[HN Gopher] YouTube, the jewel of the internet
___________________________________________________________________
YouTube, the jewel of the internet
Author : gumby
Score : 130 points
Date : 2023-04-23 18:56 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ft.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ft.com)
| lawrenceyan wrote:
| Deriving pearls from the complex oyster that is our world.
| grensley wrote:
| I think YouTube will really struggle to figure out how to weigh
| lowest common denominator content that does well with
| personalized recommendation that satisfy some deeper intellectual
| curiosity. I'm already finding it's a kind of "work" to keep the
| geopolitical and economics content that makes me feel like
| YouTube is a positive for me on the front page over shorts and
| sports montages.
|
| Maybe my algorithms just in a bad place right now, but it feels
| like there's been some kind of shift this year, and I'm wondering
| if others are noticing something similar.
| chongli wrote:
| I'm a very strict curator of my watch history. If I ever
| succumb to click bait and click on some video I immediately
| regret, I go into my watch history and delete the offending
| video. This puts an immediate stop to any recommendations of
| similar videos. I recommend it to everyone!
| SteveDR wrote:
| I use a second account to watch videos that i think will muck
| with my recommendations in any way I don't like. Comedy,
| political news, music videos, etc... it's nice to have a
| separate feed that gets my taste in these things without
| distracting my main algorithm from focusing on my deeper
| interests
| spydum wrote:
| same, single greatest control of what it recommends.
| sometimes i will go off on a tangent, but i dont want it
| populating my feed, so i'll prune the history, and it's
| perfectly happy.
| xrd wrote:
| I'm troubled by YouTube. There is absolutely incredible content
| there. And there is so much shit in between the good stuff.
|
| Does anyone run a frontend that offers control over the shit? I
| want my kids to have autonomy in viewing interesting things
| there, but I don't want to YouTube algorithm attacking their
| developing brains.
|
| Maybe a browser plugin?
| kmfrk wrote:
| There's Restricted Mode[1], but it's extremely aggressive to
| the point of hiding too much.
|
| I personally use the drop-down feature to tell YouTube I'm not
| interested in a particular recommended channel or video, as
| well as maintain a manually updated BlockTube list for channels
| and keywords.
|
| I've also heard that clearing stuff like your watch history is
| a good way to flush weird recommendations. Generally, disabling
| all targeted stuff goes a long way to ward off the craziest
| stuff. On top of disabling the main trending page so it goes
| directly to your subscriptions.
|
| [1]: https://www.howtogeek.com/770192/how-to-turn-off-
| restricted-...
| sp332 wrote:
| Well, YouTube Kids?
| timbit42 wrote:
| The following are all web browser add-ons:
|
| "Unhook" hides the related videos, comments, shorts tab,
| suggestions wall, homepage recommendations, trending tab and
| other distractions on YouTube pages.
|
| "BlockTube" lets you block channels or videos by ID, title
| keywords, or comment content.
|
| "Channel Blocker" puts an X next to the channel name on each
| video. Clicking the X instantly and permanently removes the
| channel from search results.
|
| "uBlock Origin" removes ads from the beginning and within
| videos.
|
| "SponsorBlock" skips over a variety of uninteresting sections
| of videos via crowdsourcing. You can choose which types of
| sections you want to skip.
| sgu999 wrote:
| That's my problem with it as well... I keep on clicking "I'm
| not interested" for all kind of clickbait brainless content,
| but they keep on coming back.
| duxup wrote:
| > And there is so much shit in between the good stuff.
|
| Yeah discovery is really hard on there. So much loud crap :(
| Jolter wrote:
| There are alternative front-end apps. Not for iPhone, because
| of course not, but Android has Newpipe at least. For desktop, I
| haven't looked but sure there are some.
| tambourine_man wrote:
| Why didn't the author linked to the examples he cites? It's
| almost cruel.
| ur-whale wrote:
| > Why didn't the author linked to the examples he cites?
|
| And generate traffic and revenue for another company without
| getting a cut?
|
| You gotta be kidding, right?
| [deleted]
| tus666 wrote:
| No, no, surely it's Facebook!
|
| I joke, I joke.
| tambourine_man wrote:
| Another great thing about YouTube not mentioned is the quality of
| comments. Something happened in the last 5 years or so that
| changed them profoundly.
|
| Once the laugh of the internet they are now one of the most
| wholesome in it. Almost unbelievable for a public site.
| alonsonic wrote:
| I'm fascinated by this. I feel the same way. Do we know if The
| YouTube team if ordering comments using some sort of sentiment
| analysis? This might be the key to moderating social media. Is
| almost like negative/toxic comments are shadow banned and
| relegated to the bottom of the comments section.
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| Youtube's system is extremely heavy handed. You can sometimes
| notice your comments getting shadowbanned if you see the same
| comment from another account/computer. And I think you can
| notice it for other people when you get a reply notification,
| and can even read the comment, but it doesn't show in the
| comments if you open the list of comments in notifications ?
|
| (Posting multiple comments for the same video seems to be an
| easy way to get them (shadow)banned. Even more posting links,
| even when it's literally a timelink to the same video using
| the mm:so format !)
| throw_m239339 wrote:
| > Another great thing about YouTube not mentioned is the
| quality of comments. Something happened in the last 5 years or
| so that changed them profoundly.
|
| It's not uncommon to get spam from bots trying to impersonate
| the video creator (same username, same avatar) and trying to
| push crypto scams everytime one answers a comment. Youtube
| hardly does anything about it.
| jasmer wrote:
| I see masses of bots and dregs in support of authoritarian
| states.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| The real comments are wholesome but a significant portion of
| them are obvious scammers. It looks like such an easy problem
| to solve, they are by accounts that literally post exactly the
| same comment with a link on loads of videos.
| mastax wrote:
| Yeah. They seem to have had problems recently with some very
| obvious spam bots, but other than that the quality is alright.
|
| On some niche nerd channels the comments are often exceptional
| and informative. Usually they're at least pleasant or amusing.
| [deleted]
| petilon wrote:
| A major fail, in my opinion, is YouTube TV. The user interface is
| horrendous. YouTube TV's UI is mostly images (video thumbnails)
| and it is hard to see what the currently selected item is. A
| mostly-text UI, with thumbnail only for the currently selected
| item would have worked much better. I tried to switch to YouTube
| TV as soon as it launched, but canceled because of the horrible
| UI. Recently I tried again -- surely they would have fixed the
| issues -- but no, navigation is still terrible, so canceled
| again.
| jutrewag wrote:
| YouTube's video player is the best and most responsive video
| player online. I don't think I want any UI changes around it.
| snug wrote:
| As someone that only uses YTTV to watch sportss, pecifically
| NFL Redzone, F1, and baseball/basketball playoffs, I really
| enjoy YTTV interface because it always knows what I'm going to
| YTTV for. Very rarely do I need to click more than 2 buttons to
| get to the thing I'm trying to watch
| asdfman123 wrote:
| I couldn't agree more. Most of my other "social media"
| consumption involves either low effort humor or getting mad at
| strangers.
|
| I'm constantly learning stuff from YouTube. I'm watching
| chemistry channels, DIY channels, history channels, etc. It's an
| amazing learning tool.
| zh3 wrote:
| There is indeed great content on Youtube. It's just more than
| unfortunate that the algorithmic pull is towards the - shall we
| say - less informative end of the spectrum?
|
| Some people learn a lot from it. Most people just seem to gawp
| endlessly.
| jimsimmons wrote:
| YouTube is an internet in itself. There are many sub-Youtubes
| and you can end up in any set of them depending on where the
| algorithm takes you.
| dkarl wrote:
| > less informative end of the spectrum
|
| My experience is that my recommendations are 80% good but
| lightly sprinkled with random stuff that is known to addict and
| exploit people in my demographic. It reminds me of gambling and
| other businesses that make a disproportionate amount of their
| money off of a few "whales" who invest an unhealthy amount of
| their lives into it. They're happy to serve you and make a tiny
| bit of money off you, but their real goal is to turn you into a
| whale.
|
| My theory is that some small percentage of my recommendations
| (2-3%) are dedicated to YouTube's best guess at, "What would
| this guy watch if he was miserable enough to watch YouTube 16
| hours a day?"
| hsjqllzlfkf wrote:
| [dead]
| causality0 wrote:
| Or it was, anyway. Youtube's choice to tune its algorithm for
| profitability rather than things I'm actually interested means my
| home page and "related videos" are almost entirely useless.
| Youtube's strict search limits also make it very hard to find
| anything obscure, and impossible to find every video on a
| particular topic. Maybe it's not the most intellectually healthy
| thing in the world, but if I want to watch every single, say,
| reaction video to The Verge's terrible PC build, how dare YouTube
| decide I'm only allowed to see the three most popular ones before
| my search results are replaced with random monetized nonsense?
| ravenstine wrote:
| YouTube's search is pretty much horseshit now. Trip off any
| wrongthink keywords and it will give you nothing but CNN,
| MSNBC, Fox News, and NPR. I wrote an add-on that blocks all
| these channels by filtering out anything with the verified
| checkmark, and it's pretty revealing as to how much content
| YouTube suppresses. It's pretty clear who's buttering their
| biscuits.
| causality0 wrote:
| It's truly disheartening to go back through your favorite
| creators and liked videos and see how many have been removed
| for violating new community guidelines or deleted by their
| creators because they no longer fit a marketable image. If I
| hadn't already had complete archives of my favorite channels
| due to an obsession with carrying media on the go, I'd
| probably have broken down and wept at the devastation of
| channels like Retsupurae and ChipCheezumSA. I learned that if
| there's _any_ chance I 'll want to watch something again in
| the future I need it saved to disk.
| stolenmerch wrote:
| My experience with YouTube seems to be entirely dissimilar with
| the clickbait/algorithm horror stories I'm reading here in the
| comments. I watch a lot of Youtube and I let my 1st grader watch
| YouTube somewhat unregulated. It's seems entirely fine to me.
| When I do look over his viewing history, I'm relieved it's all
| fairly wholesome content. No, he's not always learning science
| and math (but sometimes), but I simply do not consider his
| research into "what every color light saber means" as harmful.
| Looking over my own current recommendations it's all science and
| engineering related videos because that's what it knows I'm
| interested it. You get out what you put in.
| jackcosgrove wrote:
| > It has a greater trove of content than Netflix, HBO and Amazon
| Prime combined and squared
|
| And one third of that is presented by Simon Whistler.
| belter wrote:
| https://archive.is/kUh3M
| seydor wrote:
| You can't even read the subtitle now. Focus on the clickbait.
| andrewstuart wrote:
| YouTube is amazing but a couple of disappointments:
|
| 1: YouTube financially rewards 12 minute videos. I feel like this
| has resulted in a collapse in creativity as now most videos are
| 12 minutes. You get what you pay for.
|
| 2: being a walled garden, YouTube is devoid of technical
| innovation. This really hasn't evolved far beyond broadcast TV
| and that's because YouTube owns all the content and developers
| can't innovate the core experience.
| [deleted]
| waboremo wrote:
| YouTube has gotten much much better at rewarding videos based
| on context not just length. They weren't always great about it,
| but they've improved tremendously. I can see them further
| adjusting this, so that say if you've uploaded ~11 minute
| videos consecutively it'll prevent you from adding that "middle
| video" ad break (note: I don't know if they already do this).
|
| I don't believe these changes have collapsed creativity, there
| isn't another platform on the planet that is creating as much
| long form content as on YouTube. People aren't posting their
| great absurdly high detailed yet entertaining content on Medium
| or Substack, no it's on YouTube. This has led to a walled
| garden of sorts, but it's also reaping benefits from their
| improvements from the days where you could easily game YouTube
| with shallow thumbnails.
| zokier wrote:
| > 1: YouTube financially rewards 12 minute videos. I feel like
| this has resulted in a collapse in creativity as now most
| videos are 12 minutes. You get what you pay for.
|
| I checked my subscriptions page and of the latest 18 videos,
| here are the lengths stats
|
| * 1x <1min
|
| * 3x 4-6min
|
| * 1x 10-12min
|
| * 6x 13-20min
|
| * 7x 20-40min
| Zetice wrote:
| Levi Rozman talks about this a bit in his videos, I feel like
| the better rule is that you need at least one ad break, but
| two is also a good inflection point? I don't think its 12 the
| number specifically, but 12 guarantees the first ad break.
| turtleyacht wrote:
| Recently:
|
| _YouTube, the Jewel of the Internet_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35670162 - yesterday (1
| comment)
| Kye wrote:
| This website has no connection to Internet Archive.
| sp332 wrote:
| No, but it does have a paywall that you can get around by
| reading the archived version.
| Kye wrote:
| I didn't comment on that. Just the mistake about having
| something to do with Internet Archive.
| turtleyacht wrote:
| (Edited the above.)
| [deleted]
| YinLuck- wrote:
| [dead]
| bdangubic wrote:
| My kid is 9 - YouTube is her search engine. All my efforts to
| explain that is what Google is for have failed. Every time I use
| Google she laughs at me and calls me old :)
| skywal_l wrote:
| HN is the jewel of the internet. Youtube might be the amethyst
| maybe?
| crop_rotation wrote:
| HN is too small to be the jewel of "the internet", and
| irrelevant compared to YouTube for impact.
| rcarr wrote:
| I agree with the author. I just cancelled Spotify and got YouTube
| Premium and it was an absolutely brilliant decision. Pretty soon
| I'm going to cancel Netflix and Prime too and just take out the
| odd month subscription to a streaming service if there's
| something I really want to watch. I'm probably better off
| watching some informative documentary on YT than I am watching
| Netflix anyway and if I want entertainment, there are millions of
| hours of TTRPGs, stand up comedy and web series to watch that are
| often of a really high quality (e.g Critical Role, Ari Shaffir,
| Wayne).
|
| It's an awesome resource and I think Gen Z are at a massive
| advantage because of it. They can literally leave school and
| already be professionally competent. I think we'll see them
| leapfrogging millennials on the career ladder because they had a
| youth where they could spend their entire time learning literally
| everything there is to know about their passion for free. No
| other generation in history has had such an opportunity. You were
| limited by your parents bank balance or the resources of your
| local library.
| bmitc wrote:
| > It's an awesome resource and I think Gen Z are at a massive
| advantage because of it. They can literally leave school and
| already be professionally competent. I think we'll see them
| leapfrogging millennials on the career ladder because they had
| a youth where they could spend their entire time learning
| literally everything there is to know about their passion for
| free.
|
| I'm not convinced for YouTube. For the most part, I just see
| Gen Zers teaching other Gen Zers. It is very rare to find
| someone older on YouTube with actual, professional, real-world
| experience, and if you do, the channel is not popular and is
| thus buried in search results.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| > They can literally leave school and already be professionally
| competent.
|
| How? (I'm misunderstanding.)
| ZephyrBlu wrote:
| YT helped me learn a lot about software engineering before I
| had a professional SWE job, but it was nowhere near a
| replacement for a bit of experience. My first 6mo at a good
| company was very formative.
| mkaic wrote:
| As a Gen Z-er who grew up learning as much as I could about my
| passions, mostly on YouTube, I hope you're right about us! I'm
| really hopeful that my generation can go on to do some pretty
| great stuff. We do have a patently odd sense of humor,
| though...
| tinyhouse wrote:
| > Pretty soon I'm going to cancel Netflix and Prime too
|
| No one is paying Prime for their video services...
| menzoic wrote:
| > No other generation in history has had such an opportunity.
|
| I'm a milllenial that learned how to code at 14 using the
| internet. To be fair to your point about "free" I did use
| pirated software and a few pirated video courses
| makapuf wrote:
| At 14 I learned to code for "free" - minus very expensive
| computer m y parents bought and a pirated copy of turbo
| pascal and computer magazines. Magazines and books were not
| as good but remember Internet made some other resources
| disappear or rendered them less visible.
| NickBusey wrote:
| > I think we'll see them leapfrogging millennials on the career
| ladder because they had a youth where they could spend their
| entire time learning literally everything there is to know
| about their passion for free.
|
| I'm a millennial and I spent my youth learning everything there
| is to know about my passions for free. YouTube is not they only
| avenue of free online education.
| waboremo wrote:
| The resources that makes someone professionally competent are
| gatekept until you enter the industry and no amount of video
| content will change this. This means that despite a hire
| potentially being extremely competent in the subject matter,
| everything else around that is likely to be a "red flag" in the
| hiring process and prevent them from gaining that professional
| competency.
|
| Which I hope changes, I suppose we'll see if millennials-as-
| managers can change enough about the process to find and hire
| these talents to nurture their professional competency. MAM's
| also generally will also be less strict about traditional
| processes which is exactly the type of environment these
| talents need.
| coliveira wrote:
| This assumes that this generation will spent its youtube time
| learning something useful. While this will be true for part of
| the population, most people are just wasting their time and, in
| aggregate, it may happen that this generation will have even
| lower skills than the previous generation that had access only
| to a local library.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > They can literally leave school and already be professionally
| competent.
|
| Do you have evidence for that?
|
| No training makes someone professionally competent, only being
| a professional does. Even people who go through intense years
| of law school or medical school, studying directly and
| interactively with world-class scholars and peers, in actual
| labs and courtrooms, are not professionally competent lawyers
| or doctors. People with PhDs are not professionally competent
| professors.
|
| But focusing on training: I don't just accept any training when
| hiring. What evidence do you have that videos on YouTube
| provide a similarly high level of training? The Internet is
| filled with nonsense, misinformation, and disinformation, and
| it's clear that people don't make the effort to discrminate
| between that and truth, and between just any truth and the best
| knowledge and training. I'm certainly not giving someone or
| YouTube the benefit of the doubt.
|
| A strong counter-signal is someone saying they learned from
| "YouTube", which is like saying they learned from "a book", and
| demonstrates a lack of discrimination or even an awareness of
| it - here is someone who lacks even the awareness that it's
| problematic.
|
| And learning from a video or a book has never been a high
| standard of training; it's been a pejorative - 'they learned to
| be a doctor from a book'. It's just not the same at all as
| interactive learning with an expert (a professor), with peers,
| with a diverse cirriculum, resources such as labs, an
| institution geared toward creating effective learning programs.
| Again, it shows a lack of discrimination and judgment, and of
| even enough thought and skepticism to be aware of the issue.
|
| People like YouTube because it's convenient, and because it's
| trendy they can get away with not questioning it (and
| dismissing these issues). I hire people who are committed to
| being the best, who think deeply, skeptically, and
| insightfully. I don't want to hire those who make serious
| decisions - such as their career preparation - based on
| convenience and who turn over analysis and decisions to the
| Internet crowd-think.
|
| Anecdotally, I've had people assert that to me how informative
| certain YouTube videos are and show me them. When I take the
| time to research it, most are nonsense - I just lack expertise
| in the field and couldn't tell by watching (research
| establishes that people are very poor at that, and I'd guess
| that the obviously false ones don't get views). I have sought
| and used some videos from specific sources, but then I'm not
| learning from YouTube, I'm learning from that person. YouTube
| as nothing to do with it; the medium has nothing to do with it;
| if they wrote a book or article I'd have used that.
|
| One way of thinking about the problem: Why is learning from
| YouTube any better than learning from a book before YouTube?
| irrational wrote:
| > they had a youth where they could spend their entire time
| learning literally everything there is to know about their
| passion for free
|
| I have children between the ages of 9 and 26. You know what
| they are passionate about? Minecraft, Mr Beast, Travel vlogs,
| mommy vlogs, "reality" videos, etc.
|
| I've tried to introduce them to science, space, programming,
| history, math, finance, nature, etc. content and they don't
| want to have anything to do with it. They are passionate about
| cheap mindless entertainment. I see the same things in their
| friends and classmates. You can bring a horse to water, but you
| can't make him drink.
|
| I'm sure there are a few youths who are using their time
| productively and it will pay dividends for them. But, from what
| I've seen, the vast majority aren't interested.
| somethoughts wrote:
| One trick I've used is to disable Youtube on all of the kids'
| devices [1] and only enable it on the family living room TV.
|
| Then rotate video selection powers to each family member so
| that there's an equal mix of Mr Beast and Practical
| Engineering/Vertasium/Tom Scott/City Beautiful/Sebastian
| Lague etc.
|
| [1] Chromebook with Family Link to only enable specific
| websites.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| The lesson I get from all these replies is (shock & horror!):
|
| _Kids are different_. I hear of kids who are intelligent,
| energetic, curious... all those good things. Probably NURTURE
| (i.e. the parents) has something to do with that.
|
| But then: also NATURE. Not having any kids myself, I'm not
| going to preach.
| durandal1 wrote:
| The variety in temperament, interests and ability between
| even siblings varies greatly. The people most eager to
| share parenting advice is usually parents only one child
| who is calm and attentive :) I've seen several parents in
| that category have a second child and come out shocked.
|
| I'm believe that beyond a base level of food, clean clothes
| and love, your influence as a parent is marginal. It's also
| a wildly unpopular but intelligence is highly genetic (at
| least 50% of outcome determined by genes).
| brewtide wrote:
| I have a 9 and 7 year old and we are constantly enjoying such
| YouTube channels as "smarter every day", "veritasium"
| (spelling?), "Stuff made here", to some extent Colin furze,
| "technology connections", and other such edutainment.
|
| Not sure it speaks about differences in kids, in ages, in
| households, or likely a combination of sorts.
|
| Also, not a judgement on your kids, just a counterpoint about
| the resources available and how some people will tend to
| gravitate in different directions.
|
| 7 year old daughter is learning to knit and forgot how to
| "cast on" , so she jumped on YouTube to search a how-to and
| had one of the methods figured out in 20 minutes.
|
| So, perhaps it does have more to do with the availability of
| such edutainment since they were very young -- we've been on
| this path for 5 years or so and it has just become "the norm"
| if we are to use YouTube as a household.
|
| (I will admit that as Dad, my time on YouTube is split
| between learning about whatever new hobby has peaked my
| interest , currently SDR related stuff, and car related
| material for fun. I've also fallen into the LTT universe, but
| am aiming to back away because it, in my opinion , is just
| providing that mindless watching which I aimed to get rid of
| around 16 years old (ie, decades ago) to better use available
| free time.
|
| Seems everyone is just different, but the resources are for
| sure there!
| stormfather wrote:
| Can you attribute your kids' behavior to any actions you
| took or policies you had? Please don't be shy about it, I
| would love to inculcate that into my kids as well.
| MonaroVXR wrote:
| > I've tried to introduce them to science, space,
| programming, history, math, finance, nature, etc. content and
| they don't want to have anything to do with it.
|
| Anyone good suggestions?
| brightball wrote:
| This. It's the entire reason that I'm the unpopular parent
| that doesn't let my kids have unlimited YouTube.
| evanchisholm wrote:
| I am currently in high school, you definitely are right that
| the majority of people my age do just waste their time on
| YouTube (I do too sometimes) but there are a few of us that
| really take advantage of it. I have personally spent a large
| amount of time on YouTube learning to program over the past
| few years, I have now become quite competent and built some
| pretty cool things on my own (search engines, chess bots,
| personal web apps, competitive programming, etc.) My brother
| older brother spent a lot of time watching videos about
| physics and math to the point where he is now doing a physics
| degree. A lot of my other friends have used it to cultivate
| other skills and knowledge for free too.
| EGreg wrote:
| Do you think this would help your classsmates get more
| interested:
|
| https://teaching.app
| 867-5309 wrote:
| disclaimer: this is yours
| EGreg wrote:
| Yes. That's why I am asking
| Kye wrote:
| It's good form to say you're the person behind the thing
| you're recommending. Making stuff to solve problems is
| the point of most of the domain this little website is
| under, so self-promotion is fine, but not saying that's
| what it is looks bad.
| EGreg wrote:
| Right. But I'm not promoting it. I am definitely NOT
| recommending it. It isn't even launched. I was attempting
| to ask in an unbiased way whether it would help. That
| would require one person (the one I am asking) to go and
| check it out.
|
| Yes, I omitted saying it's mine, not because of any
| nefarious reason. Just didn't realize it was necessary to
| simply ask an opinion of one person about whether it
| would have the intended effect. And in my opinion it
| would actually be counterproductive to reveal that I made
| it.
| Kye wrote:
| That's promotion, though. It would be promotion if you
| _didn 't_ make it. I've been accused of being a shill for
| enough things I was enthusiastic about to be 100% sure of
| this. And since you did make it, it's hard to argue you
| don't benefit in some way from sharing it. That's why
| disclosure is good form.
| EGreg wrote:
| I don't think asking someone a question about their own
| specific opinion about whether a particular website could
| help their peers OR NOT, is the same as promotion. For
| example, earlier today I promoted a service that I built
| (see my comment history) and clearly disclosed that it's
| mine.
|
| In fact, sometimes you don't WANT the person to know
| whether what you're asking about is yours, so they can
| give a more honest assessment without worrying about
| hurting your feelings. It should not matter, and for some
| purposes it shoild be disclosed, whether you made it.
|
| As for being accused of shilling... sounds like the crowd
| accusing you was pretty extreme. The definition of a
| shill from Wikipedia is indeed nefarious:
|
| _In most uses, shill refers to someone who purposely
| gives onlookers, participants or "marks" the impression
| of an enthusiastic customer independent of the seller,
| marketer or con artist, for whom they are secretly
| working. The person or group in league with the shill
| relies on crowd psychology to encourage other onlookers
| or audience members to do business with the seller or
| accept the ideas they are promoting. Shills may be
| employed by salespeople and professional marketing
| campaigns. Plant and stooge more commonly refer to a
| person who is secretly in league with another person or
| outside organization while pretending to be neutral or
| part of the organization in which they are planted, such
| as a magician's audience, a political party, or an
| intelligence organization_
| Kye wrote:
| All you're doing here is turning what looked innocent and
| well-intentioned into something suspicious. I hope you
| learn to take feedback better before your app is big
| enough that handling it poorly does real damage.
| EGreg wrote:
| This is Hacker News. It is reasonable to have substantive
| discussion and correct mistakes. We are deep in a comment
| thread hardly anyone will see. So I think it's OK to
| explain where I am coming from.
|
| It _was_ innocent and well-intentioned. You just
| misunderstood the intention. If people say there is a
| systemic problem X in high school, and a high schooler
| confirms most of their friends have problem X, what do
| you think is more well-intentioned:
|
| 1) Promotion: Hey high school student! I built Y! Check
| it out! Tell all your friends! I think it might help
| them! Or...
|
| 2) Feedback: Hey high school student, do you THINK this
| COULD help your friends or not: Y
|
| My purpose was 2. I sometimes do 1, but here that was not
| my intent. When I'm promoting something, you know it. Now
| that you highlighted that I made it, though, it defeats
| much of the original intent. So now it has turned into a
| conversation about whether people can have purposes other
| than promotion. That's fine. It is somewhat useful for me
| to get this straightened out. I won't get an unbiased
| answer anymore, but I can get them elsewhere when I do
| case studies and beta testing.
|
| bottom line: doing a clinical trial or experiment or beta
| testing or asking someone's opinion isn't always
| primarily about promotion.
| [deleted]
| zo1 wrote:
| Be careful what you do on the internet. This thread will
| forever be connected to this "teaching.app" website, your
| down-votes, and your tone-def responses to the people
| trying to explain why they think you should have
| disclosed that you made the website, and also the name
| "EGreg"..
| EGreg wrote:
| That is a fairly good point, zo1. Sadly I think that,
| with generative AI and fake bot accounts, it will become
| very easy to create all kinds of negative associations
| and destroy reputations. A thread somewhere deep inside
| Hacker News won't rank highly for teaching.app when it
| launches - but in a year from now, far worse things would
| be going on (primarily because of generative AI making
| such attacks cheap).
|
| My entire comment history has been one of discussing in
| good faith and standing up for what I believe in. You
| prefer that I back down and agree to something when I can
| correct the misunderstanding. That's your prerogative. I
| see nothing to be ashamed of.
|
| If someone wants to misinterpret what I say or take it
| out of context, I can't stop it. Most celebrities cause
| far worse outrage when they get famous, I am rather
| careful with my words. I have made a decision for myself
| long ago that integrity and standing for what you believe
| in, in good faith, is worth it to me more than attempting
| to be too political. I could be wrong. We'll see.
| froggit wrote:
| Nah, no one is saying you're being nefarious. We just
| don't understand why you aren't proud enough to openly
| declare that's your work that you're not not promoting.
| EGreg wrote:
| It's not that I am not proud enough.
|
| I was simply interested in the opinion of a thoughtful
| high schooler who is aware of what his friends are doing.
| I want to help fix society, including teenage education.
| This is how I do it -- using software. I encountered an
| opportunity to ask an unbiased question and I took it --
| without biasing it with "Heey, what do you think of MY
| project that I clearly worked hard on?" That wouldn't be
| neutral and thus defeat the purpose of asking the
| question. Reading into this that I am somehow looking to
| promote it is wrong. It would be a terrible way to
| promite, anyway. There can be other reasons for asking a
| question deep inside a comment thread that hardly anyone
| sees, than low key trying to draw attention to a project
| for purposes of promoting it. Besides, it isn't even
| launched yet.
| [deleted]
| hyperliner wrote:
| [dead]
| shriek wrote:
| Yep, same with my nephews and nieces too. It doesn't help
| that YT algo pushes these contents to the front and center as
| trending content.
|
| But, those who do put some effort on actually making good use
| of this platform definitely has huge advantage than our
| generation growing up though. So, in that regard I'm still
| optimistic that our future generation will be much smarter
| than us.
| ur-whale wrote:
| > They are passionate about cheap mindless entertainment.
|
| Everyone hopes that their kids will be exceptional.
|
| You just have normal kids, get over it.
| kubectl_h wrote:
| Watching kids watch youtube is like watching zombies.
|
| I know a kid who is a big fan of any kind of sports. He is
| constantly watching youtube videos that are basically stats
| and clips packaged up with some slight humor but very little
| analysis. This kid has basically an encyclopedic knowledge of
| sports... stats. All from youtube. I was also like this to a
| degree as a kid, but I got my info from stats
| books/magazines/newspaper sports sections. So in a way the
| outcomes are the similar -- young kids love looking at the
| numbers -- but I can't help but feel icky about the way
| youtube can just lock a kid in for hours and hours.
|
| * Example video about Tim Lincecum that basically enumerates
| the stats of his career but doesn't discuss anything else --
| his personality, his pitches, his unconventional delivery,
| etc. Just clips (that repeat) and stats. It's bizarre.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgaPKJIF_Zo
| meken wrote:
| Not really sure what you're talking about when you say that
| vid just enumerates stats. There's a lot of narrative and
| comparison and context put into that video. Comparing it to
| how I grew up watching ESPN Sportscenter, I find that YT
| video much richer and varied
| expertentipp wrote:
| > Watching kids watch youtube is like watching zombies.
|
| My heart breaks when I see nephews playing dumb mobile
| games and watch youtube videos of someone playing games,
| all these interrupted with multiple full screen ads which
| they also diligently watch. Fuck these platforms and all
| their creators.
| api wrote:
| We banned YouTube after the kids would do nothing but
| watch junk like PrestonPlayz for hours and hours. It was
| really rotting their brains. We have seen positive growth
| in their interests and behavior since it was banned.
|
| YT is full of good content but the good content is not
| addictive or viral and the viral addictive content is not
| good. There might be a few kids that will gravitate
| toward substance but I have yet to see one. If we visit a
| home with YT enabled the kids are watching hours and
| hours of trash.
| momirlan wrote:
| totally in agreement, my kids are just the same. me and wife,
| we read a lot of literature, poetry, classics, they don't
| touch books.
| mchaynes wrote:
| Gen Z here. I grew up on YouTube. I'm 25 now, so technically
| a cusper but had an iPod touch and YouTube since third grade.
|
| Videos of travel have a lot of value. I was stuck behind a
| desk for 4 years at my programming job. The last 7 months of
| travel has done so much for the rest of my entire human
| experience that I could never get from a textbook. Plus it's
| fun to see people explore the world. We've been fascinated by
| this stuff since the beginning of humanity.
|
| Reality videos and reality TV all show elements of how
| relationship dynamics work. They often are fraught with bad
| narratives, but they model conflict and resolution between
| people. This can be helpful as a guide to understanding human
| interaction.
|
| I'm not saying that it is all bringing value to their lives,
| but there is something inherently interesting about the
| content they're consuming. Otherwise, they wouldn't be.
|
| The challenge for you is to go into their world and
| understand what they value. You might even change your
| definition of the word "value"
| radicaldreamer wrote:
| A lot of that stuff is going to be AI generated in the future
| and it'll hit those dopamine circuits better than human
| generated content ever could
| api wrote:
| Now we know what all the Borg were doing in their cube
| ships. Between occasional bouts of conquest and
| assimilation they were all frying in a sizzling bath of
| repetitive dopamine triggering meme soup created by AIs and
| other members of the hive mind.
|
| Maybe they lurched out and attacked or assimilated someone
| when a new trending channel appeared that urged such
| activities.
|
| I joke but it really is a bit spooky how _plausible_ the
| Borg are today to the point that I can imagine what it
| would be like to be part of them. It'd be like scrolling
| TikTok but with Neuralink.
| SnowHill9902 wrote:
| It's your responsibility to guide them.
| djaychela wrote:
| If only it was that simple. In my experience (with four
| step kids aging from 23 down to 16, and I've been in that
| position for over 13 years), I'd say my input has had maybe
| 5-10% influence, if that.
|
| If they're not interested in that area (and mine aren't),
| then there's not much you can do, even if you spend a lot
| of time and effort trying.
| irrational wrote:
| Like I said, you can bring a horse to water, but you can't
| make them drink. Agency is a double edged sword.
| zo1 wrote:
| The "agency" that is dominated by the influence of their
| peers, schooling, and media you allow them to consume as
| impressionable and _innocent_ individuals.
|
| Normally I'd say let them grow, have their own agency and
| learn the world in their own eyes with parental
| supervision. But right now, the media and culture are so
| highly toxic and degenerate, that I say it's our duty as
| parents (and humans) to shield them from that, and
| instilling positive values.
| pcthrowaway wrote:
| > It's an awesome resource and I think Gen Z are at a massive
| advantage because of it. They can literally leave school and
| already be professionally competent. I think we'll see them
| leapfrogging millennials on the career ladder because they had
| a youth where they could spend their entire time learning
| literally everything there is to know about their passion for
| free
|
| I don't follow this. I'm a millennial, graduated university 10
| years ago, and by my estimation, that was the golden age of
| MOOCs (many of the courses available for free back then require
| payment now, and several of the MOOC platforms have shut down)
|
| I don't consider bespoke youtube videos to be as rigorous with
| regards to structuring a topic
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| Yeah, including Wikibooks... and why hasn't anyone brought up
| Wikipedia yet ?!
|
| It's when I discovered it in 2006 when it _really_ dawned on
| me just how immense the potential of the Internet was !
| raincole wrote:
| Youtube videos are good for "fixing your own pipelines" kinda
| of problem.
|
| I don't think they're good for, for example, programmering.
| yodsanklai wrote:
| > They can literally leave school and already be professionally
| competent.
|
| I really wonder about that. Learning anything requires active
| participation and motivation. YouTube provides great content,
| but I'd say it's the easy part. BTW, public libraries existed
| before youtube.
|
| My personal example, I graduated in maths 20 years ago and
| spent countless hours solving problems. Nowadays, I'm a youtube
| addict, I casually watch lots of videos, but I have very little
| attention span left, and don't build serious knowledge about
| anything.
|
| But your hypothesis could be assessed based on data. I may be
| wrong, but I suspect students math proficiency has declined in
| most western countries.
| wildrhythms wrote:
| School is less about learning a subject to any serious
| degree, and more about socialization and exposure to a
| breadth of subjects. I am suspect of people who view school
| purely as an educational experience.
| inkywatcher wrote:
| You say "socialization" but I think the real word is
| "conformity".
| dmreedy wrote:
| Yes, societal institutions have a flywheel effect of
| normalization on those who pass through them. This is
| foundational to a cooperative society. They provide a
| background context to evaluate actions within, and define
| oneself in, or against.
|
| Consider your Shannon Information. Meaning does not exist
| without context.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| Is "calculus" a hard core counterexample?
| yadingus wrote:
| I think the socialization argument is a fallacy, in my
| experience there is absolutely no effort to guide or
| educate or provide any sort of understanding or framework
| of _how_ to socialize, how to cope with interactions, your
| own feelings, etc.
|
| It's just putting them all together and taking action if
| something too drastic happens, but there's no actual
| dedicated time for teaching how to socialize, you're on
| your own.
| [deleted]
| imbnwa wrote:
| Socialization is an artifact, not the purpose, of most
| modern schooling in America; not like kids weren't
| socializing in mines and factories, though they likely had
| way more sense of consequence for their behavior in those
| environments. That said, education is also secondary except
| for, in urban public schools at least, the tier of students
| that are filtered for to benefit.
| liendolucas wrote:
| I can't understand people paying for streaming services like
| Netflix & competition, where all their catalogs are region-
| locked and every single one of them producing mostly crappy
| shows/movies (at least that's the Netflix I experienced last
| time I was able to use someone else's account on someone else's
| computer many years ago, so I must assume as everything else,
| things get worse, not better).
|
| What would I pay for? A good streaming service where I can
| choose movies that at least for me are worth watching: good
| stories, classics, italian, french, spanish movies, independent
| productions, low-budget productions and non-mainstream
| gargantuan productions. Definitely not a service that literally
| invites you to consume whatever crap they produce and put in
| front of your screen to keep people paying for subscriptions.
| What I would also pay for? A service that after watching a
| movie allows me to actually purchase a digital DRM-free copy of
| the movie for some extra few bucks. Any suggestions?
|
| I've heavily switched my screen habit, now I find myself most
| of the time reading books, as my father used to say: "You
| produce your very own version of the film in your head". I used
| to read regularly as a kid, then there's a huge gap where I
| haven't touched books for years. The only regret I have is that
| I haven't kept this habit all this time.
|
| Edit: Some corrections.
| schrectacular wrote:
| You might like the Criterion Collection streaming service.
| Not a customer but love their movie collection.
| liendolucas wrote:
| LOL. I'm currently in Italy and I'm getting: "Sorry. This
| is currently unavailable in your region. Type in your email
| below and tell the producers you want it in your country!"
| (when trying to sign in, don't know if it's worth trying
| with a VPN service tough)
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| My local cinema does that DRM-free movie on USB key thing...
| even if you do not watch the movie first !
|
| (As you can imagine, it doesn't show _any_ Marvel movies or
| the like...)
| submeta wrote:
| > just cancelled Spotify and got YouTube Premium
|
| Did this some time ago. Never looked back.
| flandish wrote:
| My problem with yt music is that certain albums will ask you if
| you approve playing, even with age and content restrictions
| off.
|
| Rage Against The Machine's first album has "disturbing" album
| art.
|
| It asks for EVERY song.
|
| Song in a playlist?
|
| Playlist stopped waiting for you to ask.
|
| Terrible UX, imho.
| porkbeer wrote:
| Its soft censorship, yt is famous for it.
| noloblo wrote:
| archive link unpaywall :
| https://archive.is/20230422002004/https://www.ft.com/content...
| alex_young wrote:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right_pipeline
| rolph wrote:
| a cavity concealed jewel perhaps?
| 1023bytes wrote:
| I need to mention how terrible YouTube search has gotten.
|
| Instead of giving you actual search results, it only gives a 2-3
| relevant videos and then some random recommendations that are
| often completely unrelated to the query
| harry8 wrote:
| Google itself no longer does search and does recommendation in
| its place. I hate it so much. They must have such an incredible
| moat if they aren't getting smashed by the competition by just
| doing actual search, with all the words in the query string,
| ensuring every single one of them is actually in each result.
| timbit42 wrote:
| Yes, I often now use another search engine, such as DDG, to
| search YouTube.
| mastax wrote:
| I'm going to go against the grain here and say my YouTube
| algorithm is great. Signing out of YouTube and viewing the
| default home page is a reminder of the horrors that lie beyond,
| but my little corner of it is a bit _too_ good.
|
| There was a period of time semi-recently when the algorithm was
| better than my heuristics, too. I had associated too-good
| thumbnails with overproduced shallow clickbait videos churned out
| by content mills and "grindset" individuals. But at some point
| basically everybody started optimizing their titles and
| thumbnails and some of the stuff the algorithm was suggesting was
| actually good even though it looked "too flashy."
| seanalltogether wrote:
| I feel like i used to rely on reddit to surface all the new and
| interesting content creators on youtube, but nowadays i just go
| to youtube itself when I'm looking for something new to watch.
| I think all of the new content creators I've found in the past
| year have come from youtube recommendations
| mgfist wrote:
| It's decent but I feel like it lacks granularity. Everything is
| either genre A or genre B or genre C, with each being very
| narrow fields - sometimes a "genre" might contain a few select
| youtubers, even though there are thousands of channels that
| feature similar content.
|
| Whereas twitter for me is much more nuanced, and I'm constantly
| being exposed to the fringes of my interests which helps me
| organically grow my feed.
| deepzn wrote:
| oh wow exactly. When i go on incognito, im terrified at all the
| "viral" kinds of news,etc type of vids recommended to me.
| deepzn wrote:
| btw has anyone tried YT (& premium specifically) on an iPad?
| it's like 10x better. I don't use it enough. Just in my bed
| haha.
| robinsonb5 wrote:
| I do have some admiration for the algorithm - but I also wish
| that refreshing the home page would show me some more of the
| many thousands of videos that I'd likely find interesting,
| rather than the same 20 just in a different order.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| I think I'd be anxious then that if I saw two videos that I
| really wanted to watch I'd have to one in a background tabs,
| rather than just trust that the other one will almost
| certainly be recommended again.
| kccqzy wrote:
| That is not what I want. There should be an explicit button
| to refresh the recommendations. What I hate is a
| recommendation page that displayed what I liked but made them
| disappear just because I temporarily navigated away.
| TheAceOfHearts wrote:
| It's very well hidden, but if you scroll to the end of the
| filter tags there's a button to show "New For You", which
| shows a screen full of new recommendations each time you
| refresh. Sometimes I'll roll the dice a few times with that
| page and find really interesting stuff.
| mastax wrote:
| I'm glad that the home page is semi-stable because I'll often
| click on a video and then go back and want to queue up
| another that looked interesting but if it were gone it might
| be hard to find again. (Yes there are strategies to work
| around this but I don't always use them).
|
| They do have the "New to You" category on the home page now
| which you might find useful.
| silvestrov wrote:
| The should have a page with "recently shown on home page"
| like the history page for actually shown videos.
| deepzn wrote:
| i had this happen to me. ive lost videos I wanted to see
| when i clicked one instead of another.
| deepzn wrote:
| also being new to TikTok, I didn't realize scrolling up at
| first would refresh the queue of videos. And I would lose
| the vid being watched which was a bit terrifying to lose an
| interesting video.
| WanderPanda wrote:
| Watching one ,,wrong" video can mess everything up for a couple
| of weeks though, which always gives me some level of anxiety :D
| deepzn wrote:
| true, I have to say "Not interested" a couple times
| GalenErso wrote:
| I open Incognito mode when I'm about to watch a video like
| that.
| kevingadd wrote:
| You can usually go into your history and remove it to fix it.
| ur-whale wrote:
| >I'm going to go against the grain here and say my YouTube
| algorithm is great.
|
| I agree with the minor caveat that I'd like a "broaden" button
| and a "change theme" menu.
|
| My search algorithm presents me with content that I find quite
| enjoyable, but I'd like to be exposed to a little more stuff
| that's outside of my bubble.
|
| It knows what I like based on what I've watched, but it doesn't
| _know me_ and therefore can 't infer stuff I don't know but
| would enjoy if I was exposed to it.
| mastax wrote:
| On the top of the home page they have a category control that
| lets you look for different genres of stuff from your
| algorithm plus a "new to you" category. I think that's
| supposed to be what you're after. I hardly ever use it
| because I forget it's there or don't need it to steer the
| algorithm my way.
| natebc wrote:
| I always see that when visiting the YouTube site but it's
| very inconsistent in the Android app.
| crazygringo wrote:
| Yup, I'm the same. I've totally given up on navigating anything
| except my home page, I'm actually astonished at how good it is.
|
| The newest videos from my favorite channels are always listed
| first, and then it's a smattering of older popular ones from
| the topics and channels I watch the most, and a handful of
| things "adjacent" to those that are sometimes not for me but
| sometimes become my new favorite rabbit hole, so I'm very
| thankful they're there. (For me it's a lot of educational
| content like architecture tours and urban engineering and how-
| it's-made, plus content from certain comedians and sketch
| comedy groups.)
|
| I know there's supposed to be a bunch of clickbait garbage on
| YouTube but I just wouldn't know, because I literally never see
| it.
|
| (Plus there are new tabs at the top that actually _list_ the
| topics it 's learned I like, so if I want to see 20
| architecture videos instead of just 2, it's a single tap to
| filter. It's remarkably clever.)
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| > I know there's supposed to be a bunch of clickbait garbage
| on YouTube but I just wouldn't know, because I literally
| never see it.
|
| Just sort by view count for any common english word and
| filter out the music videos.
|
| Well, even including music videos there appear to be several
| dozen or hundred accounts dedicated to reposting the exact
| same Indian music videos, film trailers, clips, etc...
|
| Not even small variations of the same content, the exact same
| video.
|
| Some of the accounts look like plausible media
| distributors/producers in India but quite a large fraction
| seem to be bots or individuals spamming.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| Yeah, I really have no complaints. Of all "we feed you content"
| thingies online, YouTube has been the most adequate.
|
| The only complaint I have is what human behaviour forces even
| the intelligent creators to do: have a title card with an
| excited looking person.
| fsckboy wrote:
| this is how low we've sunk, you don't even say that youtube
| is adequate, you say it's the most adequate
|
| Just to add my anecdata to the mix, I'm waist deep in
| logging-in to gmail and workplace apps, etc, but to
| compensate have abandoned android for iPhone, and I never use
| google search, and while I watch plenty on youtube, it's
| never required me to log in so I've never logged in, I don't
| even have any idea how much it "integrates" with other google
| logins or not at all. Am I missing out on something, is there
| some benefit to logging in?
|
| My main complaint about youtube is that it used to be fun and
| quirky and have lots of "raw" content, and now everything is
| overproduced, festooned with graphics and clickbait. So many
| channels I would like to blacklist but nothing like that is
| possible. Technologically it works well, and I know there's
| content out there that I'll like, but unless I have a link to
| it or know exactly what to search for, it's very hard to find
| things. If there are channels I like and watch regularly, I
| sure don't need the algorithm showing them to me, but any
| sort of "maybe you'd like this too" seems totally broken, or
| at least completely lowest common denominator.
| disntthinkthis wrote:
| YouTube has been showing me a ton of channels with low
| Hundreds of views recently, and they're very to my taste.
| Ymmv but they're doing well at exactly what you're
| complaining about in my experience
| gambiting wrote:
| Same here. I pretty much only watch car channels and some meme
| compilations and that's exactly what YouTube shows me, nothing
| else.
| smeagull wrote:
| If I hear "not what you think", "may surprise you" or "what
| happens when" then I just close the tab as a reflex.
| wwarner wrote:
| btw the feynman lecture mentioned in the article is first rate, a
| bit mind blowing
| kubectl_h wrote:
| Over the christmas holiday I was surprised you couldn't purchase
| youtube premium as a gift card for someone else. Seems like this
| would be a non-trivial source of revenue for YT.
| verall wrote:
| You can pay for YT premium from Google play dollars which have
| gift cards. It's a little bit annoying to set up though.
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| YouTube will pull you towards controversial clickbaity crappy
| content since that's what generated clicks. These days I just
| surgically search for what I need, watch that, then get out,
| ignoring all recommends because invariably they are crap.
|
| And YouTube is poison for young children who don't know better
| than to follow what the algorithm tells you. You like super
| Mario? Here, 500 ways to die in Mario. And next - what would
| happen if all Mario characters killed each other bloodily? And it
| starts getting worse.
|
| We banned YouTube for our kid and couldn't be happier - the
| damage that thing was doing to his mind was noticeable and no
| amount of guidance or curation was able to keep him away from the
| cesspool.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| Youtube only gives you what they think you will click on. If
| you don't click on the crappy content (or at least leave the
| video immediately) then they will stop recommending it.
|
| I guess this advice doesn't apply if you are sharing an account
| with your kid, then you're screwed.
| Zetice wrote:
| Yeah but if you're immune to the most obvious awful shit (not
| your kids) it's kind of the only drawback.
|
| I get the occasional "lets debunk flat earthers" but a) I don't
| find that content interesting and b) I know that's the lip of
| the rabbit hole, so if I just avoid those kind of videos, my
| feed is fine.
|
| Your problem is legitimate and your response is understandable,
| but what would you think of YouTube if that weren't a problem?
| doublerabbit wrote:
| > What would you think of YouTube if that weren't a problem?
|
| Not op, however I avoid YT at all costs. I would sing a tune
| of a product giving back to the world. Education, knowledge
| and entertainment. Quite a dream compared to the current as
| of the moment; corruption of education, knowledge and
| entertainment.
| Zetice wrote:
| No, YouTube is not a corruption of any of those things.
|
| You can't have the things you like without some way of
| allowing the people who created those things to no have to
| do other things to survive.
| jasmer wrote:
| What is truly astonishing is that there are not many other
| competitors that are consistently as good.
| logicallee wrote:
| (via Google): Nearly 17 years ago, Google purchased YouTube for
| the hefty sum of $1.65 billion. The actual date the news hit was
| Oct. 9, 2006. The transaction closed on Nov 13, 2006.
|
| Can you imagine if there had been any snag in the paperwork or
| with the legal team or the deal fell through?
| cypherpunks01 wrote:
| Sans paywall:
|
| https://t.co/ZyQ4Xz9zX9
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-23 23:00 UTC)