top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 176 points 2 years ago (14 children)

https://www.statista.com/statistics/513049/alphabet-annual-global-income/

Let's pause a moment and just appreciate how much money Alphabet actually make net (after expenses). $73,795,000,000 last year - higher than the GDP of entire nations, in profit.

The "bad" year, 2022 that drove all this change, they only made $59,972,000,000 net. Oh how terrible (!)

5 years ago, they made $34,343,000,000 net, so they've more than doubled profits.

Take a moment to appreciate that, and really consider if they "need" the money.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    That's the whole company. How much did YouTube lose for them?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 58 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    YouTube lost google -31.5 billion in 2023, approximately 10% of all of alphabet's revenue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • [+] 135 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)
  • [–] 46 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Some years ago ago, I was a happy subscriber to Google Music. But, they added it to the graveyard, and instead grafted on some music playing functionality to YouTube and called it YouTube Music. So, I went back to Spotify.

    Then I started paying for YouTube Premium Lite. It wasn't unreasonably expensive, although it was a bit annoying I couldn't just have "YouTube" in the household, like with Netflix. So if wife would cast a video to the TV, it would play with ads.

    It was about a year ago, when Google starting cracking down on adblockers, that they also removed an option to pay for the service. I think YouTube Premium Lite wasn't a thing in the US (correct me if I'm wrong), but they removed YT Premium Lite, and the only option left was a twice as expensive YouTube Premium bundle that included YouTube Music.

    Tldr: fucked up Google Music, then removed an option to pay for YouTube premium, leaving a fairly expensive alternative with the pile of shit they replaced Google music with. It'll be a rough time if they manage to force ads. I won't pay for it, out of principle.

    Edit: I looked at the numbers again. I'd have to pay more for YouTube than for the highest Netflix tier. It's more than Prime and HBO combined. They also don't have to front large sums to fund risky projects. If they didn't include YouTube Music, I might have considered it. But with it, it just pisses me off, they can go get f.ed

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 118 points 2 years ago (52 children)

    I'll give up on YouTube before I give up my ad blocks or 3rd party apps. Fuck off Google.

  • source
  • hideshow 52 child comments
  • load more comments (47 replies)
    [–] 99 points 2 years ago (35 children)

    It's funny how this comes after Chrome's switch to Manifest V3, which makes ad blocking not possible on Chrome and was purely for security reasons and not for disabling ad blockers. Now that Chrome users can't block ads on the first-party site, they're going after third-party clients. Such coincidental timing.

  • source
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • load more comments (34 replies)
    [–] 88 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Are they going to officially allow third party apps at all? The stock app is terrible, and not just because of excessive, unskippable advertising and bizarre restrictions around background play. When you search for anything, at least half of the results are completely unrelated to what you searched for in an attempt to increase user engagement metrics. It keeps trying to get you to watch shorts in its bad TikTok clone. Sometimes it recommends unrelated shorts with disturbing thumbnails in the middle of your search results. It keeps autodetecting that the video quality should be 360p on a connection easily capable of 4k, and resetting back to 360p at the start of every new video. The UI for live streams puts things on top of other things that are more important.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    And all of those come down to money

    Search shows you random videos because “the algorithm” is hoping to drive you through to videos that are the most monetized and the most likely to keep you on the platform based on their data

    The shorts thing is because they can pack more ads into 15 second bits of content while using less bandwidth and they’re hoping to hijack your attention with an “endless stream” of short clips a la TikTok or instagram reels

    The video bandwidth drops to low every time because they’re hoping people will still watch, see the ads, and not bump the quality up, saving Google on bandwidth costs

    The live streams thing is just more advertising revenue again

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 82 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Please download and archive your favorite channels and videos!

    Host them yourself to watch them locally.

    Especially do this for educational material, share it wide and far!

    We are entering a very dark age of techno-dystopia, we need to fight it with everything we have. Pirate, seed, screen-record, download, archive, share, never give up.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 71 points 2 years ago

    Not again ... Well, let's wait a week or so for the clients to fix that.

  • source
  • [–] 56 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    Third party apps: "OK. We'll show ads. Muted. Behind a black overlay. If we really can't find a workaround."

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 43 points 2 years ago (16 children)

    They've been trying for a minute. Must be different now that they're saying it!

    Checks notes

    Nope, revanced still works.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • load more comments (13 replies)
    [–] 38 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    As soon as 3rd party clients don't work as they do anymore, I am stopping going to YouTube. Simple as, I know it doesn't matter as a singular thing, I am just one user. Was the same with reddit, now I am here but reddit is still going (how well we don't need to debate now).

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 38 points 2 years ago (5 children)
  • [–] 37 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Gotta love this shit. Conservatives/companies: "Let the market decide!" The market: "We are tired of you cramming ads down our throats and fundamentally do not want it and will actively fight you on it." Companies: "Waaaaaa, they are fighting us."

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    The problem with YouTube Premium is the pricing tiers are completely out of touch with what people are willing to pay and what services they're willing to pay for.

    Let me compare to Discovery+. For $9 a month, loads of shows that ran on TV for decades can be streamed at 1080p (or whatever resolution they were available in), on up to four devices at the same time. They still have some original shows that they spend money to make. This service does not have ads.

    Let's also compare to Nebula, which like Discovery+ also has original content funded by the platform. Every content creator there is also an invited owner of the platform, so their cost structure is a bit different, but they still have to sustain the costs of running a streaming platform while compensating the creators of said content for views. Nebula is a microscopic $5 a month per user with no ads.

    YouTube is a platform with entirely user-generated content (costs YT nothing except bandwidth) that is already supported at the free tier with a gratuitous amount of ads. This service has been available completely free with ad support for nearly two decades. The lowest "premium" tier they offer is $14 a month for one person to stream ad-free, at a better 1080p bitrate, be able to download videos or watch them in the background in the official app, pay creators for every view, and have a music streaming app thrown in for good measure. The only other tier is all the same stuff in a $22 monthly family plan for six users, but they all have to be in the same "household" or you're technically breaking TOS, so in practice it's often more like $22 for three people, and heaven forbid any of you travel for work.

    Two of the "premium" features should be free anyway. You can't watch a video without downloading it at least once, so the bandwidth cost is the same. If you download it and play it more than once, that actually saves YouTube bandwidth, and therefore cost. Any video that's played more than once is probably going to be played a lot more than once, so this would add up, especially if the app downloads the ad spots ahead of time. Background play doesn't cost them any bandwidth at all and is a trivial feature to implement, so it's put behind a paywall as an artificial restriction for no other reason than to annoy users for not paying. Both of these are anti-features; to charge for them is anti-consumer. They engender spite in users, making them less willing to pay for Premium and more determined to find alternatives.

    Instead of trying to figure out what people are actually willing to pay for, which is the expected behavior of a market actor, Google continues to behave like a monopoly that can dictate terms to its users. This is why people refuse to pay for Premium. If they made the anti-features free, and introduced a Premium tier that is $7 a month to one user for nothing more than better bitrate streaming with no ads, people would sign up in droves. There could be a $9 tier for streaming boxes like Roku or Chromecast that offers Premium service for any account viewed from that one specific device, without having to sign up each individual account for premium, which satisfies another niche. The $14 tier could remain for those who also want music streaming (an extra $7 is still much cheaper than Spotify premium), and the $22 tier could still be a significant value proposition for actual families.

    It's not that the price offered for the $14 premium plan isn't reasonable for what it offers - the issue is that what it offers doesn't match the actual needs of many people who use adblockers or third-party clients, on top of insulting users with anti-features. Until YouTube management can be made to understand this, they will continue to screech impotently about ad-blockers while driving users away and leaving potential revenue on the table.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 33 points 2 years ago*

    Fuck them. I'd rather donate quadruple the money for premium to my favourite creators directly than give a single penny to this parasitic mega corporation.

    The issue is not only the ads, it's the stupid shit it throws you to keep you hooked, it's the stupid shorts that literally no one asked for, it's every stupid little thing that fights for your attention. Basically the app doesn't work for you, it works against you. That's not the case with third party apps, they have you, the user, in mind, not their profits.

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 2 years ago (13 children)

    I've been using youtube on Firefox with ublock since the premium price raise. Even on android. The experience is not great, but that makes sure I don't have ads at all.

    Also discovered unhooked addon yesterday. Is desktop only, but great for going into less youtube rabbit holes that waste my time.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • load more comments (13 replies)
    [–] 32 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    Youtube isn't some one of a kind miracle. There's at least a dozen already-established streaming platforms that would take its place. There are thousands of websites that have no problems hosting gigs and gigs of porn, so it's not as difficult as people think.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • load more comments (11 replies)
    [–] 32 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Honestly, huge shout out to the wave of enshittification crashing through Google and reddit and forcing me off their platforms. Decade-long debilitating addiction solved.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [+] 27 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)
    [removed by mod]
  • source
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    Damn, I got my setup so perfect on the TV with SmartTube. But I will not be able to tolerate ads. Then I'd rather only watch on Firefox with uBlock on my laptop.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 26 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I'll just use Firefox mobile with uBlock Origin then, literally anything is better than ads

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 24 points 2 years ago
    [–] 21 points 2 years ago

    Hey Google, FUCK YOU.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago

    Don't worry, third party clients will rectify the issue.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago

    I personally have no problem with paying for a service. However, if I buy premium to remove the ads, YT has no longer the need to collect my data. But it is Google and they won't stop collecting. That, plus the fact that Google basically has a monopoly with youtube are the reasons I don't buy premium.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Peertube is planning on releasing an official app this year. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›