1315
submitted 11 months ago by fne8w2ah@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] USSEthernet@startrek.website 142 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The amount of downvotes on comments trying to help people not get price gouged and comments supporting these subscription price increases shows me just how many corporate shills are actually out there. No wonder these corps keep getting away with this bullshit.

Edit: Wow so many people took personal offense to this...almost like it they know it's true but are afraid to admit it. Everyone is hurting financially right now, some more than others. Yet year over year, the prices keep going up even with record inflation and record profits. Keep shilling folks, enjoy emptying your wallets for the millionaires while you struggle.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago

Ya how dare people actually pay for a platform that hosts billions of videos and streams to billions of users essentially lag free and is actually decent and shares revenue with it's content creators. /s

Things cost money. You don't have to be a corporate shill to not expect everything to be free, you just have to be an adult.

[-] mrmanager 38 points 11 months ago

Google is one of the richest companies in the world.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Ok? And? They aren't a charity and don't owe you free video hosting services.

EDIT: I find it hilarious that point out the fact that you aren't entitled to free hosting services is getting down voted. Lmao how old are the people here?

[-] Gork@lemmy.ml 34 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Dude they sell our data to advertisers and big data for profit. The least they can do is provide some services for us for the amount of analytics they collect from us on a daily basis.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

As someone who's actually worked in this industry, your data isn't enough to pay for video hosting services to the scale youtube provides. Youtube makes up a significant chunk of all network traffic in the world. It costs money.

[-] ttr@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

You're a content creator, aren't you? 🤣

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

No i am not. But I am happy to support actual content creators and the platform that they host on and gets them the most views because I spend more time on YT than I do on any other streaming platform.

[-] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

But I am happy to support actual content creators and the platform that they host on and gets them the most views

It's too bad youtube doesn't do that, lol.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

I mean that is objectively not true.

[-] Shrek@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

They pay content creators more than any other platform to my understanding. I think the exception is kik (kick?) The streaming platform.

[-] xts@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Too bad you constantly have to be worried about dumb policy changes that can affect your older videos which can mean cutting off those revenue sources

Also I’ve never seen another platform that demonetizes content as much as YouTube does.

[-] Shrek@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Both very fair points. But, there is no other platform that even compares for real.

[-] ComplacentGoat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

Dude, they ARE the advertiser. That's Google's main business. They have no incentive to export ANY of your account data to 3rd parties. Business tell them what groups of people to advertise to, and their systems handle the rest. They're open about how it all works.

[-] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

They were already being paid and profitable, both from direct cash and ad revenue, but that doesn't ever seem to be enough.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

You are free to disagree with their pricing and cancel a subscription if you have one. That's how the free market works.

[-] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

"Free market works" is by itself a very questionable statement.

But there sure are some more options beyond that. Although some people think we shouldn't be free to pick them.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

You are free to pick w.e you want. That doesn't make someone actually paying for a decent platform a corporate shill.

[-] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Our definitions of "decent" are definitely different. But this is not just about what you choose to do, it's about all the fingerwagging people do at people who don't believe this is worth paying (even more) for.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

The only finger wagging going on is people calling people corporate shills for actually paying for a service.

[-] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Then you need to look better because you are down a thread pointing out how people are getting downvoted and ragged on for suggesting ad blocking options.

I find it hilarious that point out the fact that you aren’t entitled to free hosting services is getting down voted.

Actually nevermind. Just look at the mirror. You really are talking of Google like it's a struggling charity.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Then you need to look better because you are down a thread pointing out how people are getting downvoted and ragged on for suggesting ad blocking options.

No I am a thread calling people corporate shills for disagreeing with people saying we should all be pirating.

Actually nevermind. Just look at the mirror. You really are talking of Google like it’s a struggling charity.

It doesn't matter how rich google is, it doesn't owe you video hosting services. It's not a charity. You can disagree with their pricing and you can find another platform if you like. But services cost money and just because a company has money through other sources doesn't mean they need to subsidize all their products.

[-] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

It doesn’t matter how rich google is

Of course it does. Not only Google has plenty of money to keep it running, don't even try to make a moral argument out of one of these companies stripmining everyone's data

If you care so much about the costs of hosting, I hope you donate to the Lemmy.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Of course it does. Not only Google has plenty of money to keep it running, don’t even try to make a moral argument out of one of these companies stripmining everyone’s data

No it absolutely does not. It is a business, not a charity. They don't owe anyone anything for free. That's how the world works. Your personal data is a part of the fee you pay for the service. And again no one is forcing anyone to use that service. There are plenty of alternatives like Nebula that the content creators themselves have set up. You are free to just not use it if you don't like it.

If you care so much about the costs of hosting, I hope you donate to the Lemmy.

I am new to Lemmy but I absolutely will just as I donate to wikipedia. If it is giving me value, then I am happy to support it financially up to the point where I think the finances are equal to the value I am receiving in return.

[-] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

How the world works is that people get what they can get away with, and we who are on the bottom ought to keep that in mind instead of idealizing a model of fairness that only helps those who are already powerful get away with more.

Instead, if you do care about fairness, think more about those who need it.

Nebula is a fair suggestion though, because at least that directly helps the creators without constraining them to whatever advertisers want.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

How the world works is that people get what they can get away with, and we who are on the bottom ought to keep that in mind instead of idealizing a model of fairness that only helps those who are already powerful get away with more.

It works that way because ultimately that's what drives competition and innovation. I am open to a more fair alternative however I am aware of none that has actually been successful.

Instead, if you do care about fairness, think more about those who need it.

I said things have a cost and I think based on the market alternatives, what YT is charging is still fair. You may disagree and that is your right to. I did not imply however that the world itself is fair or even needs to be fair. It's not and never has been and whether is should be is a much bigger philosophical debate outside of just YT pricing.

[-] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

We are in Lemmy through rising enshittification of the internet and you still believe that Big Tech sucking up all data and charging more for worse services everyday is what drives innovation? That everyone gotta bend over and give up what they say they are owed? C'mon...

Do you even use the internet without ad blockers?

If you think that's the right and proper way to go about it, feel free. I'll still handle things my way.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Mr_Blott@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Would just like to interject; while I agree with what you're saying, and yes, lots of people think an amazing service should be free, which is wrong.... But YouTube/Google is now 100% beholden to their shareholders, and this, plus the last couple of price rises, is gouging to make some millionaires richer and is fucking despicable

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

That's for consumers to decide. If people still pay for it and think it's worth their money, then they aren't really gouging, they were just under priced. If people don't and start cancelling their subscriptions, they have over priced it and now need to bring the price back down. For me personally, Netflix is the one teetering on that point, YT isn't there yet.

[-] Sharkwellington@lemmy.one 14 points 11 months ago

And I don't owe them a subscription if I don't agree with the value they've placed on it. Free market, baby. 👍

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Sure, absolutely, you don't. No one is claiming otherwise.

[-] Sharkwellington@lemmy.one 11 points 11 months ago

You seem oddly offended at the idea people wouldn't lol. I don't know why you're taking this so personally.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

No I just think it's stupid to call people who would pay for a service a corporate shill. I have no issue with someone who doesn't think a subscription is worth it. Maybe read the whole thread first next time.

[-] mrmanager 11 points 11 months ago

No but I'm not going to pay Google for anything. It's obscene to give them even more money.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

Whether you think that service is worth it or not is up to you.

But don't act like you have some moral high ground here and that people who are actually paying for a service that you are stealing from and a service that actually shares revenue with it's content creators and encourages independent creators are just corporate shills.

Some of us are adults and realize things cost money and not entitled children that expect everything for free.

[-] dezmd@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

And some of us are adults that don't have your innate need to wield your moral high ground like a smug pedantic asshole.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I am not the one calling anyone who isn't pirating a corporate shill.

[-] dezmd@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

And yet that's obivously not what this thread's context was before you started self-jerking to moral superiority.

Have some self awareness.

This isn't a Wendys Drive Thru.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Here, since you have difficulty following, let me copy where the original thread started.

The amount of downvotes on comments trying to help people not get price gouged and comments supporting these subscription price increases shows me just how many corporate shills are actually out there. No wonder these corps keep getting away with this bullshit.

I am not the one who started the moral superiority, I just disagreed at being called a "corporate shill" before a bunch of insecure assholes started losing their shit.

Maybe try having self awareness yourself before suggesting it to someone else.

[-] dezmd@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Self inserting as a main character to claim you've been attacked so you can shill your moral superiority is the cherry on top of your bullshit sundae.

[-] ConfirmingMoose@reddthat.com 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I see.

We are at fault for youtube giving shit away for free. We are responsible for youtube's profits.

We not only need to offer content FOR FREE to youtube ... but then accept that we must pay youtube for our content.

Get fucked.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Before telling others to get fucked, maybe learn to read and grow the fuck up.

YT shares revenue with content creators. No one is offering shit for free.

Things cost money, wether you think the service is worth it or not is up to you, but no one owes you shit just because you are an entitled prick.

[-] ConfirmingMoose@reddthat.com 2 points 11 months ago

I am a grown up. But I have little tolerance for corporate cheerleaders of any shape or sound.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Ok feel free to build your own alternative.

[-] ConfirmingMoose@reddthat.com 1 points 11 months ago

Oh take your ball and go home already.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

You should take your own advice. Your bs hasn't worked.

[-] Thadrax@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

I get that, but the vast majority of content creators seem to make their money with sponsorships or their own ads, so most of what google is doing is content distribution, not creation. Which makes the amount of money they want for that seem ridiculous when pretty much every other streaming service that produces high profile and expensive shows themselves is way cheaper.

This feels like your supermarket requiring entrance fees in addition to you having to pay for stuff you actually buy.

[-] zefiax@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Youtube spends more on revenue sharing than some big streaming services do on content creation. Content creators who also have sponsored segments are essentially double dipping but that's on the content creator.

Also I don't know how much it is in the US, but in Canada, YT is one of the cheapest streaming services if not the cheapest, and I get way more value out of youtube than I do from Netflix, Crave, Prime, or Disney+.

[-] Thadrax@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I don't know about the revenue sharing. But in Germany, youtube premium is 12€, Amazon prime and Disney is 9€, Paramount is 8€ and Apple tv is 7€. Only Netflix is the same price for hd or more expensive with 18€ for 4k.

load more comments (67 replies)
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
1315 points (99.8% liked)

Technology

55647 readers
2569 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