this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
36 points (64.3% liked)

Technology

59429 readers
2568 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

it is about usd $4 per month here to subscribes youtube premium, the same cost for a day of food + coffee + snack. what do you think?

all 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 110 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think YouTube is forcing content creators to be pawns in its war against its users and we should not fall for its tricks.

Note that YouTube is still being paid for these views in spite of this “invalid traffic”. So they can easily solve this problem by altering their payment model. I don’t personally feel the need to take responsibility for their decision of how much to pay their employees.

If I wanted to support a content creator that badly I would just donate to them directly. Ads are the real mind virus.

[–] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 25 points 1 year ago

Exactly, most creators have patreon, as a secondary option (not that it's a full solution)

[–] PlantJam@lemmy.world 70 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would sooner support content creators directly via patreon than sign up for YouTube premium or disable my ad blocker.

[–] db2@sopuli.xyz 50 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I think if you can live off 4 dollars a day you're living in 1983.

[–] muddybulldog@mylemmy.win 11 points 1 year ago

$4 would get you an egg sandwich, a coffee and a pack a smokes in ‘83.

[–] ripcord@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In the US, yes.

I'm guessing they're from somewhere else where cost of living may be different.

[–] YMS@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

And the prices of YouTube premium, too. It's not "about $4 per month" in the US.

[–] ramblinguy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

If it's only food, it's definitely possible. Rice and beans is probably less than 50 cents a day. Then you can get some cheap chicken thighs for like 1.50 a pound. Then get some carrots, broccoli, and onions. It should cover the majority of your nutrient needs for $4 dollars a day.

[–] Goodie@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

CPM/RPM isn't per day, it's pay per 1,000 views.

[–] ahah@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

it is possible here, but it kind like kills the future, loosing friends. very slow pace of living, like in 10 years if something improves, it is wise if the body still healthy haha..

[–] magnetosphere@kbin.social 48 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Content creators have my respect and sympathy, but it’s not my fault that they use a platform owned by a terrible company. I’m not going to charge my behavior to make YouTube/Google happy.

[–] ripcord@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It still baffles me that more services don't exist/be used for automatic cross posting to different video services. Even if YouTube is the only feasible option for viewers right now, that's not going to change unless people put in some minimal effort.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 year ago

It was tried multiple times.
So far every company went out of business because the amount of content uploaded and the cost to store and distribute is not matched by the amount ofdollars from users, premium users and ads.

Google operated Youtube as a loss project but kept it going for the data and market grip.

[–] smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm fine with ads (if they are bearable) or paying for a service. As long I can use the service without running propietary programs.

I don't want to give money for monopolistic video platform, requiring propietary program, runed by unfriendly tech giant that can turn knobs as they like on what big chunk of the world sees.

[–] rammjet@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 year ago

$13.99 per month US

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/watch?v=okfSCAJqX6E

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] auf@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago
[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I understand Youtube needs to make money, it's expensive to manage the infrastructure they provide. That being said, faulting content creators for the type of viewers they attract will just drive away content creators with a technical audience who use ad blockers. This will just incentivise creators to make generic content for the masses or leave the platform all together.

The only alternative would be for creators to make their own sponsorship deals, and insert ads in the video, which diminishes the value of Youtube Premium for those who pay. If creators start put messaging in front of all their youtube videos about disabling ad blockers, it could backfire, and be an advertisement that ad blockers work on youtube, and lead to people seeking them out.

Hopefully this is all a temporary measure by Youtube until they can block the use of ad blockers, but the damage might already be done if creators stop making videos or seeking out their own sponsorships because they clearly can't rely on Youtube.

[–] ahah@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

i feel like ads just not influencing my purchase decision, because i selectively choose a product/service based on the quality and testimonies. maybe exception for inexpensive things, big brand maybe works as a proof of quality