Somehow paying for Netflix is fine but god forbid I want to watch a 10 hour loop of the DS9 intro without ads.

  • Rooty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    Youtube constantly demonitizes content creators, while protecting doxxers and content thieves. I will not be giving them a single red cent.

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      You’re giving too much credit, Youtube doesn’t care and is running on AI autopilot. This benefits IP abusers, thieves, and trolls and hurts legitimate creators. But it’s not on purpose, it’s just indifference.

    • Rakonat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      This right here. I did youtube premium one time to watch the first season of cobra kai. And then immediately dropped it when that same month 3 content creators I followed all came forward with videos of how they were getting obviously fraudulent copyright strikes, demonetized over things that they didn’t do wrong and youtube just screwing them over cause they could.

      A company that makes billions in profits could easily afford to put better content creator support in place and cover costs or disputes against content creators so none of the people who make their site profitable in the first place ever have to worry if they’ll still be paid for the hours and hours they devote to their channel only for a troll or bad faith actor to make a false claim on their videos and irrevocably remove income.

      • Rooty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Moral reasons

        🙄

        A corporation can blatantly violate the law, bribe politicians, ignore its TOS whenever its suits them, but a second somebody wants to use a heavily subsidised service without being assaulted by advertising, a gaggle of concern trolls pop up to lecture about “stealing service”. Buddy, simping for Alphabet will get you nowhere.

        • Anemia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 years ago

          If you are against them on a moral basis then use another service, I imagine that has a more negative impact on them. If you just want no ads, pay for it.

          I hate ads as much as the next guy and use a variety of blockers but i’ll pay for any service with a reasonable payment method.

            • Anemia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              Specifically youtube-videos? None. For similar videos there are a bunch of services, at least to watch for entertainment purpose.

          • Rooty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            The price of food items has gone almost 50% up during last year, the wages are not keeping up with inflation, and I already pay for utilities and internet. I ain’t paying shiiiiiiiit.

  • Potfarmer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Paying for premium is fine, but premium users letting Youtube off the hook for their corporate greed is annoying. If YT ran reasonable ads like they used to in the olden days I wouldn’t use an adblocker. Don’t even get me started on their garbage search, a multi billion dollar company can and should do better. Then of course there’s the fiasco of their demonetization system, and rules that apply to some but not others. Simply put they don’t deserve to be paid for premium, if their grinch heart grows and they decide to do better as a company I’d honestly pay for premium.

    • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Tbh, I almost caved and got premium, but I have a lot of the same issues with Youtube that you have.

      A big YouTuber was doxxed recently by another big YouTuber, and Youtube did nothing about it. If I was him, I would be going to court.

      • Sigh_Bafanada@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        YouTube is trash, and if a viable alternative were to exist then I would switch in a heartbeat.

        But I’m all about convenience, so until that alternative exists, if I have to give some money to YouTube to have that convenience, I’ll do it.

    • r_se_random@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      While the monopoly that YT has as a video platform is definitely an issue, the cost of maintaining the content has definitely risen now. 480p vs 4k videos have a ton of difference in bandwidth, no matter how much Internet speeds have evolved over the years.

      I used Google Play Music (RIP) and moved into YT Music for my music streaming needs. The cost of YT premium was marginally higher so I switched for it.

      The major issue with YT Premium is that they still collect the data from YT to show targeted ads, but I use also use uBlock, so that doesn’t really bother me as much.

      Point is, video hosting services are expensive. The quantity (not quality) of content on YT is way higher than any othet streaming service, and maintaining that for free is pretty close to impossible. The only possible alternative would be a government backed video platform and that’s definitely worse.

    • rengoku2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 years ago

      Us premium users have no obligation to help non premiums.

      At the end of the day Youtube or Google offer no ads experience for us and we get it. Transaction is completed.

  • LesserAbe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    I’ll pay to not be exposed to ads. I’ll also pay to support a service I get value from. So I’m paying for YouTube premium, Netflix, Hulu. etc. When a service with media I want that has a more desirable corporate structure becomes available I’ll pay for that and maybe get rid of other services. I also occasionally sail the high seas if the thing I want isn’t available on any of the services I’m already paying for.

  • limelight79@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    You think that’s bad? Mention you use a HP printer sometime. I dare you to try it.

    • Subverb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Trigger warning:

      I have an HP inkjet printer attached to my Windows 11 machine playing YouTube Premium in Chrome without an ad blocker.

      Edit: it’s a joke, people.

      • limelight79@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Eh, HP has always worked fine for us. I have two sitting here, actually - one is an all-in-one from ~2009 that we printed our wedding programs on when it was new, and it still works fine, but ink is getting harder to find for it, and we had a scare with the irreplaceable print head a few years ago (I got it working, using HP’s “try this if you’re out of options, but it’s unlikely to work” directions, but we realized it was probably time to consider replacing it).

        The other is a few years old and is one of the ones with the subscription service. We’ve had a good experience with it, and I spend less on ink than I did with the old one, but that upsets a LOT of people.

          • Aa!@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            For what it’s worth, all of HP’s business hardware is very good, whether it’s printers or PC systems. It’s just the cheap consumer-oriented products that suck.

            Same thing with Dell

    • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Using an HP printer is like playing Russian Roulette with a ton of loaded bullets. I say this as someone with multiple HP printers.

  • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I subscribe to YouTube Music and have since the Play days (R.I.P.). Watching videos without ads is just a perk.

    • Default_Defect@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      This is basically my stance. Its also one of a very few subs I use, I don’t really care to watch streaming services or to pay for the slightly (maybe?) better other music streaming services.

    • dmrzl@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      I still have Premium but could never accept YT music as a former Play user. Why did they end the best music streaming service for this unusable trash?

      Spotify is still worse than Play was, but at least it’s good at recommending music. YT music is worse in every regard. Except for smart watch integration maybe.

      • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Play was the best, especially in the early days with the professionally curated (by humans) play lists. I discovered so much new music. AI generated playlists are terrible.

  • ranoss@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    I think I’m more ok with people playing for YouTube premium. It still helps the creators on YouTube more directly than Netflix

  • The Barto@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I believe it’s someone else’s hard earned money, if they want to throw money to have what is objectively a better viewing experience, then it’s not my problem.

  • lemillionsocks@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I know this is a silly meme but my issue with not wanting to pay for youtube is 3 fold.

    1.Theyre a monopoly. Google bought out the plucky streaming service on the rise(and honestly if it wasnt google it would have been someone else) and then continued to build up momentum and squash the competition. There is no competition. Daily motion and vimeo and peertube exist, but they dont really compete with youtube anymore.

    Google can complain all they want about how it’s expensive to host 4k videos from anyone who wants to upload and how all the global traffic makes their service unprofitable but given theyre a giant corporation, if it didnt bring them value they wouldnt be doing it and if it is a hole theyre putting money into then it’s an hole they dug for themselves.

    2.Google sucks at dealing with their creators. The lifeblood of the site is that it is the default platform for video content creators because its so big. Unjustified DCMA takedowns which ruin a persons livelihood and are difficult to appeal, their demonetization and essentially delisting from the algorithm of nsfw videos(which can happen if a key word is detected or a specific type of image, that recent issue with the big youtuber doxing another and getting a slap on the wrist, and the changes made to algorithms that hurt creators and shape content.

    Like how the comedy sketches and animators that were prevalent in the early days got squeezed out because the algorithm favored longer videos and a steadier stream of content. Or a case where a youtuber got his own song DCMA’d because another artist remixed his music. And thats not even getting into the poor compensation from ads that means creators need to use sites like patreon to get by. “Oh but if you pay premium your views count more” wow how nice of one of the biggest most valuable companies on earth.

    They also have no easy way for even decent sized creators with millions of subs to appeal or get a hold of them, let alone one in the 100s of thousdands or tens of thousands mark. All ai reviewed and ai resolved.

    1. The algorithm debacle. Its fickle tweaks have indirect impacts on creators and at worst it has been known to feed into conspiracy theories and red pill people into extremist pipelines and it took google way too long to address it. Even when it works well it can still push a lot of the same content. But its arbitrary nature an be a windfall on some seasons for one type of creator and tank another.

    2. Honestly even if all else failed and adblock stopped working I would probably just watch the ads. It’s like a 15 second clip in the beginning if you skip and a minute worth of ad 10 or 15 minutes later. Im not gunna say I love it but do you people not remember what watching tv was like or reading magazines, or have you ever had a bus drive by you? I can live with the minor amount of mostly skipable ads I’d get an hour especially if it means Im not paying.

    • namingthingsiseasy@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      2.Google sucks at dealing with their creators. The lifeblood of the site is that it is the default platform for video content creators because its so big. Unjustified DCMA takedowns which ruin a persons livelihood and are difficult to appeal, their demonetization and essentially delisting from the algorithm of nsfw videos(which can happen if a key word is detected or a specific type of image, that recent issue with the big youtuber doxing another and getting a slap on the wrist, and the changes made to algorithms that hurt creators and shape content.

      Well said. It’s so hypocritical of Google to say “support our creators” when they do such a trash job of it already. Google makes hundreds of billions of dollars per year! If they cared so much about the creators, they could share more of their obscene earnings with them. Why should it be people’s responsibility?!? And of course, all the things that you mentioned as well that constantly screw them over too.

      It’s just shameless hypocrisy. They have no moral high ground here whatsoever.

  • sykael@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 years ago

    I have a YouTube Premium family plan spread between me, my brothers and our mom, only reason why I bother

  • gregorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Here’s the thing: how much YouTube content creators are really affected by ad blockers varies widely, and that’s due to several factors such as what region their main viewership is in, their subject matter, and how many viewers of each creator fit the demographic that might use ad blockers. YouTube is the only entity that would have the real data on the real impact to content creators due to ad blockers, and it’s believed that the reason they don’t share that data is so that they can inflate the numbers in order to claim greater losses than they actually suffer— and while that may very well be a strong motivation, I believe the primary motivation to be to hide the wide variation in levels of compensation between their top content creators. If the ad-blocking impact data became public, it would also reveal the wide disparities in how much YouTube compensates different tiers of content creators and would make public deals with top creators that have, until now, remained private.

    This so why it’s always discussed in vague terms and as some existential threat— which is is, for them.

  • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    I can pay for Netflix to be entertained for days at a time if I want to by original and classic shows and movies that I can’t watch anywhere else, or I can pay for YouTube to show me a bunch of kowtowing brow beaten “creators” try to skirt their ever changing draconian rules long enough to make something that barely counts as entertainment anymore WHICH I could also already watch for free with ads.

    Why would I ever pay them for anything?

    • weedazz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      YouTube is way more than content creators. Just last night I watched an hour long episode of PBS news hour, an hour long EDM concert that was live in Europe a few days ago and then fell asleep to a bunch of clips from late night comedy shows. These aren’t struggling content creators, these are all from huge content providers that I’d have to track down separately if they weren’t on YouTube. Anything on Netflix I just pirate because tv shows and movies are easy to get.

  • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    A further way to divide the masses. It’s almost as if the masses desire division. We must judge each other based on the others decisions. Even if we were in complete agreement half of everyone would think the other half is agreeing incorrectly.