7 ms·

The only thing irreplaceable for me is Youtube. Even if it's gotten worse as a platform over time, I still consume it more than any other type of video media an

by least 2y ago

The only thing irreplaceable for me is Youtube. Even if it's gotten worse as a platform over time, I still consume it more than any other type of video media and there are no good alternatives for much of the content that I enjoy watching.

autoexec 2y ago
The good news is that none of the content you care about is Google's. As soon as someone else provides a space for content creators to move to you can get rid of Youtube and never miss a single thing about it. Google has successfully pissed off enough youtubers that they're just waiting for the first chance to jump ship, just like we are as watchers. In the meantime, try to give as little as you can to Google. Use Newpipe and youtube-dl so you never see an ad.
- annexrichmond 2y ago
  Yeah but operating a service like YouTube is such a money pit (given on recent HN threads I've read). It seems like they've been mostly able to work because of their huge ad network, targeting, etc.
  - smaudet 2y ago
    Yeah, the important 3rd wheel of the video space: 1) Hosting space/cpu/bandwidth. Video is one of the most intense data jobs out there, behind I suppose maybe AI and Big Data (if anyone is still doing that). You need Terabytes of drive space, petabytes of traffic, all the CDNs, processors capable of encoding inefficient video uploads to efficient video downloads. 2) Network effect. People need to actually want to come, so that people come. 3) Paying for all this - People don't like donating, don't like paying, but hard drives/servers/power banks are not free. So you either charge premiums or use ads. I wish more people had been willing to pay for Youtube Pro, e.g. (I still do), they're (still) getting worse because the ad-supported version(s) are still the bulk of their income. And so the ad-supported version is messing up everything, being very aggressive, etc. You/I pay for Netflix, why wouldn't you pay for Youtube? You can't influence the dynamic with capitalism at all when something is free. Sure, companies can "en-shittify", but at least for video this is fairly simple - when it costs too much/works too terribly on one video platform, you can move to the next one. 1) and 2) Make it harder to start a new paid platform, but not impossible - you can directly reflect the costs to your users. YT is just a black box at present...but would have been less so if Youtube Pro had been more popular (ads might have been easier to block, even).
    - b112 2y ago
      There's a space for Netflix here. They have the "TV" class subscribers, they have all the networks, knowhow. All the initial groundwork is done. All they need is a platform for the youtube class content provider. They already have ad deals too. They could, if they found some model that works, snap up loads of talent.... and that talent could even stay on youtube too. As long as they keep content in its own category...
  - marcosdumay 2y ago
    It's not inherently a money pit. Google and Facebook have a complete oligopoly over the ads market and are manipulating it so nobody else can prosper.
    - hot_gril 2y ago
      It seems like inherently a money pit to me. Was Google even profiting off it before they started cramming in ads and offering YT Premium?
    - malfist 2y ago
      Serving video data to, potentially, billions of users is absolutely expensive. You can't, "in a weekend" a youtube clone that can stand up to the first viral hit.
      - skeledrew 2y ago
        That's what BitTorrent is for. The main issue with torrenting is that non-viral content is going to have very low availability.
- hot_gril 2y ago
  This generously assumes that the new provider won't take the same steps YouTube did. I feel like the only solution is to not care all that much about watching videos.
- AmpsterMan 2y ago
  Nebula is such a streaming service. From what I understand, they are a subscription based company that has a profit share incentive for it's creators. Consequently, the creators skew toward educational-esque content.
mobilejdral 2y ago
That is so wild to me. I only consume media there if I am sent a link. Every time I have gone there I find content that is literally optimized to use up and waste as much of my time as possible under the incentive of maximizing viewer minutes. I wonder what it would be like to spend a day in your shoes.
- itishappy 2y ago
  > Every time I have gone there I find content that is literally optimized to use up and waste as much of my time as possible under the incentive of maximizing viewer minutes. It's a feed, and it responds to your use. I click on longform educational content, I get lots of longform educational content. I find the act of opening clickbait videos in an incognito window along with judicious use of the "not interested" button has kept it quite usable.
  - the_af 2y ago
    > It's a feed, and it responds to your use. I click on longform educational content, I get lots of longform educational content. Yup. You still get the occasional dud, but most of the feed is relevant in my case. I once browsed YouTube without being logged in. Do not recommend. I wanted to gouge my eyes out. I imagine it's a similar experience to browsing the web without an adblocker.
- readthenotes1 2y ago
  Live the speedup ability in YouTube videos. Minimum 1.5x, some faster (because it's pretty obvious the creators slow the content down)
- the_af 2y ago
  > Every time I have gone there I find content that is literally optimized to use up and waste as much of my time as possible under the incentive of maximizing viewer minutes. Depends on what you're watching. I mean, everyone on YouTube is playing the algorithm game somewhat -- assuming they want to have their videos watched, and they do, or they wouldn't be there to begin with. Having said that, I watch a ton of YouTube videos. Not randomly, like zapping through TV channels (do people still do that, by the way?). I watch videos from the dozens of channels I'm subscribed to, by authors I enjoy watching and about topics that are relevant to me. YouTube is unbeatable for this, because almost everyone is on YouTube, but few other video platforms are as universal. And yes, I pay for YouTube Premium because ads absolutely break YouTube. Ads make everything worse. I'm still upset about the recent trend of authors placing "sponsor segments" embedded in their videos (looking at you, Squarespace -- you can go f*ck yourself); I wish paying for Premium automatically skipped these segments too, but oh well. At least some authors make self-deprecating jokes about their sponsored content.
annexrichmond 2y ago
I've personally been watching YouTube less and less. The ads are insane. I would normally spend more time watching videos but it's become so disruptive I think most of us can agree that many videos are unnecessarily long (as it's incentivized by the creator for ad revenue), so there's far more fluff in it. With the rise of LLMs, etc for getting knowledge fast , I just can't see how this model is sustainable. I don't want to waste time watching videos that could have been a short paragraph. And when you add 30 second ads every 5 mins it makes it even less compelling
- lawn 2y ago
  Don't everyone on HN use ublock origin? I haven't seen an ad in years.
  - usmcnapier 2y ago
    Same here.
  - rav3ndust 2y ago
    same. firefox with ubO is my best friend.
  - rossjudson 2y ago
    I don't want the ads, but I'd rather see the carefully curated list of creators I care about be able to get paid, and Youtube Music works for me. Youtube Premium is worth it.
  - instagib 2y ago
    Sideloaded the latest and greatest YouTube++/uYou/uYouPlus/(currently uYouEnhanced) on my iPhone and re-sign it weekly with AltStore, Trollstore, or use a jailbroken equivalent on a device that managed to stay jailbroken. There’s a few other new options I’ve seen through Reddit for web viewing, iOS content blockers, or hosting your own VPS invidious/piped instance with rotating ipv6 servers (not google/aws/digital ocean as they require using a web panel). You can leave ads on for whitelisted creators sponsored advertising content also.
  - 2y ago
guyzero 2y ago
I find it crazy that someone will say "I still consume it more than any other type of video media" but somehow just paying for it isn't an option. You can pay to make YT ads go away. And the payments go to the video creators (eventually).
- PodgieTar 2y ago
  I’m conflicted on this. I pay for YouTube premium - for background playing on my phone and for Ad-less on my TV. I pay more for Netflix, and I use it a lot less. So I’m airing on the side of agreeing, but I also think Googles tactics have been incredibly shoddy, and I can understand someone not wanting to support that.
- rc_mob 2y ago
  I don't want to send google money. I happily pay nebula though.
- sneak 2y ago
  You can’t pay YouTube to remove in-video ads that the video creators put in. For that you need SponsorBlock anyway, so might as well use a 3p client that supports blocking both kinds of ads, without giving money to Google to continue building ad surveillance software.
  - ok_dad 2y ago
    I don’t mind ads in the videos for creators I enjoy, it pays their bills. There’s a difference between those and YouTube’s ads which the creators don’t get a big percentage of. I can easily fast forward those ads if I want to, anyways. How do you expect all this content to be made without any sort of money? You’re basically leeching off the rest of us, in this case, IMO. I hate ads, but right now that’s the only ticket, or paying for premium. Perhaps that will change, I hope.
    - sneak 2y ago
      I mind all ads. They rob you of your most precious and nonrenewable resource without consent. Ads are cancer and should be excised at every opportunity. Ad companies should be destroyed. Ad tech workers should be blackballed. Shilling is shameful.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
cjk2 2y ago
I use yt-dlp to download the videos, then play it on VLC on my iPad. Much nicer experience!
- qwerpy 2y ago
  This is also my preferred way of consuming YouTube. In addition to zero ads, you get instant seek, consistently high bitrate, ability to watch anywhere, and no autoplay for the kids to get sent down an addiction spiral.

by least 2y ago

autoexec 2y ago

The good news is that none of the content you care about is Google's. As soon as someone else provides a space for content creators to move to you can get rid of Youtube and never miss a single thing about it. Google has successfully pissed off enough youtubers that they're just waiting for the first chance to jump ship, just like we are as watchers. In the meantime, try to give as little as you can to Google. Use Newpipe and youtube-dl so you never see an ad.

annexrichmond 2y ago
Yeah but operating a service like YouTube is such a money pit (given on recent HN threads I've read). It seems like they've been mostly able to work because of their huge ad network, targeting, etc.
- smaudet 2y ago
  Yeah, the important 3rd wheel of the video space: 1) Hosting space/cpu/bandwidth. Video is one of the most intense data jobs out there, behind I suppose maybe AI and Big Data (if anyone is still doing that). You need Terabytes of drive space, petabytes of traffic, all the CDNs, processors capable of encoding inefficient video uploads to efficient video downloads. 2) Network effect. People need to actually want to come, so that people come. 3) Paying for all this - People don't like donating, don't like paying, but hard drives/servers/power banks are not free. So you either charge premiums or use ads. I wish more people had been willing to pay for Youtube Pro, e.g. (I still do), they're (still) getting worse because the ad-supported version(s) are still the bulk of their income. And so the ad-supported version is messing up everything, being very aggressive, etc. You/I pay for Netflix, why wouldn't you pay for Youtube? You can't influence the dynamic with capitalism at all when something is free. Sure, companies can "en-shittify", but at least for video this is fairly simple - when it costs too much/works too terribly on one video platform, you can move to the next one. 1) and 2) Make it harder to start a new paid platform, but not impossible - you can directly reflect the costs to your users. YT is just a black box at present...but would have been less so if Youtube Pro had been more popular (ads might have been easier to block, even).
  - b112 2y ago
    There's a space for Netflix here. They have the "TV" class subscribers, they have all the networks, knowhow. All the initial groundwork is done. All they need is a platform for the youtube class content provider. They already have ad deals too. They could, if they found some model that works, snap up loads of talent.... and that talent could even stay on youtube too. As long as they keep content in its own category...
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  It's not inherently a money pit. Google and Facebook have a complete oligopoly over the ads market and are manipulating it so nobody else can prosper.
  - hot_gril 2y ago
    It seems like inherently a money pit to me. Was Google even profiting off it before they started cramming in ads and offering YT Premium?
  - malfist 2y ago
    Serving video data to, potentially, billions of users is absolutely expensive. You can't, "in a weekend" a youtube clone that can stand up to the first viral hit.
    - skeledrew 2y ago
      That's what BitTorrent is for. The main issue with torrenting is that non-viral content is going to have very low availability.
hot_gril 2y ago
This generously assumes that the new provider won't take the same steps YouTube did. I feel like the only solution is to not care all that much about watching videos.
AmpsterMan 2y ago
Nebula is such a streaming service. From what I understand, they are a subscription based company that has a profit share incentive for it's creators. Consequently, the creators skew toward educational-esque content.

mobilejdral 2y ago

That is so wild to me. I only consume media there if I am sent a link. Every time I have gone there I find content that is literally optimized to use up and waste as much of my time as possible under the incentive of maximizing viewer minutes. I wonder what it would be like to spend a day in your shoes.

itishappy 2y ago
> Every time I have gone there I find content that is literally optimized to use up and waste as much of my time as possible under the incentive of maximizing viewer minutes. It's a feed, and it responds to your use. I click on longform educational content, I get lots of longform educational content. I find the act of opening clickbait videos in an incognito window along with judicious use of the "not interested" button has kept it quite usable.
- the_af 2y ago
  > It's a feed, and it responds to your use. I click on longform educational content, I get lots of longform educational content. Yup. You still get the occasional dud, but most of the feed is relevant in my case. I once browsed YouTube without being logged in. Do not recommend. I wanted to gouge my eyes out. I imagine it's a similar experience to browsing the web without an adblocker.
readthenotes1 2y ago
Live the speedup ability in YouTube videos. Minimum 1.5x, some faster (because it's pretty obvious the creators slow the content down)
the_af 2y ago
> Every time I have gone there I find content that is literally optimized to use up and waste as much of my time as possible under the incentive of maximizing viewer minutes. Depends on what you're watching. I mean, everyone on YouTube is playing the algorithm game somewhat -- assuming they want to have their videos watched, and they do, or they wouldn't be there to begin with. Having said that, I watch a ton of YouTube videos. Not randomly, like zapping through TV channels (do people still do that, by the way?). I watch videos from the dozens of channels I'm subscribed to, by authors I enjoy watching and about topics that are relevant to me. YouTube is unbeatable for this, because almost everyone is on YouTube, but few other video platforms are as universal. And yes, I pay for YouTube Premium because ads absolutely break YouTube. Ads make everything worse. I'm still upset about the recent trend of authors placing "sponsor segments" embedded in their videos (looking at you, Squarespace -- you can go f*ck yourself); I wish paying for Premium automatically skipped these segments too, but oh well. At least some authors make self-deprecating jokes about their sponsored content.

annexrichmond 2y ago

I've personally been watching YouTube less and less. The ads are insane. I would normally spend more time watching videos but it's become so disruptive I think most of us can agree that many videos are unnecessarily long (as it's incentivized by the creator for ad revenue), so there's far more fluff in it. With the rise of LLMs, etc for getting knowledge fast , I just can't see how this model is sustainable. I don't want to waste time watching videos that could have been a short paragraph. And when you add 30 second ads every 5 mins it makes it even less compelling

lawn 2y ago
Don't everyone on HN use ublock origin? I haven't seen an ad in years.
- usmcnapier 2y ago
  Same here.
- rav3ndust 2y ago
  same. firefox with ubO is my best friend.
- rossjudson 2y ago
  I don't want the ads, but I'd rather see the carefully curated list of creators I care about be able to get paid, and Youtube Music works for me. Youtube Premium is worth it.
- instagib 2y ago
  Sideloaded the latest and greatest YouTube++/uYou/uYouPlus/(currently uYouEnhanced) on my iPhone and re-sign it weekly with AltStore, Trollstore, or use a jailbroken equivalent on a device that managed to stay jailbroken. There’s a few other new options I’ve seen through Reddit for web viewing, iOS content blockers, or hosting your own VPS invidious/piped instance with rotating ipv6 servers (not google/aws/digital ocean as they require using a web panel). You can leave ads on for whitelisted creators sponsored advertising content also.
- 2y ago

guyzero 2y ago

I find it crazy that someone will say "I still consume it more than any other type of video media" but somehow just paying for it isn't an option. You can pay to make YT ads go away. And the payments go to the video creators (eventually).

PodgieTar 2y ago
I’m conflicted on this. I pay for YouTube premium - for background playing on my phone and for Ad-less on my TV. I pay more for Netflix, and I use it a lot less. So I’m airing on the side of agreeing, but I also think Googles tactics have been incredibly shoddy, and I can understand someone not wanting to support that.
rc_mob 2y ago
I don't want to send google money. I happily pay nebula though.
sneak 2y ago
You can’t pay YouTube to remove in-video ads that the video creators put in. For that you need SponsorBlock anyway, so might as well use a 3p client that supports blocking both kinds of ads, without giving money to Google to continue building ad surveillance software.
- ok_dad 2y ago
  I don’t mind ads in the videos for creators I enjoy, it pays their bills. There’s a difference between those and YouTube’s ads which the creators don’t get a big percentage of. I can easily fast forward those ads if I want to, anyways. How do you expect all this content to be made without any sort of money? You’re basically leeching off the rest of us, in this case, IMO. I hate ads, but right now that’s the only ticket, or paying for premium. Perhaps that will change, I hope.
  - sneak 2y ago
    I mind all ads. They rob you of your most precious and nonrenewable resource without consent. Ads are cancer and should be excised at every opportunity. Ad companies should be destroyed. Ad tech workers should be blackballed. Shilling is shameful.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

cjk2 2y ago

I use yt-dlp to download the videos, then play it on VLC on my iPad. Much nicer experience!

qwerpy 2y ago
This is also my preferred way of consuming YouTube. In addition to zero ads, you get instant seek, consistently high bitrate, ability to watch anywhere, and no autoplay for the kids to get sent down an addiction spiral.