7 ms·

I think the point is that if we want this to stop happening, we have to address the cause of the problem, not just complain about its effects.

red-iron-pine 2y ago
to put a finer point on it: capitalism. "then the MBAs got involved" is a cop-out, it's a systemic issue.
- chongli 2y ago
  to put a finer point on it: capitalism. That's still an extremely blunt point. While we can imagine some alternative world where we all live in a communist utopia and the internet is the great free place it was in its early days, it's not so easy to build such a society. All the attempts I'm aware of either didn't scale (small, local communes) or were large-scale disasters resulting in the deaths of millions. What we have now is no paradise, but it's not a disaster either. It's balanced on the razor's edge of disaster, however.
  - Terr_ 2y ago
    I'm assuming parent-poster means "publicly-traded corporations with limited-liability and low friction on transfers of ownership." However you're right that "capitalism" encompasses many potential different varieties and actors. For example, family-owned businesses are equally "capitalism", but they don't show up much in this kind of product-degradation story.
    - chongli 2y ago
      For example, family-owned businesses are equally "capitalism", but they don't show up much in this kind of product-degradation story. Family owned businesses can be sold to private equity just like any other. Instant Pot was a family owned business started by the inventor and it was famously sold to private equity who then proceeded to raid its assets and bankrupt the company.
      - Terr_ 2y ago
        I mean they don't know up as perpetrators. In contrast, I've never heard a complaint about a previously-respected product run by a private-equity firm that became ruined after it was taken private by a closely-held family business.
jl6 2y ago
But the cause isn’t simply being for-profit. There are plenty of for-profit enterprises which make good products. If I were to propose a cause, it would be the normalization of internet stuff being “free”.
- Kiro 2y ago
  And yet, when YouTube cracks down on adblockers, people on here get outraged instead of just paying for Premium. Everyone keeps saying "just let me pay" but when the option exists, it seems like most still avoid it and stick to complaining.
  - layman51 2y ago
    I read that in their battle with adblockers, the YouTube team seems to have broken Premium at least once. I think they were accidentally showing banner ads to Premium users.[1] It seems kind of odd, but wouldn’t your money be better off being spent on helping the ad-blocking effort rather than paying websites that seem to offer a gradually worse experience for everyone who isn’t blocking ads? [1]: https://old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/18ll7y6/i_have_youtube_premium_why_am_i_getting_adds/ https://old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/18ll7y6/i_have_you...
    - Kiro 2y ago
      Yes, that's certainly an odd argument. Why would I do that when I'm happy with the service I'm paying for? Especially when it's the best way to support the creators I enjoy, since they get a much bigger share of revenue from Premium views than regular views.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    I don’t trust or like the company. I expect them to drive up the premium price in the future, make it inconvenient to use multiple devices, etc. so I’d much rather steal their stuff.

red-iron-pine 2y ago

to put a finer point on it: capitalism. "then the MBAs got involved" is a cop-out, it's a systemic issue.

chongli 2y ago
to put a finer point on it: capitalism. That's still an extremely blunt point. While we can imagine some alternative world where we all live in a communist utopia and the internet is the great free place it was in its early days, it's not so easy to build such a society. All the attempts I'm aware of either didn't scale (small, local communes) or were large-scale disasters resulting in the deaths of millions. What we have now is no paradise, but it's not a disaster either. It's balanced on the razor's edge of disaster, however.
- Terr_ 2y ago
  I'm assuming parent-poster means "publicly-traded corporations with limited-liability and low friction on transfers of ownership." However you're right that "capitalism" encompasses many potential different varieties and actors. For example, family-owned businesses are equally "capitalism", but they don't show up much in this kind of product-degradation story.
  - chongli 2y ago
    For example, family-owned businesses are equally "capitalism", but they don't show up much in this kind of product-degradation story. Family owned businesses can be sold to private equity just like any other. Instant Pot was a family owned business started by the inventor and it was famously sold to private equity who then proceeded to raid its assets and bankrupt the company.
    - Terr_ 2y ago
      I mean they don't know up as perpetrators. In contrast, I've never heard a complaint about a previously-respected product run by a private-equity firm that became ruined after it was taken private by a closely-held family business.

jl6 2y ago

But the cause isn’t simply being for-profit. There are plenty of for-profit enterprises which make good products. If I were to propose a cause, it would be the normalization of internet stuff being “free”.

Kiro 2y ago
And yet, when YouTube cracks down on adblockers, people on here get outraged instead of just paying for Premium. Everyone keeps saying "just let me pay" but when the option exists, it seems like most still avoid it and stick to complaining.
- layman51 2y ago
  I read that in their battle with adblockers, the YouTube team seems to have broken Premium at least once. I think they were accidentally showing banner ads to Premium users.[1] It seems kind of odd, but wouldn’t your money be better off being spent on helping the ad-blocking effort rather than paying websites that seem to offer a gradually worse experience for everyone who isn’t blocking ads? [1]: https://old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/18ll7y6/i_have_youtube_premium_why_am_i_getting_adds/ https://old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/18ll7y6/i_have_you...
  - Kiro 2y ago
    Yes, that's certainly an odd argument. Why would I do that when I'm happy with the service I'm paying for? Especially when it's the best way to support the creators I enjoy, since they get a much bigger share of revenue from Premium views than regular views.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  I don’t trust or like the company. I expect them to drive up the premium price in the future, make it inconvenient to use multiple devices, etc. so I’d much rather steal their stuff.