• BraveSirZaphod
    link
    fedilink
    51 year ago

    Well, actually, they have to create a service that caters to people who bring them revenue. If that isn’t you, they don’t have to, and actively shouldn’t, cater to you at all.

    You’re just saying “I don’t have an actual answer” in a roundabout way.

    • @TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      17
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well, I don’t, but it isn’t my problem.

      Google makes enough money as is, I don’t really care if the make poor decisions and end up with an unviable business model. I’ll do other things with my time.

      I don’t really care about Google’s wellbeing. I pay directly to the content creators I like and I hate seeing ads anywhere in my life and I’m willing to put in time and effort to make sure I see as few as possible.

      If they say that the marketing data they scrape from user activity isn’t enough for em, well, sucks to suck I guess.

      • BraveSirZaphod
        link
        fedilink
        -61 year ago

        I don’t really care if the make poor decisions and end up with an unviable business model. I’ll do other things with my time.

        Alternatively, they’ll take steps towards a more viable business model, and you’ll also find other things to do with your time.

        I’m willing to put in time and effort to make sure I see as few as possible.

        You can zap all ads forever with a few minutes and a credit card, if you’re willing.

        • @TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          10
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That’s the thing with ads. They’re a thorn in my side. That Google puts there.

          If you were charging me to remove the thorns you put in my side, I’d be belligerent towards you. And I ain’t gonna give ya money.

          Is YouTube running at a loss, anyway? Or is Google just trying to squeeze more money outta its products? Maybe they should be content with the profits they got. Some quick searching says it generates somewhere in the realm of $29,000,000,000 in revenue annually. I imagine it’s likely they can afford to not be so damn greedy.

          • @candybrie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            We have no idea if YouTube operates at a loss or is profitable. Google won’t say. Revenue really tells you very little when you look at what it takes to run something like YouTube. It’s a huge reason why an open competitor is so hard to make work.

      • BraveSirZaphod
        link
        fedilink
        -11 year ago

        Ultimately, they have no obligation to provide you something of value for free, and given that you do apparently use YouTube, they are objectively providing you something of value. They’re completely within their rights to not do that.

    • @roo@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      I paid for Lynda.com, and it could have easily taken in more business if YouTube wasn’t working so hard for Google ads. There are a lot of paid (and free) services that suffer because of YouTubes ad-money business model.

      Netflix could use the extra business. There are plenty of services failing to thrive while YouTube exists. Peertube would be wide open if YouTube went the way of most of Google’s stable of apps. PeerTube is wide open even if YouTube doesn’t go away anyway.

      People genuinely hate ads. It’s a high degree of enshitification. YouTube could divide into paid content and free content in a simple Freemium model.

      Or, add third tier with ads, which any user can opt out of in the same way contributers can. I’d be happy to click subscribe on an ad free experience with less content available to me.

      Or, add an option for a couple of free tier items per month, week, or day. Like Medium’s business model.

      It’s not hard to stop sucking!