this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
710 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59495 readers
3050 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
 

cross-posted from: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/22423685

EDIT: For those who are too lazy to click the link, this is what it says

Hello,

Sad news for everyone. YouTube/Google has patched the latest workaround that we had in order to restore the video playback functionality.

Right now we have no other solutions/fixes. You may be able to get Invidious working on residential IP addresses (like at home) but on datacenter IP addresses Invidious won't work anymore.

If you are interested to install Invidious at home, we remind you that we have a guide for that here: https://docs.invidious.io/installation/..

This is not the death of this project. We will still try to find new solutions, but this might take time, months probably.

I have updated the public instance list in order to reflect on the working public instances: https://instances.invidious.io. Please don't abuse them since the number is really low.

Feel free to discuss this politely on Matrix or IRC.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] meldrik@lemmy.wtf 30 points 2 months ago (2 children)

That depends. If they only make a living with YT ads, then it’s going to be hard.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 29 points 2 months ago (1 children)

About half the ads I see on YouTube are already within the videos they post. I wonder what the overall ratio is of YouTube ad revenue versus in-video ad revenue.

[–] meldrik@lemmy.wtf 15 points 2 months ago

Are you talking about sponsors? Because yes, that has nothing to do with YT ads.

[–] brrt@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I guess I forgot things like Patreon which could be a valid option. Although I’m neither a fan of subscribing to specific creators nor am I particularly fond of Patreon.

With Nebula my perception is that I pay a monthly fee and they can figure out who gets what depending on whose videos I watched. I don’t need to be particular in my action on who to support.

[–] meldrik@lemmy.wtf 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Nebula is a good option, but now you've created a paywall. Now only people who can afford it, can watch the content and what is to keep Nebula from upping the price of the subscription?

If ads is out of the question, then content creators need to use sponsors and patrons, if they want to make a living.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

People want a fantasy world where all the main content is free and two or three rich sponsors support the creator by sponsoring little extras only available to Patreon supporters. The ends will never meet in the middle on that. It’s a fantasy where people get what they want for free because someone else pays for it. Won’t work. Get out your cash, kids. Cancel your Netflix and put the money into Nebula.

[–] borgertwo@ani.social -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Don't shift the blame on "people wants" as if they're owed by the people. Most people dont even ask for whatever content that is pushed out. And what's more content creator is just a glorified term for online digital panhandlers. And they frame it as if viewers are meant to owe them something all while contributing as little to their efforts that amounts to no significance as possible. Imagine paying someone to make a facial reaction and talking for a bit everytime you passed a panhandler and they call themselves a content creator. It's bogus way to frame or even justify that especially considering they get payed far larger sums comparison to people who actully work for a living while dodging the taxes. And is unlikely any such platform as youtube as well as its big panhandlers are struggling with finances. Youtube gets $15 billion dollars a year in ad revenue and hey greedily continue the push for more ads. And the digital panhandlers calling themselves content creators can make more money in a week than the typical wage slave can in a year.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Interesting thing here:

YouTube's top 3% of channels now attract 90% of total views, up from 67% in 2006. Even among those elite channels, average annual ad revenue is only $16,800 - less than a third of U.S. median household income. For the remaining 97% of YouTubers, reaching even that modest income level is nearly impossible given the platform's increasingly skewed viewership distribution.

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

An advantage of funding things via a collective like Nebula as opposed to each individual creator managing their own patrons is that new creators can start making bigger, more expensive projects quicker. Even established creators have this advantage, they can take bigger risks on bigger projects with the safety net of a share of the nebula pie.

I don't think a project like The Prince would exist without Nebula, for example.

[–] noodlejetski@lemm.ee 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Thanks for the link, it was a very interesting read. While it is disappointing that it's not actually a collective (assuming this blog post is accurate), having a platform run and owned by 6 creators is still better than YouTube's governance structure, and still has the advantage in having both the capacity and desire to invest in creators.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Nebula is also priced for the masses. You get an entire video service for one reasonable price. Patreon finally has really low priced options like $1 a month but for the longest time it was like $25/month just for the entry level supporter package and I could never justify blowing all that on one creator. I also hated digging around the Patreon app for the sponsor content and dealing with its stupid push notifications.

I find Nebula is a much more sustainable thing. And I still discover new creators there. Because after all I’m not going to be set for life with one or two YT creators. I want to find new things too. Nebula gives you that.

[–] LordWiggle@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

They also can use sponsors in the video, but that only works when you have enough views.

[–] darvit@lemmy.darvit.nl 1 points 2 months ago

You could also send money via paypal or kofi if you don't like subscriptions, if the creator has it set up.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yes if a creator’s main living can be shifted into Patreon or their own independent subscription service, THEN you will see them move off of YT because it actually works against them at that point. Mark Spagnuolo aka The Wood Whisperer has made this transition. He’s been around years (decades?) with awesome quality woodworking content. He’s found independent sponsorships. He’s created his own subscription service and takes direct payments but also uses platforms like Patreon. He plays the social media game very well. He travels to trade shows and keeps up with a podcast. He is the gold standard for what it takes a creator to move off of YT and still make a living IMO. His wife is a driving force behind making the business work and I think it’s a full time job for her too and probably a staff of employees. Mark used YT in the early years to build an audience but he does very little at all on YT nowadays.

He also has very little out there now that is free 🤷‍♂️

You can’t have it both ways