Haha yea, shame on them for trying to transition to a business model that's actually a great value for the customer compared to other music and video playforms, no longer relies on datamining customers to maximize ad-effectiveness, and brings in more income for creators than ads ever did...

It's a totally stupid idea, YT should just eat the costs and be subsidized by Google search revenue forever.

Why can't we just keep taking from the platform while its expenses are covered by some shrinking group of shmucks who don't know about ad-blockers yet, drowning in commercials?

I don't understand this outlook. Like, sure, you can use adblock. One person stealing a mars bar isn't gonna hurt Walmart... But if literally everyone just took their shopping cart home, never once paying, Walmart would just... Cease to exist.

What makes people think that math is any different for online services?

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Google doesn't deserve your money.
You don't pay a bully so that they bully you a little bit less

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's a very bad analogy.

That logic would lead to defect-defect scenarios in all but the rarest of cases.

By all means, defect when warranted, but if a bad company changing course doesn't net rewards, why would corps ever do anything other than the worst possible, taking as many users down with them as they can snare?

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 10 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

That logic would lead to defect-defect scenarios in all but the rarest of cases.

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

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

load more comments (7 replies)