• notous@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 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.

  • ColdWater@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Fucking YouTube is at it again, and you know what? I think Susan make a better YouTube CEO than the current retarded CEO, Luckily Revanced is a thing hopefully they patch it if it come true

  • Squizzy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    Hmm at a glance I dont see a major issue here, my concern would be that I dont click on vids with shit numbers so they are now on a more equal footing.

    But it is better for people not to be so focused on numbers like removing number of likes on Instagram.

    • moseschrute@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Wouldn’t the YouTube creator need to see views for ad revenue? Are they removing them for viewers or creators too?

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      But it is better for people not to be so focused on numbers like removing number of likes on Instagram.

      Is my mental health really something I want Google managing?

      • Squizzy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        They are not managing so much as they are eliminating a likely issue for users and the public.

            • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              When Google removed the dislikes from youtube videos, one of the lies they told was it was for the users(or uploader’s) mental health.

              • Squizzy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 days ago

                Prominent youtubers came out and specifically said that they found it a good measure for their mental health to not have the focus on dislikes. Fairly certain one of the vlogbrothers did. They may not agree with it completely but said it was a positive.

                I dislike it because it was a good measure of if I should click on a video or not.

                • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Except that the uploader can still see the downvote count. It was just removed so that corporations wouldn’t be embarrassed when they put out an unpopular trailer or product.

    • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      I don’t mind seeing vids with small numbers (many are genuinely cool) but I avoid 500k and above (except music) because the mainstream is mostly clickbait.

    • COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      I don’t know what’s up with the algorithm pushing these lately. If it’s a video with 4 views from a channel with no subscribers I’m probably not interested in it. Sometimes they have a good thumbnail/title so I give them a chance but 9/10 times it’s terrible. Also often extremely right wing for whatever reason.

  • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    I’ve encountered so many AI generated videos that now I have to depend on view count since they removed dislike. And even view count doesn’t work as well because people click on just to see why there are high view counts, turns out it’s an AI video with high view count. Absolutely terrible practice. Youtube knows, they’re not stopping

    • Evotech@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      YouTube har made everyone using AI in their video declare it, but in not sure it matters when it comes to being pushed out.

      Source: I was playing around with autogenerating YouTube shorts, YouTube did not make it easy

      • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Alright now how do I filter out that A.I content. Chances are if you search up a tech question, there’s an A.I video made from scraping websites and bot TTS

    • Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Removing the homepage entirely, replacing the entire UI with the shorts-style format of “view video right now, tap button to see next/previous video”. If you want a specific video, you must search for it.

      • sheogorath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        The endgame will be Gemini generating videos based on the information they’ve harvested off you.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      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 savings they can get away with, without repelling most of their userbase.

      • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days 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.

  • Ironfacebuster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    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?

    • golli@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

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

      I am pretty confident in guessing that they are not doing it for selfless reasons. Imo the reason is that the less information they give the user, the more you are beholden to the algorithm choosing for you.

      But depending how they hide it it actually might not just be users, but also companies that e.g. buy ads from them. The less information they get, the more they need to trust whatever metric google offers them

    • vxx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      That makes sense. Youtube has mixed more and more small channels with low views into my feed for a couple of months.

        • vxx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          And the comments are all “How does this have so few views?” while it has 10 times more than subscribers.

          I subscribed to quite a few small channels recently.

          I’m no fan that they try to show me 14 year old videos all the time, though.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      I don’t avoid low view count videos because…say I get a notification that RedLetterMedia has just published a new Best of the Worst. It’s been live for 4 minutes. Of course it’s going to have a low view count.

      I’m looking for a repair video on the specific make and model of Dell laptop I have. I’ve seen exactly two of them in existence, not a popular model. It’s going to have a low view count.

      I think it is useful information to have, it shouldn’t be entirely hidden like the downvotes are, but I don’t think it’s necessary on the home page.

      Date uploaded though…that needs to be there.

    • misk@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      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.

      • Ironfacebuster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        That’s fair, and I’m more inclined to believe people on Lemmy would agree with your view thankfully! A lot of high view videos are for sure manufactured, and from what I can tell usually target children.

        I guess we’ll see how the landscape changes if this sticks around? We’re all along for the ride, for the most part!

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    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

    • fnrir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      In 20 years:

      Users can no longer upload and YouTube becomes just a CDN for Adsense.

      (and the only way to watch old videos is through the Internet Archive)

    • Sourav Satvaya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days 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.

  • notfromhere@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

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

    • CaptKoala@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      I thought I was imagining this until I put a 1080p episode on one monitor and a 1080p YT vid on another. The difference was night and day.

  • Hal-5700X@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    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.

      • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        That’s what happens to all alternatives at the start, only really the content that isn’t suitable for the main platform migrates there. It requires a mass exodus because of something major, like what happened with reddit 3rd party apps or twitter/X & the block change , to get enough regular users there.

        Lemmy literally exists because Dessalines, a “long time Marxist-leninist” decided that “Fuck the while supremacist Reddit admins” and made an alternative to host r/communism because reddit is run by an “anti-tankie scum”.

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        Its got a lot of those types for sure, but it has the most normal content of any alt video platform.

      • vonbaronhans@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

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