3 ms·

In the 90s, there was no "engagement" and "content" just meant the content of the thing you were talking about, but I digress... > None of the megacorps give a

by qwery 2y ago

In the 90s, there was no "engagement" and "content" just meant the content of the thing you were talking about, but I digress... > None of the megacorps give a damn about that as is evident by their behavior. The rumour (and extrapolation) the discussion is based on is that Youtube prefers their bloated player to an unknown alternative because it makes the videos play faster, which drives "engagement". That is, in this case, the "megacorp" literally does care about that. > it doesn't make sense for you to optimize that on their behalf This is certainly true, but I don't think that's what the parent comment was suggesting.

froggit 2y ago
> In the 90s, there was no "engagement" and "content" just meant the content of the thing you were talking about, but I digress... Sometimes i think back at this idea from the 80s when i need some perspective: "Productivity soars when a computer and its users interact at a pace (<400ms) that ensures that neither has to wait on the other." https://lawsofux.com/doherty-threshold/ https://lawsofux.com/doherty-threshold/
- qwery 2y ago
  That website/page is a bit weird. It seems to be based on a TV show[basedon]? What I assume is the actual IBM report[0] might interest you. [0] https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102751398 https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/10275139... [basedon] https://daverupert.com/2015/06/doherty-threshold/ https://daverupert.com/2015/06/doherty-threshold/