Poll of the Day > Serious YouTube question.

(+) Yeah! (+)

I keep hearing content creators complaining. I keep seeing the new rules theyve implemented, and I keep seeing them censor folks of ALL walks. I also keep seeing, not one, but now two fucking ads when I use YouTube on my phone(which doesnt have a blocker on it).

If all this is true... why doesnt someone create a different site like it?
---

because you're going up against youtube.

and any competing website, of which many have tried and failed, would have to somehow, yknow, pay the people on their platform.

and how do you do that? you either start a subscription services, like the defunct Vessel, or what Floatplane is trying to do, or you show ads.

and when you show ads, you're now open to the whims of the ad providers, and then you have the exact same situation as youtube.
---

yeah, pretty much what helly said, not to mention all that server space is not free, ap you yourself will have to make a sizable amount of money too
---

Two?
I'd seen like 4 in a 10 minute video before, after the first 'adpocalypse' had gotten going.

6+ for 20-30 minute ones.

Horror content where they said their ad revenue took a hit to boot.

I'd seen ads on videos that didn't previously have them, even though they were WELL within fair use, because they were claimed.

All good responses but...

Still, we have to have options. Just like theres a Pepsi to a Coke. We need at least one more, main platform.

I mean... without competition Xbox owners would have to be online 24/7 without the ability to buy used games, and would have the Kinect constantly listening to their voices and providing ads based on what they said.

#godblesssony
---

HornedLion posted...

If all this is true... why doesnt someone create a different site like it?

They have, most have failed. Because you are going up against YouTube.

The current competitor now seems to be BitChute, which is decent but also far from having the kind of popularity it would need to compete with the likes of YouTube.

---

HornedLion posted...

If all this is true... why doesnt someone create a different site like it?

I've suggested this many times. Turns out vloggers are better at complaining than coming up with solutions. They'll go down with the ship before they fix it, and profit from the clicks.

That reminds me, now that I have the skills, I might try to program a crowd hosting service. Like the Tor network, except designed for high bandwidth sites that stream videos. I might even offer a portion of the profits to people willing to help host.

This was the idea behind dtube (I think that was the name) but the creator never actually realized it, instead hosting it from a paid hosting site.
---

Yellow posted...

HornedLion posted...

If all this is true... why doesnt someone create a different site like it?

I've suggested this many times. Turns out vloggers are better at complaining than coming up with solutions. They'll go down with the ship before they fix it, and profit from the clicks.

That reminds me, now that I have the skills, I might try to program a crowd hosting service. Like the Tor network, except designed for high bandwidth sites that stream videos. I might even offer a portion of the profits to people willing to help host.

This was the idea behind dtube (I think that was the name) but the creator never actually realized it, instead hosting it from a paid hosting site.

Since I reminded you... can I have 3% of anything you make?
---

HornedLion posted...

Since I reminded you... can I have 3% of anything you make?

Sure

---

Another thing is why is youtube bending over so much for advertisers? It's not like there's an alternative site. The only thing advertisers can do is not advertise on youtube and miss all the exposure.
---

There are sites like youtube other than youtube...
---

Going up against Youtube means going up against Google as Youtube is part of Google and this is a war on a different level, there are already competitors to Youtube but most people haven't heard about them because Google deranks them in their searches and products (which is understandable)

1.Android is owned by Google so all Android smartphones would come with Youtube already installed as the go to video platform

2.Same with Chrome and Firefox

3.Google prioritizes Youtube in their searches, now in any search you get Youtube videos as the first choice (for me at least that's what happens), breaking Youtubes monopoly means also breaking Googles monopoly and seeing as 90% of global searches are through Google, it ain't gonna happen soon.

4.Google is also an ad monopoly which is where all the $$$ comes from and what the big youtubers care about eventually.

5.All the big shots need to move ship and they have no incentive to do so because it's mostly the small shots who are getting screwed by Youtube, with the exception of Pewdiepie hence why Youtube returned to kissing up to him.

6.There is no guarantee that the new platform wouldn't turn into a Youtube 2.0 after a few years.

7.People hate change, it'll take something big to make the switch.

There was an hearing against google about bias just last week actually, all of it is interesting but it's long so i timestamped Dr.Epstein which imo was the highlight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nO2hOe61yeM" data-time="&start=7593
---

HornedLion posted...

why doesnt someone create a different site like it?

https://www.bitchute.com/
---

JOExHIGASHI posted...

Another thing is why is youtube bending over so much for advertisers? It's not like there's an alternative site. The only thing advertisers can do is not advertise on youtube and miss all the exposure.

Apparently the trouble is going both ways; Advertisers like Trojan and Budweisser have been seriously fighting to get ad space on youtube, but Google is being weiners
---

Lokarin posted...

JOExHIGASHI posted...

Another thing is why is youtube bending over so much for advertisers? It's not like there's an alternative site. The only thing advertisers can do is not advertise on youtube and miss all the exposure.

Apparently the trouble is going both ways; Advertisers like Trojan and Budweisser have been seriously fighting to get ad space on youtube, but Google is being weiners

If theyre being weiners, then Trojan might be good for them...
---

It's almost as if it's really, really hard to create new, viable competition once one company owns a monopoly on a given product. People should really be against that sort of thing.
---

There are other video-sharing sites, but most of them suck in their own way or can't get traction because Google has a chokehold on the industry and the way that Google monetizes its products afaik effectively keeps it immune from antitrust laws.
---

Another thing to consider is that for a long time YouTube wasn't making any money. Up until about 2015 Google hadn't broken even on its $1.2 billion purchase of YouTube, and during the whole "Adpocalipse" YouTube was loosing something like $2 million a day. It wasn't until they started focusing on a more corporate friendly model (the thing that people complain the most about YouTube) that they actually started turning a decent profit.

Now consider trying to start your own video sharing site WITHOUT a huge corporation shoveling millions and millions of dollars into making you popular. It may have worked 15 years ago, but it certainly isn't going to today.

---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

It's almost as if it's really, really hard to create new, viable competition once one company owns a monopoly on a given product. People should really be against that sort of thing.

This is what I was saying when the Epic store popped up. YouTubers were spinning it as anti consumer just to ride the drama bandwagon, despite the fact that any objective view would tell you it's not.
---

Wanded posted...

There was an hearing against google about bias just last week actually, all of it is interesting but it's long so i timestamped Dr.Epstein which imo was the highlight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nO2hOe61yeM" data-time="&start=7593

Why is that guy behind him blinking so much?
---

Dikitain posted...

Another thing to consider is that for a long time YouTube wasn't making any money. Up until about 2015 Google hadn't broken even on its $1.2 billion purchase of YouTube, and during the whole "Adpocalipse" YouTube was loosing something like $2 million a day.

Yeah, but that also kind of falls into the same category as Hollywood accounting and like when you hear things about how Amazon has never turned a profit. Basically, you have a scenario where the company is actually making shit-tons of money, but is then constantly reinvesting the money or spending it in extravagant ways that ultimately leave the final bottom line showing a loss. At which point, the answer isn't "Well, we have to fuck over the users to generate more revenue!" as much as it is "Run your company better, asshole." (see also, the US Post Office in specific, and the US government in general). Or worse, "Stop fudging your financial records and then crying poverty, asshole."

But the other thing to consider is that the fact that Google overvalued the purchase in the first place to generate "debt" isn't something the end user should give a single shit about. It's the same reason why gamers are still fully justified in complaining when a company like EA buys a productive, popular studio, runs it into the ground via terrible management and piss-poor decisions, then guts the company and moves on to their next victim. Sound financial strategy and the ability to cater to and satisfy an audience aren't necessarily equivalent skillsets. Whether or not something is financially viable to operate has a direct and justifiable impact on user experience, but whether or not something is financially recouping prior investment really, really doesn't.



Yellow posted...

This is what I was saying when the Epic store popped up. YouTubers were spinning it as anti consumer just to ride the drama bandwagon, despite the fact that any objective view would tell you it's not.

The problem is, while the concept of attempting to establish a monopoly-breaking alternative that will spur both options to competition that will improve service for end users (as opposed to two alternatives that collude to control the market and still exclude others and screw over users) is a noble goal, they've still gone about it in some of the scummiest, anti-consumer ways possible. So the professed noble intentions tend to fall on deaf ears when you're acting more like a Mafioso or a hostage-taking terrorist.

At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law, it's like rooting for Stalin when he shows up to kick Hitler in the dick. Sure, Hitler bad, but Stalin's still pretty much an equally terrible (if not more so) piece of shit. The only idea scenario for everyone else is if they both simultaneously kick each other in the dick so hard they explode.

That being said, I don't really have a dog in that fight because I'm a console gamer and I treat PC gaming like the plague, so I always sort of chuckle at PC gamers frustrated that they can't have all of the games because they're suddenly dealing with artificial platform exclusivity. I've been living that life for 37 years now.
---