pb7

35 ms·

541.
by pb7 3y ago
A few questions: 1) Who is being abused? The platform? Can you elaborate? 2) Can you give an example of the corporate brainwashing you’re referring to? 3) What are you glad about specifically?
542.
by pb7 3y ago
No, you wouldn’t because the stock price would keep going up so you would sell less and less each time and when the price got too high, the stock would do a split. Every time a dividend is paid out, the stock price drops by an identical amo
543.
by pb7 3y ago
I meant because they’re going to break ad blockers. YouTube isn’t going anywhere. Absolutely nothing will change if all the people that block ads are booted from the site except reduced costs. Sounds great!
544.
by pb7 3y ago
You're not entitled to their content either but you force yourself to it anyway.
545.
by pb7 3y ago
Pay or find a different place to watch videos soon.
546.
by pb7 3y ago
>Most of my favorite creators are there >Doesn't disclose how much of that subscription actually ends up in creators' pockets. Enough for your favorite creators to be there. >Charges $23/mo for premium It's $23&
547.
by pb7 3y ago
What data do they harvest and what do they do with it?
548.
by pb7 3y ago
>If everyone stops riding the subway, the city will lose the same amount of money and the subway will be underfunded. If everyone stops skiing and instead decides to build snowpeople in their back yard, the resort will go out of business
549.
by pb7 3y ago
Which alternatives host and stream up to 4K@60 HDR videos for free/ads only?
550.
by pb7 3y ago
Competition would be good but I'm not so sure that (lack of) competition is the problem. Serving video is just expensive, period. The smaller the economies of scale, the more expensive it is per view. I don't know what the solutio
551.
by pb7 3y ago
A (call) stock option is the option to buy X shares at Y price by Z date (a put option is the same thing but to sell instead). You can go on any brokerage and buy a call option on Apple, for example, which would be the option (but not the o
552.
by pb7 3y ago
So don't watch it then. Serving video is not cheap and you're increasing costs for everyone else. I don't get to jump the fence at a music festival just because I wouldn't have gone if I had to pay.
553.
by pb7 3y ago
How does YouTube steal your data? What do they do with it?
554.
by pb7 3y ago
Theft is both criminal and civil. If you steal something from me, I can sue you in civil court to recoup the cost, and if it's a significant enough something, then I can also try to file a police report and get the DA to press charges
555.
by pb7 3y ago
If everyone blocked ads, do you think content creators would continue making videos? If I ski at a resort without a ticket, did the resort lose money? If I jump over a turnstile to get on the subway, did the city lose money? If I sneak into
556.
by pb7 3y ago
Which brings us right back to the article: don't be surprised when your ad-blocker stops working. Serving high bitrate video is not cheap and YouTube is notoriously breaking even at best. Any alternative is going to be even less effici
557.
by pb7 3y ago
>If I were to allow all ads but make it a rule to never actually watch them or heaven forbid, buy anything in them, would that be ok? Yes, you would be holding up your end of the agreement. >If I can't watch it without ads, I sim
558.
by pb7 3y ago
No, not everyone uses an adblocker, otherwise services like YouTube wouldn't exist. You are trying really hard to absolve yourself of culpability but nothing you're saying makes any sense.
559.
by pb7 3y ago
Fair enough. It's YouTube's servers and GPU cycles and that's why they're blocking you.
560.
by pb7 3y ago
Do you have any examples of free services that added ads to their premium subscription?
561.
by pb7 3y ago
YouTube Premium is direct patronage.
562.
by pb7 3y ago
But you are cheating someone. The creators of the videos you're watching don't get anything when you block the ads. That means you've cheated them of money, on top of cheating the company of money. It's not handed to you
563.
by pb7 3y ago
Unprosecuted theft is still theft. You are breaking the terms of service, it's just not practical or cost effective to go after every person that does so because each individual damages are low. I'm glad you agree it's unethi
564.
by pb7 3y ago
You won't fund the company that your creators use to host their videos? Why should YouTube host their videos then?
565.
by pb7 3y ago
There wouldn't be a YouTube without "normies" watching ads because people like you won't pay for a subscription. How can you not understand that?
566.
by pb7 3y ago
Then stop using it. The content creators you watch use it and that means you are obliged to follow the platform's terms. If they didn't need the platform, they would self host their videos and monetize via other means like Patreon
567.
by pb7 3y ago
People that actually don't have money don't complain about ad-supported free options. Spoiled rich techies do.
568.
by pb7 3y ago
Ads exist because people are cheap and won't pay an equivalent amount of revenue in cash. All the complaints about ads and tracking will fall on deaf ears until that changes.
569.
by pb7 3y ago
Please enlighten me, what payment do you provide in exchange for the services you are using? You are circumnavigating the payment system in place and providing nothing in return. That's theft.
570.
by pb7 3y ago
It is stealing. You're stealing the bandwidth from the company, and you're stealing the commission for video play from the content creator.

More ›