• scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I can point you to some people who need your money more than you do. Are you going to give it to them? Why not?? Doesn’t money flow to those who need it??? Isn’t that how this works???

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        It doesn’t, which informs the rise technical mitigations of YouTube’s terrible ad schemes. YouTube isn’t interested in a more egalitarian society but serving its shareholder masters, and it sucks even at that.

        YouTube subscriptions are not a good deal for the consumers, so they’re not going to be popular, which might serve to explain to you why everyone is not a paying subscriber, nor will they ever be.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          All you have to do is look at other streaming services which are subscriber-only to see the truth of what I said. Even the ones that have ads are not doing backflips to cram them everywhere as the other commenter complained, because ads are just supplementary revenue, not primary. The subscription model is incredibly strong historically and currently. It’s patently ridiculous that you think you can wave it away so easily. You’ll also notice that most other subscriptions are cheaper than YT Premium - because they’re going for subscriber scale where YT has a powerful ad business in place that subscriptions replace.

          If you’re not following me, I’ll simplify: if everyone on YT has to subscribe, as on Netflix, it in fact would cost a lot less. But you don’t, so you get ads up the wazoo.

          I’m even more baffled by your criticism that YT cares more about shareholders than creating an egalitarian society. Thats true of literally every business including the one you work for. YT never said they were trying to make society egalitarian. Where do you even get that shit from?

          • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I’m even more baffled by your criticism that YT cares more about shareholders than creating an egalitarian society. Thats true of literally every business including the one you work for. YT never said they were trying to make society egalitarian. Where do you even get that shit from?

            The pissed-off engineers that develop effective adblockers, for which there remains robust support.

            Much like the west coast oyster monopolies of the 1880s that were scourged by oyster pirates, YouTube is fighting a losing battle.

            PS: I take you’re aware of the cord-cutting epidemic of cable television, yes?

            • scarabic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Piracy, cable TV, cord cutting.

              You’re throwing a lot of words together without making any argument.

              YT is winning the battle against blockers as evidenced by the extreme vitriol toward them here right now.

              YT are winning at business: they are massively successful.

              YT are winning competitively. Just listen to the cries of monopoly around here. That’s how strong YT are.

              YT won my business by making something I use every day and mostly can’t find a substitute for.

              What are they losing again? They’re not even losing the ad blocker users, who clearly and obviously depend greatly on YT or they wouldn’t be so mad that their free ride is over.

              Explain to me again how someone who writes an ad blocker gives you the idea that YT is supposed to be creating an egalitarian world? That part made no sense.

                • scarabic@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  You can’t make your point. And I’m not impressed by this attempt to make it look like you’re just choosing not to because SWISH SWISH you’re just too cool for that.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I can point you to some people who need your money more than you do. Are you going to give it to them? Why not?? Doesn’t money flow to those who need it??? Isn’t that how this works???

        i can point you to the basic fact that if i just keep my money, i can very well do more work with that money that i keep, rather than just giving it away to other people.

        Money doesn’t flow to those who need it, money flows to those who get it through commerce most effectively.