4 ms·

So you’re saying it boosts engagement, advancing the creators primary goal of putting something on YouTube to begin with?

by phoghed 12d ago

whattheheckheck 12d ago
Shitty engagement that's not good long term human flourishing.
- phoghed 12d ago
  Shitty engagement will just get them recommended to more people because of The Algorithm though.
  - zahlman 12d ago
    Yes, and this is a bad thing. It's bad that it gets rewarded and it's bad that creators whose main content is good feel compelled to do it. And I would watch all of this stuff just the same, based on the topic matter and the channel's reputation, without them doing these things, as long as YouTube had put a trial of that content in front of me in the first place. And I get no way to actually give that feedback on YouTube. There are plenty of channels I'll watch semi-regularly that have god-awful thumbnails. But the same is true of almost everything that I immediately click "don't recommend channel" on.
dspillett 12d ago
I'm saying that it at best drives a temporary increase in engagement, then you look even more like everyone else than you did before because everyone is doing the same thing with the same AIs. And while that engagement counts in the immediate stats, it might result in a drop overall as some mark you as a channel they don't want to visit again. Then again, I don't think many youtubers are relying on discerning viewers so maybe they will get a boost in the hollow attention the crave.
- phoghed 12d ago
  > the hollow attention they crave It’s their job, their source of income (or they’re aspiring to it). Making bait thumbnails is a necessary evil. If they don’t they’re leaving money on the table for no reason. If they AB test some thumbnails and the AI ones get more views/engagement then of course they are going to do that. I think the overall premise of “if AI thumbnails are even getting more engagement, it must be from haters” is faulty to begin with. It just fits your personal narrative. We simply don’t know.
  - dspillett 12d ago
    Peers Morgan's source of income, and hence his job, is being rage bait in (vaguely) human form. A pound shop Alex Jones. It's being his job doesn't mean I have to respect it, or him. See also: loan sharks, living statues, influencers generally.
    - phoghed 12d ago
      Who said anything about you personally respecting anyone?
      - dspillett 12d ago
        >> the hollow attention they crave > It’s their job, their source of income You seemed to be reacting to my low opinion of the practices of attention dredgers, as if I'm bad for holding that opinion and a should respect all career choices and income generation attempts. Perhaps I read that quite wrong.
        phoghed 12d ago
        > as if I’m bad I didn’t say anything like that, you pulled that feeling out of yourself. I’m just pointing out that they are doing it for money. Most white collar workers are using AI as part of their job these days.

So you’re saying it boosts engagement, advancing the creators primary goal of putting something on YouTube to begin with?

by phoghed 12d ago

So you’re saying it boosts engagement, advancing the creators primary goal of putting something on YouTube to begin with?

whattheheckheck 12d ago

Shitty engagement that's not good long term human flourishing.

phoghed 12d ago
Shitty engagement will just get them recommended to more people because of The Algorithm though.
- zahlman 12d ago
  Yes, and this is a bad thing. It's bad that it gets rewarded and it's bad that creators whose main content is good feel compelled to do it. And I would watch all of this stuff just the same, based on the topic matter and the channel's reputation, without them doing these things, as long as YouTube had put a trial of that content in front of me in the first place. And I get no way to actually give that feedback on YouTube. There are plenty of channels I'll watch semi-regularly that have god-awful thumbnails. But the same is true of almost everything that I immediately click "don't recommend channel" on.

dspillett 12d ago

I'm saying that it at best drives a temporary increase in engagement, then you look even more like everyone else than you did before because everyone is doing the same thing with the same AIs. And while that engagement counts in the immediate stats, it might result in a drop overall as some mark you as a channel they don't want to visit again. Then again, I don't think many youtubers are relying on discerning viewers so maybe they will get a boost in the hollow attention the crave.

phoghed 12d ago
> the hollow attention they crave It’s their job, their source of income (or they’re aspiring to it). Making bait thumbnails is a necessary evil. If they don’t they’re leaving money on the table for no reason. If they AB test some thumbnails and the AI ones get more views/engagement then of course they are going to do that. I think the overall premise of “if AI thumbnails are even getting more engagement, it must be from haters” is faulty to begin with. It just fits your personal narrative. We simply don’t know.
- dspillett 12d ago
  Peers Morgan's source of income, and hence his job, is being rage bait in (vaguely) human form. A pound shop Alex Jones. It's being his job doesn't mean I have to respect it, or him. See also: loan sharks, living statues, influencers generally.
  - phoghed 12d ago
    Who said anything about you personally respecting anyone?
    - dspillett 12d ago
      >> the hollow attention they crave > It’s their job, their source of income You seemed to be reacting to my low opinion of the practices of attention dredgers, as if I'm bad for holding that opinion and a should respect all career choices and income generation attempts. Perhaps I read that quite wrong.
      - phoghed 12d ago
        > as if I’m bad I didn’t say anything like that, you pulled that feeling out of yourself. I’m just pointing out that they are doing it for money. Most white collar workers are using AI as part of their job these days.