▲ 216 ▼ YouTuber's Channel Permanently Banned Over Censored Hellraiser: Revival Gameplay Video - "I'm Losing 10 Years of Hard Work" (www.ign.com) submitted 1 day ago by alessandro@lemmy.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca 68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago (11 children) Google can’t be trusted permalink fedilink source hideshow 11 child comments replies: [+] nik282000@lemmy.ca -8 points 23 hours ago (10 children) Alphabet owns YouTube they set the rules, they host videos for free, sometimes they even pay users a portion of the ad revenue. YouTube is not a free (as in freedom) platform, it is a business. Choosing to base your income on that kind of platform is a risk, and users who do so should be extremely cautious about breaking rules on that platform. Anyone is free to rent a VPS, install video hosting software, a message board, a blog, get advertisers who want to run ads on your site, and then you can do and say anything you want. Then YOU own the platform, you get to set the rules. But that takes a level of technical knowledge and personal responsibility that most 'Career YouTubers' are unwilling to take on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] zuckey78@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 hour ago (1 child) Hear me out…maybe these services have grown so much they should be regulated as a utility just like the airwaves used to be. Not saying that will fix the problem, but will at least make them accountable beyond their opaque corporate structures and whims. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 hour ago Maybe? The problem I have with that is they are not a radio station or TV station. or even an analog to one like a streaming service that provides access to local news/weather. They do not chose a bunch of programs to host and they generate a VERY small amount number of their own videos, they are a user generated content hosting site. A comprehensive regulation of the conduct of a user generated content hosting services would have to be written by competent, intelligent, and technologically knowledgeable lawmakers. Otherwise it is guaranteed to make things worse for the end user (see age verification laws). permalink fedilink source parent [–] boonhet@lemmy.zip 7 points 10 hours ago You're only mentioning the hard bits like renting a VPS and installing software, but you shouldn't gloss over the easy bits like spending tens od billions on getting a user base big enough to make it worthwhile running a video hosting platform. YouTube's network effect is what makes being a career YouTuber possible and Google spent billions and the better part of two decades making sure no other platform can offer this. permalink fedilink source parent [–] architect 14 points 23 hours ago (6 children) You own the platform, you own the rules, you die from no reach as every single platform silences you if you try to get users offsite! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Cherry@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago Yup you are only ever renting the space. This trajectory was obvious years ago but people still followed it rather than diversifying. It’s just another extension of you’ll own nothing and be happy. The quicker people move away from google/YT and all the tech bros media the better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 3 points 22 hours ago (4 children) I understand that dragging traffic away from YouTube/Instagram/TikTok/whatever is a monumental task but people are literally gambling with their livelihood on the hope that a corporate service will always work in their favour. You can follow the rules as conservatively as possible, YOLO and be ready to loose your account, or host your online business on your own platform. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 13 hours ago* (3 children) Impossible task really do you think a federated network is going to keep every video ever posted to it like Youtube does? I mean the storage that Youtube uses must be massive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 hour ago As a thought experiment, do you think that the ad revenue from watching ONLY videos on that guy's channel were enough to cover the operating costs and infrastructure required to store and host all of that channel's videos? If so then it should be possible, if extremely painful, to operate a vlogging business outside of YouTube. Getting users TO your personal vlog site is a whole other problem but through Patreon (as an example) it is possible to funnel users out of the Alphabet/Meta/ByteDance networks. If any of my favorite channels were to announce they were transitioning to a new video sharing network I would gladly follow them off of YouTube. permalink fedilink source parent [–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 hours ago Evidently they don't keep all of them. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 5 points 12 hours ago They simply have a massive monopoly, and it is impossible to replace them, no matter how good your platform. Because you depend in them and their buddies for advertisment. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] nik282000@lemmy.ca -8 points 23 hours ago (10 children) Alphabet owns YouTube they set the rules, they host videos for free, sometimes they even pay users a portion of the ad revenue. YouTube is not a free (as in freedom) platform, it is a business. Choosing to base your income on that kind of platform is a risk, and users who do so should be extremely cautious about breaking rules on that platform. Anyone is free to rent a VPS, install video hosting software, a message board, a blog, get advertisers who want to run ads on your site, and then you can do and say anything you want. Then YOU own the platform, you get to set the rules. But that takes a level of technical knowledge and personal responsibility that most 'Career YouTubers' are unwilling to take on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] zuckey78@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 hour ago (1 child) Hear me out…maybe these services have grown so much they should be regulated as a utility just like the airwaves used to be. Not saying that will fix the problem, but will at least make them accountable beyond their opaque corporate structures and whims. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 hour ago Maybe? The problem I have with that is they are not a radio station or TV station. or even an analog to one like a streaming service that provides access to local news/weather. They do not chose a bunch of programs to host and they generate a VERY small amount number of their own videos, they are a user generated content hosting site. A comprehensive regulation of the conduct of a user generated content hosting services would have to be written by competent, intelligent, and technologically knowledgeable lawmakers. Otherwise it is guaranteed to make things worse for the end user (see age verification laws). permalink fedilink source parent [–] boonhet@lemmy.zip 7 points 10 hours ago You're only mentioning the hard bits like renting a VPS and installing software, but you shouldn't gloss over the easy bits like spending tens od billions on getting a user base big enough to make it worthwhile running a video hosting platform. YouTube's network effect is what makes being a career YouTuber possible and Google spent billions and the better part of two decades making sure no other platform can offer this. permalink fedilink source parent [–] architect 14 points 23 hours ago (6 children) You own the platform, you own the rules, you die from no reach as every single platform silences you if you try to get users offsite! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Cherry@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago Yup you are only ever renting the space. This trajectory was obvious years ago but people still followed it rather than diversifying. It’s just another extension of you’ll own nothing and be happy. The quicker people move away from google/YT and all the tech bros media the better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 3 points 22 hours ago (4 children) I understand that dragging traffic away from YouTube/Instagram/TikTok/whatever is a monumental task but people are literally gambling with their livelihood on the hope that a corporate service will always work in their favour. You can follow the rules as conservatively as possible, YOLO and be ready to loose your account, or host your online business on your own platform. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 13 hours ago* (3 children) Impossible task really do you think a federated network is going to keep every video ever posted to it like Youtube does? I mean the storage that Youtube uses must be massive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 hour ago As a thought experiment, do you think that the ad revenue from watching ONLY videos on that guy's channel were enough to cover the operating costs and infrastructure required to store and host all of that channel's videos? If so then it should be possible, if extremely painful, to operate a vlogging business outside of YouTube. Getting users TO your personal vlog site is a whole other problem but through Patreon (as an example) it is possible to funnel users out of the Alphabet/Meta/ByteDance networks. If any of my favorite channels were to announce they were transitioning to a new video sharing network I would gladly follow them off of YouTube. permalink fedilink source parent [–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 hours ago Evidently they don't keep all of them. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 5 points 12 hours ago They simply have a massive monopoly, and it is impossible to replace them, no matter how good your platform. Because you depend in them and their buddies for advertisment. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zuckey78@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 hour ago (1 child) Hear me out…maybe these services have grown so much they should be regulated as a utility just like the airwaves used to be. Not saying that will fix the problem, but will at least make them accountable beyond their opaque corporate structures and whims. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 hour ago Maybe? The problem I have with that is they are not a radio station or TV station. or even an analog to one like a streaming service that provides access to local news/weather. They do not chose a bunch of programs to host and they generate a VERY small amount number of their own videos, they are a user generated content hosting site. A comprehensive regulation of the conduct of a user generated content hosting services would have to be written by competent, intelligent, and technologically knowledgeable lawmakers. Otherwise it is guaranteed to make things worse for the end user (see age verification laws). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 hour ago Maybe? The problem I have with that is they are not a radio station or TV station. or even an analog to one like a streaming service that provides access to local news/weather. They do not chose a bunch of programs to host and they generate a VERY small amount number of their own videos, they are a user generated content hosting site. A comprehensive regulation of the conduct of a user generated content hosting services would have to be written by competent, intelligent, and technologically knowledgeable lawmakers. Otherwise it is guaranteed to make things worse for the end user (see age verification laws). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] boonhet@lemmy.zip 7 points 10 hours ago You're only mentioning the hard bits like renting a VPS and installing software, but you shouldn't gloss over the easy bits like spending tens od billions on getting a user base big enough to make it worthwhile running a video hosting platform. YouTube's network effect is what makes being a career YouTuber possible and Google spent billions and the better part of two decades making sure no other platform can offer this. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] architect 14 points 23 hours ago (6 children) You own the platform, you own the rules, you die from no reach as every single platform silences you if you try to get users offsite! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Cherry@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago Yup you are only ever renting the space. This trajectory was obvious years ago but people still followed it rather than diversifying. It’s just another extension of you’ll own nothing and be happy. The quicker people move away from google/YT and all the tech bros media the better. permalink fedilink source parent [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 3 points 22 hours ago (4 children) I understand that dragging traffic away from YouTube/Instagram/TikTok/whatever is a monumental task but people are literally gambling with their livelihood on the hope that a corporate service will always work in their favour. You can follow the rules as conservatively as possible, YOLO and be ready to loose your account, or host your online business on your own platform. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 13 hours ago* (3 children) Impossible task really do you think a federated network is going to keep every video ever posted to it like Youtube does? I mean the storage that Youtube uses must be massive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 hour ago As a thought experiment, do you think that the ad revenue from watching ONLY videos on that guy's channel were enough to cover the operating costs and infrastructure required to store and host all of that channel's videos? If so then it should be possible, if extremely painful, to operate a vlogging business outside of YouTube. Getting users TO your personal vlog site is a whole other problem but through Patreon (as an example) it is possible to funnel users out of the Alphabet/Meta/ByteDance networks. If any of my favorite channels were to announce they were transitioning to a new video sharing network I would gladly follow them off of YouTube. permalink fedilink source parent [–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 hours ago Evidently they don't keep all of them. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 5 points 12 hours ago They simply have a massive monopoly, and it is impossible to replace them, no matter how good your platform. Because you depend in them and their buddies for advertisment. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cherry@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago Yup you are only ever renting the space. This trajectory was obvious years ago but people still followed it rather than diversifying. It’s just another extension of you’ll own nothing and be happy. The quicker people move away from google/YT and all the tech bros media the better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 3 points 22 hours ago (4 children) I understand that dragging traffic away from YouTube/Instagram/TikTok/whatever is a monumental task but people are literally gambling with their livelihood on the hope that a corporate service will always work in their favour. You can follow the rules as conservatively as possible, YOLO and be ready to loose your account, or host your online business on your own platform. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 13 hours ago* (3 children) Impossible task really do you think a federated network is going to keep every video ever posted to it like Youtube does? I mean the storage that Youtube uses must be massive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 hour ago As a thought experiment, do you think that the ad revenue from watching ONLY videos on that guy's channel were enough to cover the operating costs and infrastructure required to store and host all of that channel's videos? If so then it should be possible, if extremely painful, to operate a vlogging business outside of YouTube. Getting users TO your personal vlog site is a whole other problem but through Patreon (as an example) it is possible to funnel users out of the Alphabet/Meta/ByteDance networks. If any of my favorite channels were to announce they were transitioning to a new video sharing network I would gladly follow them off of YouTube. permalink fedilink source parent [–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 hours ago Evidently they don't keep all of them. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 5 points 12 hours ago They simply have a massive monopoly, and it is impossible to replace them, no matter how good your platform. Because you depend in them and their buddies for advertisment. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 13 hours ago* (3 children) Impossible task really do you think a federated network is going to keep every video ever posted to it like Youtube does? I mean the storage that Youtube uses must be massive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 hour ago As a thought experiment, do you think that the ad revenue from watching ONLY videos on that guy's channel were enough to cover the operating costs and infrastructure required to store and host all of that channel's videos? If so then it should be possible, if extremely painful, to operate a vlogging business outside of YouTube. Getting users TO your personal vlog site is a whole other problem but through Patreon (as an example) it is possible to funnel users out of the Alphabet/Meta/ByteDance networks. If any of my favorite channels were to announce they were transitioning to a new video sharing network I would gladly follow them off of YouTube. permalink fedilink source parent [–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 hours ago Evidently they don't keep all of them. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent [–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 5 points 12 hours ago They simply have a massive monopoly, and it is impossible to replace them, no matter how good your platform. Because you depend in them and their buddies for advertisment. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 hour ago As a thought experiment, do you think that the ad revenue from watching ONLY videos on that guy's channel were enough to cover the operating costs and infrastructure required to store and host all of that channel's videos? If so then it should be possible, if extremely painful, to operate a vlogging business outside of YouTube. Getting users TO your personal vlog site is a whole other problem but through Patreon (as an example) it is possible to funnel users out of the Alphabet/Meta/ByteDance networks. If any of my favorite channels were to announce they were transitioning to a new video sharing network I would gladly follow them off of YouTube. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 hours ago Evidently they don't keep all of them. 😉 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 5 points 12 hours ago They simply have a massive monopoly, and it is impossible to replace them, no matter how good your platform. Because you depend in them and their buddies for advertisment. permalink fedilink source parent