Somehow paying for Netflix is fine but god forbid I want to watch a 10 hour loop of the DS9 intro without ads.
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
735 points (94.5% liked)
Risa
6921 readers
30 users here now
Star Trek memes and shitposts
Come on'n get your jamaharon on! There are no real rules—just don't break the weather control network.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think most people are angry with YouTube premium because it's a service that doesn't give you anything. It's a service where they stop annoying you. But it doesn't unlock anything new that you didn't have before, doesn't give you access to content or data you don't have access to, it doesn't improve the service. It just removes the annoyances they put there deliberately. So people are a little angry about it
It's a protection racket, for your attention and time.
It includes youtube music. And creators you watch get more money than if you watched using the ad supported version.
You also get to play video with a screen off on mobile
You also get to download for offline viewing
You also support the creators of the videos, not just google.
AND FFS YOU DONT GET ADS.
Using adblock isnt some innate human right. They are well within their rights to block adblock.
You get almost the whole worlds information for free in video form. You can be entertained or use it as a teaching tool. It is the best place at this point for product demos and reviews. It is a crazy wealth of information and infrastructure that everyone takes advantage of and somehow just expect to be free. If Google cancells it because it is not profitable, i would bet the efficiency of the entire human race takes a significant nose dive. It also probably runs one of the highest sets of data storage and encoding on the planet.
Can do all of those things without premium if you have the right apps.
But besides that, absolutely not. I remember when YouTube was free with no ads, I remember when the adverts first started appearing, and that's when it became obvious that they were trying to annoy you into a pay model. It took a little longer than expected, but sure enough, they ramped up the ads until "YOUTUBE PREMIUM! PAY FOR NO ADVERTS!"
Fuck that, I had no adverts before and they took that away. But the worst part is that they harvest my private data and make money from me already. As far as I'm concerned, that's my subscription to their shit, in their perverse data selling.
No fucking way I'm going to also pay them for the privilege to have my private data sold.
So.. you dont like the service.. just dont use it at all anymore. Then they cant track your data as well.
It's almost like they were bleeding money and needed to at least break even.
You also get videos crammed full with sponsors. One might say that most videos on YouTube are ads themselves. YT Premium does not have Sponsorblock. Alphabet makes money by selling your data and they continue to do so when you pay them. I support a select few creators via Patreon. Fuck Alphabet, they're not getting a single cent from me.
Oh, ffs. You dont see that the reason you "need" sponsorblock is because we used adblock so much that the only way the creators could make a living was injecting their own adds into their own videos.
The money youtube makes from selling your data does not cover the cost of running the business.
What about all the creators of videos you watched that you dont support on patreon? They dont deserve anything for their work?
Ok a few points.
Youtube is in their right to show ads and shove them in my face. They can also try to block my adblocker. Their platform their rules.
Youtubers adding sponsors into their Video is because Youtube does not pay them for the ads that are shown, or at least not fairly. Also because people want to earn money with Youtube which is partially a problem in the first place.
Yes youtube is expensive to run and they have been in the minus for years, but just as they make profit they go all the way and force you into Premium! They can try that but it's in my right to use the Service with adblock and sponsorblock until they go to a subscription only Service.
Well, they're free to try
People are ridiculous sometimes. These companies aren't going to eat millions of dollars per day in hosting costs to appease the minority who expect everything to just be given to them.
I have all those things with ReVanced
Revanced pays the content creators and google for your usage?
So, some basic features that you can/used to get by just using a web browser, and soemthing that you can do directly via Patreon.
Definitely value for money.
I kinda want Google to just cancel YouTube. Shit would be hilarious. Also sad and we would lose soooooo much information. But still I kinda just want to see what happens. What new players enter the game, will the monopoly be broken? Though I'm sure Microsoft, Amazon, and other big boys would roll their own versions of YouTube and effectively there would not be a difference, just a small amount of fragmentation.
But still...
According to the Lemmy community the folks over at selfhosting will just spawn an international CDN on their raspberry pis and deliver my 5 hour, 400GiB Starfield all categories speedrun recording for free out of good will. Right?
I thought YouTube music was a separate subscription?
~~It is not, unless they perhaps have a YT Music-only subscription but I haven't seen such.~~
Edit: It looks like there is a YT Music Only subscription available, for $3/mo cheaper. I'd still say if you use YouTube any more than just on one-off occasions, its still worth picking up regular YT Premium if you're grabbing the music one anyways, but at least the option is there.
... I don't know where I got this idea. And I just got another month of Spotify too. Isn't there an easy way to transfer your playlists over there?
As far as I'm aware, none of the music services really have a direct transfer option available. You pretty much have to use a third party service to do so from what I found the last time I tried to do a major switch.
Funnily enough, I feel like this is one of those things that are present day "AI" could probably help with, if it were integrated with these services. Realistically you'd just need something to do some OCR of images from your playlists, and match the results - I'm kind of surprised that's not something Spotify, Google, etc have done yet.
Awesome thanks!
As mentioned, third party services are there
There was a YouTube music only tier I was on when I moved from Google Play Music. Eventually I figured out about YouTube Premimum including the music so I changed to that
Oh, interesting, you're correct there does appear to be one which looks to be $3 cheaper. I'll edit my comment to reflect that, thanks!
The fact that they made it worse so they could lock what we had behind a paywall is what permanently killed YouTube for me. I will bend over backwards to make sure they never receive a penny at this point. They could have added or improved features but they just made everything shitty instead lol screw them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_IaVMsCbf8
It's just a little advertisment
Come to Quarks, Quarks is fun, Don't walk Run!
Yeah I need youtube premium in order to enable background play on the official app. This is ridiculous, especially on a mobile operating system that made fun of the competition because it didnt have true multitasking. Ever since then it's kinda been it for me. Like I cant multitask on my computer device because you want me to pay a subscription? No thanks.
It is, but it is only between the free and paid versions. I can't expect a service to exist for my use without some form of compensation. I'd rather pay with money than time.
Thats one way to look at it.
The other way is to compare it to the free netflix tier... which doesnt exist.
IMO even being pestered to death I'm slightly amazed that its still free at all.
The problem with this point of view is that Netflix either produces its own content or rents content from other producers. YouTube doesn't produce its own content and also doesn't rent content from producers... it only pays them a percentage of ad revenue (to be comparable to Netflix, YouTube would have to pay creators up front regardless of ad revenue they generate). YouTube profits from the content production of its users, and doesn't actually pay a fair amount for it. For them to charge for access to that content is just... egregious.
People post their content to YT for 3 primary reasons
Hosting is free. (In which case they are implicitly giving YT permission to profit off them in return for not charging hosting fees.
They want the largest possible potential audience. Which YT spent a mind boggling amount of money and effort to build. (Although I do wish they had some form of legitimate competition, cant argue that point)
They want to make money off the advertising revenue. (Which aside from Floatplane, is next to impossible to do otherwise)
There is nothing stopping content creators from hosting their own videos on their own servers they pay for but they dont. Because how do you generate the traffic? How do you get clickthroughs? How do you generate income, or just cover expenses?
YT dont owe you anything for free. Its not egregious, its business.
You're not a musician, are you?
Because what you just described is just the classic: "Oh, we're not going to pay you for this gig. You're getting paid in exposure. Sorry kid, just business."
So dont upload your stuff to that platform or make sure you use their platform to make the exposure work for you to generate money. If you can name another service that will put you in front of 122 million daily users and 2.7 BILLION global users I'd love to hear about it.
Justin Bieber was discovered on YT, Linus Sebastian just rejected a $100,000,000 offer for the media company he built largely on Youtubes back and Mighty Car Mods makes an estimated $46k a month. Youtube is not a public service. If you dont like it, dont use it. If you do use it, make it work for you.
While I use piped myself I am k with their business model, its just degrading every year making the experience worse for everyone. YouTube can't be compared to Netflix if you look at the bandwidth and the amount of users who don't pay for it. Hosting such a huge video sharing platform for free will never be profitable and the only other way is to make it paid only like Netflix which is obviously not gonna happen. Yeah they have 0 morals, yeah google sucks ass, yeah they treat their users like pigs but wishing it should be completely free with no ads is just wishful thinking.
I want to bookmark this comment as my thoughts on this are basically the same but I'm sure I'll forget it the next time I need to put it into words.
Also, I don't think wanting everything to be paid is a good idea in the world we live in, although I can't think of a world where there's only a paid option is a good idea. What I mean is that there was a time when I benefitted from the free access to information that the internet provided, now things have evolved to be a bad version of that with widespread misinformation and really egregious ads; but that old internet with ads only there to recoup the hosting costs and people sharing information for the joy of it will always be something I'll argue for.
P.S. I am not opposed to a better internet than what we had but for that there are changes needed to the rest of the world that won't come any time soon, otherwise what we had was the ideal version.
I think there always will be free access to information in some form but video hosting specifically is simply too expensive when it grows to the size of YouTube. If you aren't paying for something and it isn't run by donations, you're likely paying it with your personal info or time. I personally wouldn't mind paying for a service like YouTube but the content I watch are simply nowhere else to find so piped is the closest thing I have now.
I pay for YouTube, so you won't find disagreement from me. Optional paid versions are okay to me, though I do wish ads weren't just so awful (scams, viruses, etc)
Doesn't it do exactly that? It removes the ads whoch makes it way better.
It does give you access to higher quality streaming though, offline play, background play, video queue, picture in picture and youtube music premium. Do you even know what you are talking about?
Yes I do, thank you for asking.
You'd have a much stronger point if all the following were free: bandwidth, server farms, developers, support staff.
Since they aren't, something needs to pay for those. I'm paying to not see that something.
There was some original content, there is offline play, ad removal, however they should allow premium to skip sponsor ads too if you ask me.
I thought it was a decent deal for $15/mo for family of 3 using it for music and yt. $23 is pushing it.
I dont agree on the sponsor adds because that money is money the creator gets directly that isnt totally dependent on the policies that YT pushes. If those spots become worth less to the creators because they are skippable then they are more dependent on YT for their revenue.
While I do get it, they shouldn't need those sponsors if I'm paying to watch their videos. If YT is injecting ads to pay them.
It's two sources of ads for the viewer, who can only pay to remove one of them
It's a shitty model for everyone.
I think the flip side to that is then thats your issue with the creator. Its between you and them wether you're willing to suffer their product placement.
If you imbed sponsor spots AND I have premium theres no way on gods green earth I'm buying merch or joining your patreon. Not unless your content is accurate predictions of lottery numbers for subscribers.