I like algorithms giving me suggestions in all sorts of ways, but not shady ones. None of the people around me seem to mind, but I worry about a company like Google strongly influencing what information we consume. Even if they didn't use this influence, it's dangerous to have them in the position where they could.
You have the correct idea, but it's way too late for most people. This "pre-selection" made by most services have been in place for a long while, and these days people even complains when they are not fed with it.
It is a sad state of affair; thankfully at some point enough people might move away from these automated suggestions, but I'm not holding my breath.
"Dissenting" here meaning using a swear word within 1 minute of an ad break, videos under a set length, and new content not dropping every week, in addition to what you normally think the word dissenting means
A lot of the most popular YouTube creators only post every few months and their content always gets plenty of impressions
They have a rule about not swearing at the start of a video because of the auto play feature and various accessibility tools, having it is probably better than the result of not having it.
I regularly get offered videos of all lengths including variations of mr skellybones that are between 8 and 15 seconds, though since shorts were added those are normally uploaded there now. Yes shorter videos earn less money and yes of course they do, why wouldn't they? If lord of the rings was two minutes long then I
I imagine the box set would be cheaper.
Creators have repeatedly spoken about how their videos and channels get suppressed priority if their videos arent released on a regular rapid timeline. Massive creators with huge followings can push through that by way of having insanely large fanbases who have notifications turned on. That does not change the facts of youtubes prioritization system.
Thats a nonsense excuse, because the autoplay doesnt pause at 2 minutes, and swearing within the time limit doesnt take you out of potential autoplay queue. Its because advertisers dont want swears in proximity to their ads, which is why the video gets demonetized. Youtube themselves said this when they established the policy.
Ok. And? That means literally nothing, youtube pays creators signifigantly less for not meeting the 10 min mark even when the number of ads run is not different. No one gives a shit what you were reccomended. Youtube still runs the same number of ads on 4-9 minute videos while paying the channel less for not crossing the threshold.
Yeah that too. But I mostly meant a mostly opaque list of keywords that get you demonetized, and it's possible that there is an AI that assesses how likely a video is to put a viewer in a "click ad mood" or how likely it is to keep viewers watching. Unfortunately I don't know exactly how it works, but if they do this, I assume they also do a whole lot more subtle things.
Controversial videos might actually do fine if they keep viewer watching and clicking on ads. But many things critical of the current consumerist and propaganda model at least gets a chilling effect. Creators know this is more work so many would avoid it. And some might not be able to make a living even though their content would be valuable for society and drop out.
So alphabet (massively) shapes the content our society sees the tube.
Honestly, the only social media i clearly see this is instagram and their comments. They sort by controversial to get engagement and an emotional response and affects my mood negatively tremendously (can't find a single clip with a woman that doesn't have a misogynistic comment in top10). TikTok is heaven for me in comparison, it's my happy place.
I already suspected they did this considering how every single element of videos suggested to me based on what I regularly watch covers the same content, is in the same format, has people on camera that look and sound exactly the same, the sets are similar, the intros and outros are similar, even down to what's on someone's shelf in the background is sometimes identical. The overall color tone is just another thing the AI can reference with other videos.
Why not? Not you, I mean but why not have it as an option?
Frankly I wouldn't use it either, but I can absolutely see the appeal. Sometimes you want some warm tones, sometimes you want cool tones. Maybe you're having a Green party for 4/20 and you're playing Green Day and watching green videos idk.
Lol dumbness aside, my immediate thought was "this seems like it could be nice for those who sleep to videos" - I know that I don't always want a white-blue heavy video but something darker and red
Okay, but what if your darker and redder video is super loud and obnoxious and your blue-white video is quiet and calm? Or the dark red one is strobing and the blue-white one is calm and soft? That's the problem with just sorting them by color. Color doesn't really tell you anything about the content of the video. I mean I supposed this very out-there idea of a 'green party' could be a weird usage case, but I think that's a very unusual event and doesn't really justify the feature.
Pretty sure the solid colors are for people who need to shine a specific color of light, and there's no simpler way to quickly do that. You either download a new app, or google image search and try to find something you can zoom in with.
Remember in the very early days of the apple app store they had shit like a virtual beer so if you held the phone up to your lips it looked like you were drinking a mug of beer? Pointless but kind of showed off the phone's capabilities? There would have been an app for put whatever color you want on the screen" with a set of RGB sliders. But nowadays that thing would require file access, phone, SMS, camera and payment permissions and would ruin your life for installing.
Yeah I'll take an F-droid recommendation as proof of my case. Not many people are doing even that amount of side loading even on Android and forget it on iJewelry. We certainly have arrived in a place, haven't we?
Why take it as proof of anything? I wouldn't know about google play alternatives as I havent launched that in years, and I've never had an iPhone, I only answered to the extent of my experience
I haven't bothered with F-Droid because at this point I either use apps that aren't in open source repos, like my credit union's app, the built-in apps like the camera, or I just use the web browser. Because the whole "app" ecosystem on any platform is more about exploiting me than being useful. "There's an app begrudgingly for that."
Really? What stock apps? I'm struggling to think what built-in app on my Galaxy S10 will just paint the screen any hex value I want. The tool I'd reach for on my Linux desktop is the Drawing utility (basic raster editor similar to MS Paint).
The simpler method is to load whatever stock application that came on your mobile device/computer OS that allows you to color the screen exactly as you desire. They're offline too.
The ASMR and meditation community sometimes embrace a specific colour aesthetic for videos. They're also all pretty similar in terms of audio level etc so I can see this working well in that niche.
There will never be another one again. Storage, Bandwidth, Server, etc etc costs would be too astronomical for anyone but another multi-billion dollar company to spin up a competitor.
There are small scale niche efforts, Like for guntubers, or that stupid members only floatplane thing, but none of them will ever compete with youtube, because they don't have the scale or reach. and never will.
and considering i've never heard about it until you just mentioned it, I guess that means its very not big and very not a youtube competitor.
Also, a p2p video site will never work. cause you will just be offloading the bandwidth and storage burdens onto individuals who are far far less equipped to handle suhc things on their personal connections than a major video provider.
I believe it works like Bittorent (and things like Windows updates) where there is a swarm of peers that simultaneously upload and download to/from eachother, so the original creator, or any single user, doesn't necessarily need much bandwidth. There are some disadvantages to this, but it is manageable, and works for many other things. If it actually became a thing, I imagine sponsored/patreon-funded creators would pay someone to seed their videos to ensure availability and quality. Fans would probably help too. Technically, it's a viable option.
But yeah, with how walled-garden the Internet has become, it probably won't become popular without massive amounts of marketing and doing things like signing exclusivity deals with popular creators, which needs a lot of money.
Thats still going to get up petabytes of bandwidth at scale, and it will be sobs like you eating the cost of it. Which is why it'll never work.
Bandwidth is cheaper the bigger in bulk you buy it, which is pretty much the only reason youtube of today is viable at all.. All your peer2peer idea does is the same thing that every business in America does... Socialize the costs and privatize the profits.
It has been a long time since i've heard someone go crazy on the whole "p2p can fix anything/everything" spiel though. Its long since been overtaken by the whole "blockchain can fix anything/everything" spiel, so it was quite nostalgic hearing it again.
Thanks :) I've always been extremely pro-decentralization (that does not use blockchains to "solve" byzantine fault tolerance and sybil vulnerabilities). I'm fine with things being somewhat less efficient if they're decentralized, and fine with creators and fans eating the costs about things they're passionate about (though it would probably turn semi-decentralized with companies offering seeding/content-delivery services at low cost). The rise of symmetric home fiber connections further increases viability. But, I agree that it likely will never become mainstream.
Really wish there was a better way to host videos that doesn’t require a multibillion dollar company’s backing
Archive.org. For now. But people keep uploading full copyrighted movies to it and there appears to be no content moderation, so at some point there will be a massive lawsuit and it will be shut down. And that will be an incredibly sad day because it is currently also a source of useful public domain footage like the Prelinger Archives. Without the Internet Archive, we will not have a non-commercial archive of public domain footage.
I wonder if they are doing something worse and just overshadowing it with this weird change. Like we are using your data for training AI with no opt out BUT look at this random color picker! Don't mind the first part, LOOK! COLORS!
I can watch 20 fucking hours of content about a subject, and it wont suggest anything similar.
but I accidentally click a link someone posts to a crazy right wing video, I get nothing but right wing violence and brainwashing fear mongering videos for over a week that I can barely break the fuck out of with hyper specific searches.
Which is the same problem facebook has, in that the algorithm favors right wing extremism and shoves people heavily down that path, and only through very significant and concerted effort can you break out of it.
And if I happen to click on those videos only to confirm it’s not for me they will be like “omg, he’s crazy about this video! Let’s recommend 10 different variations of this video from now on!”
I've recently started getting the most random, low-view localised content from small channels even though I never watch anything in my native language or any content like what they are producing.
Color is so stupid. Who the fuck cares what color the video is. Couldve used this to actual good like pick three minor subjects from the video and ask me if im interested in more of those. That would be awesome. And I know they have that data.
This reminds of how Xiaomi introduced sorting by colours of the app icon in their launcher. But that was different and I believe actually helped getting around
At least that would make for an aesthetically pleasing gradient for some people. Sorting videos by color makes no damn sense. I'm not in an orange sort of mood lmao
I have sorted the icons on my quicklaunch bar (on my desktop PC) by color. Those typically aren't sorted in any particular order so putting them by color was something visually interesting to do. Their titles aren't displayed here, it's just the icons, and there's 12 of them, so actually it does help guide my eye, if I know I'm looking for, the Blender logo my eye tends toward orange.
I see a lot of people complaini gbhere, and, admitting that most of you might have Androi based phones, I'd urge you to install Youtube Revanced, they have a Github : https://github.com/NoName-exe/revanced-extended
