• LouNeko@lemmy.world
    2·
    6 小时前

    Back in the day most media was designed around commercial interruptions. Watch some old cartoons on Netflix, they often have “fade to black” moments after which the last 10 seconds are repeated. Nowadays commercials are algorithmically inserted into content to maximize viewership, meaning that more often then not a YouTube commercial will play right before the most important bit of the video.

  • RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
    4·
    8 小时前

    Still better than old school linear tv, where you paid to watch things being constantly interrupted by paid commercials.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.worldEnglish
    16·
    21 小时前

    As a highly experienced software developer, I’m available for not writing software at a reduced rate of $45/hr, and I can handle unlimited overtime.

    • underwire212@lemm.ee
      11·
      8 小时前

      As a highly experienced murderer, I’m available for not murdering you and skinning your family alive in front of you for a low cost of just $40/hr.

  • nialv7@lemmy.world
    231·
    1 天前

    not the first time capitalism asks you for money to solve problems capitalism created…

  • Eiri@lemmy.ca
    652·
    2 天前

    It’s one or the other. If you pay YouTube for Premium and don’t get any ads, advertisers don’t pay for your ad impression.

    • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      332·
      2 天前

      wish there was an option for “pay the platform the few cents the ads make” instead of me paying the platform a wild and ever increasing amount of money

      Tbh I feel like they should take a ~30% cut from the creator tips feature and add that to a “ad balance” which would remove ads and subtract the few cents they would’ve got from the ad. That way YouTube gets paid, the consumer doesn’t get ads, and the creator gets encouraged to make good content.

      • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
        157·
        1 天前

        You keep imagining some way how YT could get cheaper for you.

        But in fact, ads are highly profitable, and if you buy a premium there’s a very transparent revenue share model. 70% of your money goes directly to the creators.

        All your wishes are already fulfilled, you’re just poor and are trying to justify not paying with imagined arguments.

        • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
          52·
          22 小时前

          The thing that bothers me is the revenue doesnt go to creators that I watch. Its all pooled and divided out by view count across the entire platform. Which is bs. I dont want my money going to the top channels that i have zero interest in. A better system is dividing it out to the channels I view.

          Thus why adblocking and patreon is highly popular…

          • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
            42·
            17 小时前

            Again you’re wrong. It’s counted directly by the amount you watch and goes to the creators you watch.

            Or, equivalently, pool all revenue, divide by watch time, get the same result.

            You can verify this by constructing an excel table of 10 users (rows) and 3 channels (columns). Assign random % weights of “watch time” per user per channel. Assume a constant subscription fee of 1. Verify that a column_sum is the same as column_average*10, where 10 is the total platform revenue, as there are 10 users each paying 1.

            • mitrosus@discuss.tchncs.de
              1·
              5 小时前

              You are assuming a fair distribution of watch time over channels and/or over the viewers. In reality, some channels are highly popular and some are not. A few proportion of people pay for yt premium. Assuming the payer’s money get distributed equally to creators, the less popular channels get less amount from those payers. The question is, does google distribute the paid money according to each user’s view?

        • ComicalMayhem@lemmy.world
          9·
          2 天前

          My biggest gripe about Patreon is that I can’t just do a one time donation, it’s a subscription to donate money to people. Cool and all, but I’m not rich enough to just give some of my income to people, I’d rather do small donations whenever I can.

        • cheers_queers@lemm.eeEnglish
          7·
          2 天前

          most patreons are at least $5 so if you sub to more than 2, you might as well be paying for YouTube premium

  • Blue@lemmy.world
    652·
    2 天前

    This can’t seriously be surprising for anybody, youtube with its on-demand unlimited video storage and streaming has to be one of the biggest money sinks on the internet.

    • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
      1·
      1 分钟前

      And this is why peertube will never actually take off outside of a Utopian future of unlimited energy and a future where everything is perfectly distributed

      Who is going to pay the hosting costs? Who is going to pay the bandwidth costs? Let’s say magic happens and the users donate enough for that. Who is going to pay the creators who that is their main source of income?

      Now what will happen when people demand 4k content everywhere, and then 8k after that? That quadruples the cost of the bandwidth and hosting costs.

      I absolutely hate hate hate subscription models and hate ads. There has to be a subscription model for any video hosting platform, and YouTube doesn’t split up into exclusivity deals like shitty steaming services to screw over the consumer for profit. So at least there is that.

      Decentralized systems work extremely well for text and even audio-based services. Video is a whole other beast, especially long form video at high resolutions.

    • pufferfisherpowder@lemmy.world
      3·
      8 小时前

      This kind of pisses me off whenever people complain about YouTube pushing ads or charging money. It’s absolutely insane how much storage and bandwidth the amount of video hosted and uploaded every second requires. How could it possibly free?!

      Bundled with YouTube Music it’s even extremely good value.
      Spotify premium costs USD15.36 in my country.
      YouTube premium, including YouTube music USD19.58.
      That’s USD4.23 for no ads where I watch the most videos. Absolute no brainer in my opinion.

    • JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.worldEnglish
      64·
      2 天前

      We all bought a free subscription to it for life with our data that they stole before we even had a sense of it being a problem.

  • Serinus@lemmy.world
    804·
    2 天前

    I’d pay YouTube if it were $5/month instead of $15.

    In fact, a couple of my favorite YouTube creators are on nebula.tv and I pay them $30/year.

      • Obi@sopuli.xyz
        3·
        1 天前

        Is a treadmill show just something you watch while you’re on the treadmill?

        • GingaNinga@lemmy.world
          2·
          1 天前

          honestly i’m not sure lol. I prefer shows I don’t have to pay too much attention to but i always end up watching real life lore/geopolitic/news videos and get really wrapped up in them. I’ll probably classify them as shows that i watch in my own and not with my fiance.

          • Obi@sopuli.xyz
            2·
            1 天前

            Right I meant more the expression itself, first time I see it I think.

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      165·
      2 天前

      I’d pay YouTube if it were $5/month instead of $15.

      It’s less than 5/month on the family plan IF you have 4 other people you’d like to share with

      The family plan is the only reason I pay for premium lol.

    • Soup@lemmy.world
      81·
      2 天前

      I pay $14CAD for Crunchyroll and I don’t even use it that much. I use hours and hours of Youtube content pretty much every day. I also had Nebula but need to get that sorted again now that they aren’t with Curiosity Stream.

      People will pay for a lot of stuff but ask them to pay for Youtube and they will lose their damn minds.

      • Serinus@lemmy.world
        7·
        2 天前

        YouTube doesn’t even produce their own content. I’d rather get it somewhere else, if creators offer that option.

        • Soup@lemmy.world
          3·
          2 天前

          Sure, but considering just how much they need to store and serve to viewers at the highest speed I kinda get it. Look if it was $20CAD a month I’d definitely reconsider, and if they start putting ads in anyway I’ll cancel because I’m not paying to still see that shit, but for now it’s fine.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipEnglish
      81·
      2 天前

      I wish Nebula had official support for third party clients.

      What I really want is a more decentralized approach. Hosting video is expensive so it would be idea if it could be offloaded to smaller community devices instead of huge server farms.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zipEnglish
      51·
      2 天前

      I’d gladly pay €15 a month if they guaranteed not to track me on the internet.

    • morrowind@lemmy.ml
      11·
      2 天前

      They would lose money with every user if this was the case, UNLESS they stopped paying creators entirely

  • GHiLA@sh.itjust.works
    321·
    2 天前

    I scrape videos off of YouTube using Pinchflat which dumps them into a folder, predownloaded for me, which I then have connected to a Jellyfin server that splits each channel up as an individual series, ads and bumpers stripped entirely, and it automatically downloads videos as they release.

    Paying sounded too involved. Make a google account, etc…

    Who has the time?

  • Gutek8134@lemmy.world
    33·
    2 天前

    Ever heard of Elsevier? You pay them for the privilege of posting your article, and then they charge other people for the privilege of accessing it.