wasn't lying).
- fragmede 2y ago
  > assuming it wasn't lying that's the key issue with this kind of ChatGPT writing. Code you can relatively easily check for correctness - just run it. For analysis on this level, it really had to be based on facts and reality, not generated by a bullshit generator to be of actual use.
  - pclmulqdq 2y ago
    I actually went back to the source it pointed out - SEC filings and the call transcripts are all public. It isn't citing the most recent statements on YouTube by far, but the citation of 2017 was at least correct. In this case, digging through all the material to find the factual basis is the hard part, and corroborating it is not (for those who care).