this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2024
448 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

59135 readers
2313 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] notous@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Screw this, mainstream websites are constantly trying to do everything they can to influence public opinion every day. First dislike button second this.

[–] dinckelman@lemmy.world 269 points 1 week ago (9 children)

It’s already really difficult to engage with the content you want to see, but now they’re also taking away the only immediately noticeable metric of a successful video? Genuinely just why

[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 251 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

They removed the star system a long time ago. They removed the down votes again a few years back.

They want their algorithm to be the only thing that decides whether you watch a video or not.

[–] CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee 151 points 1 week ago (2 children)

That'll work excellent for all those people trying to find tutorial videos for 'XYZ' when you have no verification data to determine whether it's even a legit tutorial.

[–] calabast@lemm.ee 75 points 1 week ago (6 children)

People who watch tutorial videos only get on, watch the video and then leave. How are they supposed to make tons of advertising revenue from that? No, we must sacrifice that class of video from the platform, in pursuit of the almighty dollar.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 37 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I mean you joke, but they're literally doing that to reaction video channels. MXRPlays had his entire channel deleted, despite having millions of subscribers. It was clear for years that someone at youtube had a grudge against them.

Especially since they deleted their channel. Gave strikes to all their videos, and took the videos down. Buuuuuuut, someone ELSE illegally reuploaded their content, and they can't even report the video because their channel is deleted. The illegal re-uploads have no strikes, no issues, the content stay up, and some OTHER person makes money off of MXRPlays years old content.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

the content creator isn't following the proper system then. You don't need YouTube to do a copyright/IP violation claim. Google is actually opening themselves up to significantly hot water if they are indeed refusing to allow a process for DMCA on creators that are deleted off the platform, as there are severe penalties for not reacting to a DMCA claim when you are a content provider.

If they actually owned the rights to the videos, that creators first step when learning that Youtube is not going to do anything about the violation, is to manually file it themselves, and honestly they should state that Youtube at that point is intentionally allowing it which would perhaps pull Youtube into it as well

just because YouTube decides that they aren't going to do anything, doesn't invalidate your claim to copyright. I'm surprised that the channel hasn't seeked legal action against anyone regarding it.

My two cents on the matter is that it's likely the channel is worried that their videos aren't transformative enough fair use wise and that they themselves may get into legal troubles if they attempted to. A lot of commentary artists stay borderline on fair-use and not fair use, however if this was not the case, they have a pretty decent chance of winning that suit.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 39 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Too hard to manipulate the algorithm with ai spam, disguised ads and propaganda if users can see all the videos at the top of their recommended feed have 20 views.

You must only view what the Corporation approves.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] crypt0cler1c@infosec.pub 17 points 1 week ago

They want to decide what you like and don't like. You WILL watch what THEY show you.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] RangerJosie@lemmy.world 122 points 1 week ago (2 children)

YT Exec - /rips massive line of coke off Intern's ass/ - "Remove View Count"

YT Engineer - "But Sir, users will hate that. It will actively make the user experience worse"

YT Exec - "That's the goddamn point!"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 96 points 1 week ago

sounds like another job for the return youtube dislikes guy

[–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 76 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Seems like a sure way to lose my engagement. I don't understand what Google thinks they're getting out of this except for flooding you with more ads between video recommendations at the cost of people actually watching anything and using the damn website.

Between removing the dislike counter, a defect search bar that shoves garbage down your throat, recommendations of decreasing quality on my end and shorts (which I hesitantly gave a try but ultimately lost all interest in because it remained mostly low effort content despite my efforts to train my algorithm), this is just another reason why I find myself spending more time enjoying other things lately.

Maybe I am just out of touch, but I smell another bubble bursting when I look at how enshittified all major web services are simultaneously becoming.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] sag@lemm.ee 73 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Next What???? Removing Title, Only Thumbnail.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's currently a race-to-the-bottom in big IT & tech, where they don't look how they get you to like them but how much they can get away with, without repelling most of their userbase.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 week ago

In this case YouTube can do literally anything they want due to the lack of real alternatives. Hosting videos for free, for anyone (and any number of viewers) to watch, for free, is rather predictably not a very profitable business model. If you want to see what it takes to actually be profitable with such a model, look at the average free porn site. Extremely intrusive ads everywhere. If you don't want to pay, and ads are the only revenue, advertisers are the customer, not you.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 73 points 1 week ago (4 children)

In 5 years:

Youtube tests small ads in the top corner during video playback.

In 10 years:

Youtube tests small increase in size of well established corner ads.

In 15 years:

Youtube graciously allows video playback inbetween ads

[–] notfromhere@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

If you count the little banner text ads then they already have the ads in the top right corner of the videos and have had those for years.

[–] SouravSatvaya@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago

In 20 years, "YouTube was an online video sharing platform...."

I doubt they can make it to the next 20 years, the way they are controlling everything.

[–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"We can sell 80 percent of the screen before inducing seizures!"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 67 points 1 week ago

YouTube/Google and hiding data from the end-user, name a better duo.

[–] notfromhere@lemmy.ml 56 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Not to mention their “1080p” streams look worse than 2013 480p streams. The site is a dumpster fire.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] shotgun_crab@lemmy.world 53 points 1 week ago

Return youtube view counts, coming soon

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 36 points 1 week ago

this would essentially kill my method of viewing videos on the platform, this isn't a boost to interaction they think it will be, it will ultimately result in me watching less videos as I won't have the ability to decipher trash from good, so I'll just stick with content creators that I am used to and no longer branch out like I currently do.

[–] hal_5700X@sh.itjust.works 34 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Good thing we have Youtube alternatives. The two biggest ones are Odysee & Rumble. Also we have Peertube. The problem with Peertube is people don't use it. So it haves less content on it.

If you're going to watch Youtube, use a Frontend. For same reason Privacy Guides don't have Grayjay on it.

[–] downdaemon@lemmy.ml 32 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Odyssey is all fascists and crypto bros

[–] vonbaronhans@midwest.social 38 points 1 week ago

Rumble isn't any better. It's where my dad gets his COVID conspiracy material after folks got kicked off other platforms.

[–] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 1 week ago

Isn't rumble the same? Lul what the fuck is going on with the world.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] alphacyberranger@sh.itjust.works 32 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Who makes these retarded decisions?

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 20 points 1 week ago
[–] Ironfacebuster@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

As someone who tries to regularly post videos on YouTube I think this would help me, since I'm sure many people (including me, unfortunately) avoid low view count videos.

But I can absolutely understand why you wouldn't want it hidden. I'm sure this will lead to major misinformation clickbaiting (as if that isn't already a problem!), but I believe that the view count will still be visible on the view page.

Is YouTube doing it with small creators actually in mind? Who knows, other than them?

Edit: I do want to clarify that I think hiding the date it was posted is just strange and would probably only lead to problems

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I don’t like this idea for the opposite reason. I'm one of the people who are suspicious of videos with millions of views since most of them look manufactured. We all use view counts to gauge if a video is something we’re after, probably in more ways than we can come up with.

If it gives you any encouragement - I’m not discouraged by view counts. I know I like niche stuff and give small channels a try. It’s a chance at having more genuine interaction. As long as a video is not off-putting due to bad diction or very bad production then I’m not going to back out and see what it is about. This can work to your advantage too.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 24 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I don't understand why they on such a self destruct path?! I already barely use this fucking platform anymore because of how shitty it has become already, and now they want to bait me into watching some low views garbage on top of all that? WHY?!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Lmfao, fuck it, why not remove titles, tags and the searchbar too if you only want them to watch the videos your algo hand picks.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Computerchairgeneral@fedia.io 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Thanks Youtube, I hate it. Like I can see some arguments for taking away the view counter, even if I think it's a bad decision. But the date the video was uploaded? Who does that even help? I guess Youtubers will either need to start properly dating their videos or we'll just have to use context clues to figure out when a video was uploaded.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 week ago

Time for Peertube

[–] brap@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (8 children)

How about you test marking videos as watched across devices so I don’t have the same shit pushed back at me all the time.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] kokesh@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Why? Is everything going to shit? Like counts, view counts, dislikes .. I suppose it won't change anything for me on reVanced, but still.. why?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 17 points 1 week ago

Ok, this one is really stupid. Dislikes? Ok. Views? Fuck all the way off, Google.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

In the future you’ll pay $900/mo to stare at a blank page.

And you’ll have to because all the free sites are entirely ads.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›