Comment on YouTube is now flagging accounts on Premium family plans that aren't in the same household

• sunbeam60@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  It’s a product. You can buy it or not. If you don’t think it’s worth it, stay away, or stay on the free tier. You’re acting as if you’ve got some kind of right to use a service that’s provided by a commercial entity.

  source

  • archonet@lemy.lol ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    and it’s a multi-billion dollar corporation, that already makes more money than you or I will ever see in our lifetimes, that actively strives to make the user experience worse for people who don’t pay, when they’ve got a practical monopoly in the “free video sharing platform” space. And you’re whiteknighting for them. 🤡 Image

    source

    • ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      more money than you or I will ever see in our lifetimes

      I mean, I feel like you need to expand your comparison a little as the amount that you’ll see in your lifetime is such a minute grain of sand on a beech compared to corporate profits. The money they made today, hell, in the last hour… minute… will dwarf the amount that you will likely see.

      source
    • reev@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      actively strives to make the user experience worse for people who don’t pay

      And evidently those who do! My parents live in a different country. What are they, not my family? What’s the family plan for? (Rhetorical question)

      With Vanced I have so many more options to customize my experience. I can hide shorts I never watch, set a fixed resolution for data and wifi, return the stupid dislike ratio they removed… And if I’m using Vanced anyway to fix all the issues they introduce, why on earth would I additionally pay for their service?

      I want to pay for their shit, especially to support content creators, but I can’t support a platform whose singular mission it is to make everything worse for everyone constantly. Feels like every month I have to get a new extension to undo some horrible design decision.

      source

      • Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Vanced

        I hope you mean ReVanced, otherwise… bBoy, I’ve got some news for you.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I agree that it would make more sense if they called it a “household” plan. That’s clearly what it is.

        source
    • FishFace@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      whiteknighting

      was a weak-ass criticism when it was on 4chan being leveled at anyone who said anything not derogatory about a woman, and it’s weak-ass now. Oh no, someone on the internet has an at-least-partially positive opinion of a company, how awful, we’d better stereotype and body-shame them for it.

      If you had your way, the only comments about YouTube - or any other product from a large company - that would be allowed would be negative ones. How the fuck does that make sense?

      source

      • Hominine@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Well said.

        source
    • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      By Darwin you see a lot. I was merely stating that I think YouTube premium is worth the price I pay for it.

      Is there no product you are satisfied with? Your life must be pretty bleak.

      source
    • HerbieBangkok@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I only simp for Steam.

      source

      • garretble@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Gabe and his 300 yachts thanks you.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • lobut@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’ll join you in the downvotes. There’s many reasons to hate YouTube. Asking them to pay for video content to everyone for free is a bit silly.

    I’m also not saying you shouldn’t use alternatives or run an ad-blocker. Those are cool. I just find it funny how someone is saying: “I get some benefit in paying for this service” results in such backlash, lol.

    source

    • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I know. I thought we were upvoting respectful debate, not having a popularity contest. But apparently not…

      source
  • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It’s a “product” that profits billions off other people’s - often stolen - works.

    source

    • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      YouTube steals other people’s work?

      I tend to watch content creators who willingly put their content on YouTube. Am I missing something here…?

      source

      • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        You are missing something. Multiple things actually.

        • most content isn’t uploaded by the copyright holder (e.g. TV excerpts)
        • demonetized videos will still have ads (at least for people without ad blockers)
        • videos are used for machine learning without credit to authors or financial compensation (especially without consent when it’s not the copyright holder uploading them)

        source
  • elucubra@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’m willing to sacrifice some of my valuable internet points here and be down voted to low hell.

    I was going to make a comment along those lines.

    They are, at the core, an ad company. Their motivation is to make money, and we are free to pay or not pay for their services.

    The idea that we have a right to a non essential product for free is entitlement. They make a shit load of money, but also pay money to most content creators. Could they provide a service where they essentially just pay for costs? Sure, but no for profit Corp is going to do that, it has to make money somehow. While I’m all for peer tube, I really don’t know if it’s sustainable.

    I wonder how many of the people who demand free access to services donate to FOSS Development.

    Maybe some form of consumer co-op, where users essentially pay for operating costs, could be an option.

    source
  • HerbieBangkok@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    This community is a toxic craphole. Just watch how they will be defend Steam which is a comparable service that steals from and exploits game developers.

    source