You’ve yet to explain what those are…
YouTube Premium
- Thread starter Nitefly
- Start date
it's akin to spotify too - the selection algorithm and political bias, it's owners might want, is another contention
(let's push prince andrew stuff to usa viewers , promote videos with tourism content for usa to europeans ... above and beyond adverts they might insert foir free viewers)
tik-tok was already accused of distributing educational stuff to chinese kids but mind-rotting material to western kids.
All companies do this in the end, like Intel back then and now Microsoft.
People still have the option to vote with their wallets and go else where.
Last edited:
I am surprised mine is still working, though it is Israel pricing so I guess it was always going to stay put
Steady on. You’ll get an unsolicited DM from hornetstinger ranting about some political stuff you never took part in.
YouTube now blocking background playback on mobile browsers
Google says it has started enforcing its YouTube Premium requirement for background playback on mobile.
www.theverge.com
YouTube now blocking background playback on mobile browsers
Google says it has started enforcing its YouTube Premium requirement for background playback on mobile.
Someone will find a work around to that eventually, just like they did to make PiP work on iOS in the browser by making a shortcut a long time ago.
Last edited:
Still works on ff if on desktop view.YouTube now blocking background playback on mobile browsers
Google says it has started enforcing its YouTube Premium requirement for background playback on mobile.
They've killed the ability to sort by upload date, and I hate this change so. much. I used it all the time to search for new videos on the topic I wanted. Now the best I can do is limit it to a day or a week, and get fed search results that are utterly irrelevant to my search term. God it's so asinine.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,846
- Location
- Blaydon on Tyne
The continued making things worse of YouTube.
Regulation is the only answer so that there is viable competition.
Not sure what regulation needs to be placed on a platform where creators are free to upload or upload elsewhere. Seems these days creators use Youtube along with a Patreon subscription.
I forget where I am currently living, maybe Portugal, so the days of paying £1.20 a month are long gone but even for the ~£8 I spend now it's totally worth it. I'd say I probably watch/listen to about 10+ hours of content a week, minimum. Wouldn't be shocked if it was closer to 15-20 hours a week.
I forget where I am currently living, maybe Portugal, so the days of paying £1.20 a month are long gone but even for the ~£8 I spend now it's totally worth it. I'd say I probably watch/listen to about 10+ hours of content a week, minimum. Wouldn't be shocked if it was closer to 15-20 hours a week.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,846
- Location
- Blaydon on Tyne
The trouble is if a creator doesn’t upload to YouTube then their video won’t get watched and they’ll earn no money. Creators have no choice but to use YouTube.
OK, but how is that YouTubes fault or why should that need regulation?
If I made a somewhat popular product that I chose to sell in Sainsbury’s but not in another supermarket would that also need regulation? Who would you be regulating? The supplier or the store?
You can’t force content creators to put their product on all streaming platforms.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,846
- Location
- Blaydon on Tyne
It would be fine if YouTube made things better for creators and viewers. But at the moment they are putting prices up and removing features. That’s indication they are aware they have no viable competition, and are engaging in making things worse.
The only way to stop that is regulation.
Last edited:
I'm not a creator so I don't know how they've made it worse but as a paying customer I think YouTube is great so I'm not sure how they've made it worse for a viewer. I like a lot of the little QoL changes they've done recently. Like going from watching on my iPhone to my iPad, PC or my TV and it just continues in the same spot. As I frequently change where I am watching a video that change, which might not seem like a huge deal, has been fantastic for me.
You can still watch YouTube for free, though. If you don't mind adverts then you pay nothing. I think that's fair.
Then if you don't mind paying then of course some features are going to be locked behind a paywall to entice users to pay for it. Again, I don't see how that is unfair.
I know it's a bit rich of me saying the price is justified as I seek out cheaper countries but that's just because I'm cheap. When the time comes where I have no option to pay in pounds, I'll still pay as I get my moneys worth.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,846
- Location
- Blaydon on Tyne
The quantity and volume of ads has got a lot greater for free viewers too. Again, because they know they have no viable competition and can make the experience worse for consumers.
That's just how it goes, man. You're in the free seats. They have to get money to run it somehow - regardless of how rich of a company Google is, they don't run YouTube for a charity exercise. I understand adverts are annoying, it was the initial reason I went premium, but I don't really think people who pay nothing have a leg to stand on when complaining about adverts.
You have to pick your poison and it seems most online services offer a free ad-supported option or you pay for no adverts. I don't pay for Reddit so I have to deal with adverts with auto-playing videos or adverts masquerading as posts. The other day I got asked if I wanted to pay for Instagram. It's just how it is.
Unfortunately, life is pay to play. Some pay cash. Others pay the annoyance of adverts. It is what it is.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 5,846
- Location
- Blaydon on Tyne
If YouTube had viable competition then they wouldn’t be able to have so many ads as viewers would switch to another platform that had better terms. That’s supposed to be the whole point of competition. YouTube shouldn’t be able to make things worse for viewers with impunity.
Who's stopping the competition? Youtube is one of those things that is done pretty well even with its many flaws. The competition is lame in comparison.
Then it's on the other platforms to offer a product that makes other creators want to go there instead. This isn't YouTube's fault or their problem.
I'm not trying to defend a multi-billion company but expecting something that probably costs a lot of money to run for free is a really wild hill to die on.
You have tonnes of fantastic content on there for free. It's can cost you nothing to watch that but you have to put up with adverts. If you don't want the adverts you can pay to get rid of them and have a few extra features.
I struggle to see what your problem is other than you don't want to pay but you also don't want to have adverts. So how do you suggest something like YouTube runs, for free, for all?