EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
EEVblog => EEVblog Specific => Topic started by: JoannaK on November 11, 2013, 10:47:15 am
-
RANT: Big New Youtube Google+ Changes Nov 2013 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2ilbmv70oQ#ws)
Thanks. This one I agree 110% :-+
-
Now there has been a lot of discussion about the recent replacement of YouTube's old comments system with the Google+ comments system. While I agree with several points:
- The manual spam review UI looks well broken.
- The fact that there's no way to view all comments on your channel, except for manually setting up a Gmail filter to nicely group all comment notifications into a separate label, a kludgy and inferior solution.
These are all backwards steps, the hallmarks of a rushed release, and it's ridiculous and unnecessary, and it's valid to get angry. The things on the list above, though, look fixable, the first is a bug, and the second seems like a indefensible situation, etc.
However, what really concerns me is some of the sheer tin-foil hat paranoia that accompanies these complaints. This is leveled at Fran's video, but a good deal of the rhetoric leaks into Dave's as well. Let me (not word-for-word) quote some directly incorrect statements:
- Fran: "I use Mozilla, so I can't use Google+." Absurd.
- Fran: "What sort of reacharound are you willing to accept when doing something stupid like making a comment on a video, while Google is going into your computer to get whatever it wants?" Um, if you log into Google+ to make a comment on a video, the only thing added to the "tracking net" is that comment. Where's the tin-foil hat?
- Fran: Quoting from an article, "Google is cross-leveraging Search, Gmail, Maps, Android and everything else, [+YouTube] tying them together with Google+". Can you name a service on that list that wasn't logged into using a Google account before.
Dave shadowed the last point in his video too, and it's a particularly perplexing. We were all using Google accounts before this change. A Google+ identity is just a tag within your Google account, a location on the Google+ site, yet another profile page. A pass to use Google+, the social networking site. Where does this magical new ability for Google to track you come from? It was all Google before, it's still all Google now. What is everyone getting so hysterical about? You realise Google bought YouTube back in 2006, about a year after it was created, right?
At the end of the day, you type things into your computer, it goes out to the Internet. A fair lot of it lands in Google property. They use it to customise advertising to make it as relevant as possible to you. Call it tracking if you want, and yes, it makes them a lot of money. But they only make money by showing advertisements that are relevant to the users, the advertisers' wouldn't pay if no sales ever came from the advertising. But we're talking about a site here that lets you upload multi-gigabyte video files, and serves them with outstanding reliability and speed to anyone who's willing to watch. One would have to be a monumental, spoiled and unreasonable idiot to think that it's reasonable to get this for free. Analysts estimate bandwidth costs alone for YouTube run into $360 million per year. So yes, there will be advertising. And I'd rather have a small amount of likely-to-be-of-interest-to-me, high-cost-per-click-to-the-advertiser, well-targeted advertising than pages and pages of penis-enlargment pill advertisements. Any other point of view is perplexing to me.
Dave, why do you want to uncheck the "post to Google+" box when you post a comment? If you don't want to visit/spend time tending your Google+ page, that's perfectly reasonable, but what negative consequence befalls you if you failed to untick that box? Any replies made on your Google+ page also find their way into the YouTube comments stream; they're one and the same, that, if anything, is the whole point of this revamp. There's going to be a tiny percentage of your users who actually use Google+, who would prefer that you leave it on; the rest are utterly unaffected.
I would go on but this is all I'm calling for here -- a bit less hysteria and a little bit more well-founded, thought out argument. These videos seem to be a fascinating mix of perplexing hysteria and very validly pointed out annoying bugs. I heartily encourage the latter, but find the former absurd. If I'm wrong, or if I've missed some specific point, please correct me.
-
- The fact that there's no way to view all comments on your channel, except for manually setting up a Gmail filter to nicely group all comment notifications into a separate label, a kludgy and inferior solution.
I tried that and look what happens:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BYx25X9CAAAdz3C.jpg)
That's for ONE comment, so if my inbox has a thread with a couple of hundred of these comments, then I have the scroll down through all that huge wastage to read the message.
|O
The old Youtbe inbox was pretty shitty, but at least it was better than this.
Dave, why do you want to uncheck the "post to Google+" box when you post a comment?
The same reason as for Facebook.
I have a Facebook page for the blog that my videos get auto-uploaded onto, but apart from that I don't touch it. I don't read comments there and I don't interact with my audience there, and I wouldn't want people to think that I do by having all of my Youtube comments cross-posted there. Same thing with Google+. I chose not to use it, so I don't want my comments to end up there, I want them only on Youtube where I intended them to go.
If you don't want to visit/spend time tending your Google+ page, that's perfectly reasonable, but what negative consequence befalls you if you failed to untick that box? Any replies made on your Google+ page also find their way into the YouTube comments stream; they're one and the same, that, if anything, is the whole point of this revamp. There's going to be a tiny percentage of your users who actually use Google+, who would prefer that you leave it on; the rest are utterly unaffected.
I have not verified that is the case myself.
There may indeed be zero consequences, but until I investigate that myself, I do not want my youtube comments cross-posted outside of youtube.
Also, there is the simple principle of it. If I don't like Google+ then I should be easily able to set that myself.
My problem is that it's switched on by default, and there does not appear to be a way to default it to off if I so chose.
-
rs20, it's pretty naive to proclaim that distrust of Google's mission to gather, track and analyze every available scrap of data about every connected individual on the planet is 'hysteria', particularly given their documented collaboration with the likes of the NSA.
You may well feel that the convenience of having Google know all about your habits, interests and preferences so that they can deliver "targeted content" is worth the irrevocable loss of privacy which that entails, but some of us are less keen.
As Dave said, Google are being 'Evil', and given that they are an American corporation one could say that is inevitable. There is a strong argument that modern corporations are legally required to act in a psychopathic way. What responsibilities they have are largely to their stockholders, not their customers, and they are compelled to enrich the former at the expense of the latter by whatever means possible. Read Joel Bakan's book on the subject - or watch the movie. I wonder if it's available on Youtube...
-
One little correction to something mentioned in the video. This change is not about tracking. They've been able to track you, and have done so, ever since you had to use your Google account (not plus) to sign in to Youtube. (At one point you could create a YT account without being signed up to Google.) This change is only about pushing G+ as a social network.
-
There is a strong argument that modern corporations are legally required to act in a psychopathic way. What responsibilities they have are largely to their stockholders, not their customers
Essentially true. It's called fiduciary responsibility.
In the states it's this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_judgment_rule
Of course you can do all that without being evil dicks and listening to your customers/users.
-
One little correction to something mentioned in the video. This change is not about tracking. They've been able to track you, and have done so, ever since you had to use your Google account (not plus) to sign in to Youtube. (At one point you could create a YT account without being signed up to Google.) This change is only about pushing G+ as a social network.
Many commentators don't agree with that, and I suspect as much as well. There seems to be much more to it than the simple dumb-arse pushing of G+, because that alone doesn't make sense, it's not worth the huge risk they took (and they knew it).
-
One little correction to something mentioned in the video. This change is not about tracking. They've been able to track you, and have done so, ever since you had to use your Google account (not plus) to sign in to Youtube. (At one point you could create a YT account without being signed up to Google.) This change is only about pushing G+ as a social network.
Not directly about tracking, but all part of their mission. As their login page says "One account. All of Google."
They want you to stay logged in and do everything online in their space. Presumably they think that if they make their social media system omnipresent, people will start using it through sheer inertia. Hey, it worked for Microsoft. Until it didn't.
-
- The fact that there's no way to view all comments on your channel, except for manually setting up a Gmail filter to nicely group all comment notifications into a separate label, a kludgy and inferior solution.
I tried that and look what happens:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BYx25X9CAAAdz3C.jpg)
That's for ONE post, so if my inbox has thread with a couple of hundred of these comments, then I have the scroll down through all that huge wastage to read the message.
|O
Fully concur, it's ridiculous to have each comments laid out in a separate email/page, instead of a easily browse-able list. I'm astonished that they thought this was acceptable.
Dave, why do you want to uncheck the "post to Google+" box when you post a comment?
The same reason as for Facebook.
I have a Facebook page for the blog that my videos get auto-uploaded onto, but apart from that I don't touch it. I don't read comments there and I don't interact with my audience there, and I wouldn't want people to think that I do by having all of my Youtube comments cross-posted there. Same thing with Google+. I chose not to use it, so I don't want my comments to end up there, I want them only on Youtube where I intended them to go.
If you don't want to visit/spend time tending your Google+ page, that's perfectly reasonable, but what negative consequence befalls you if you failed to untick that box? Any replies made on your Google+ page also find their way into the YouTube comments stream; they're one and the same, that, if anything, is the whole point of this revamp. There's going to be a tiny percentage of your users who actually use Google+, who would prefer that you leave it on; the rest are utterly unaffected.
I have not verified that is the case myself.
There may indeed be zero consequences, but until I investigate that myself, I do not want my youtube comments cross-posted outside of youtube.
Also, there is the simple principle of it. If I don't like Google+ then I should be easily able to set that myself.
My problem is that it's switched on by default, and there does not appear to be a way to default it to off if I so chose.
Again, I more-or-less agree, having that selection persist is a reasonable feature to want.
On a side note, the interesting thing is that YouTube, as it was, was just a sequence-of-videos, you couldn't post text, or a link, or anything like that. Just a whole new video, with its isolated collection of comments. (If one wants to keep using YouTube that way, you just make a random anonymous Google+ page and post away, just like before, no change.) Yes, you can post to Facebook, Twitter, etc, but then you get some comments here, some comments there, it's all a very fractured experience. I guess the sad thing for me is I can sort of see the vision that Google is going for here; I could go to the (e.g.) EEVBlog Google+ page and see the videos, little upcoming event text announcements, links to websites that you think are cool, etc etc. And I could see the real YouTube comments right there and then, and not have to split out into the YouTube interface. Just visualise it -- twitter, with a non-retarded commenting system and the videos right there inline, all in one place. As much as I sort of feel the negative vibe against Google+, it's kind of a beautiful idea, and an experience that's impossible for any other company to match. Yes, if people flock to the idea, Google will make a crapload of money off it, but if you live your life trying to prevent people from making money off you, you're really living a rather vindictive tin-foil hat life. (This isn't directed at you, Dave, I know you recognise the financial aspect of this situation.)
-
Youtube Bullshit (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEWR2-zcAtM#ws)
Popular YouTuber Cr1TiKaL created this video, calling the new system "soggy dog sh*t":
-
rs20, it's pretty naive to proclaim that distrust of Google's mission to gather, track and analyze every available scrap of data about every connected individual on the planet is 'hysteria', particularly given their documented collaboration with the likes of the NSA.
You may well feel that the convenience of having Google know all about your habits, interests and preferences so that they can deliver "targeted content" is worth the irrevocable loss of privacy which that entails, but some of us are less keen.
As Dave said, Google are being 'Evil', and given that they are an American corporation one could say that is inevitable. There is a strong argument that modern corporations are legally required to act in a psychopathic way. What responsibilities they have are largely to their stockholders, not their customers, and they are compelled to enrich the former at the expense of the latter by whatever means possible. Read Joel Bakan's book on the subject - or watch the movie. I wonder if it's available on Youtube...
Where to start. First of all, this is a completely orthogonal discussion. How does clicking "yes, make me a Google+ page" suddenly give Google an increased ability to track you? It doesn't.
Also, again, don't even continue this discussion on this thread, it's off-topic as noted above, but NSA tapped Google, which Google is well pissed about it (http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/6/5072924/google-engineers-issue-fuck-you-to-nsa-over-surveillance-scandal), and have now encrypted the internal channels that Google were using. Calling that "documented collaboration" is a bit rich. Yes, I'm trusting what they're telling me, silly me, but it's impossible to have a reasonable debate if your line is "don't believe anything you read". Just next time you're building a bomb, maybe don't plan it using Google+ private messages. In the mean time, chill out and enjoy the wonders of the internet.
-
Also, again, don't even continue this discussion on this thread, it's off-topic as noted above,
Hey, don't tell me I'm talking bullshit and then forbid me to respond.
but NSA tapped Google, which Google is well pissed about it (http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/6/5072924/google-engineers-issue-fuck-you-to-nsa-over-surveillance-scandal), and have now encrypted the internal channels that Google were using. Calling that "documented collaboration" is a bit rich.
I wasn't. I was referring to the PRISM web surveillance program which was carried out with Google's full knowledge and cooperation.
As documented by The Guardian:
Newly declassified documents show that the spy agency paid Google millions of dollars to cover the costs associated with PRISM.
-
One little correction to something mentioned in the video. This change is not about tracking. They've been able to track you, and have done so, ever since you had to use your Google account (not plus) to sign in to Youtube. (At one point you could create a YT account without being signed up to Google.) This change is only about pushing G+ as a social network.
Many commentators don't agree with that, and I suspect as much as well. There seems to be much more to it than the simple dumb-arse pushing of G+, because that alone doesn't make sense, it's not worth the huge risk they took (and they knew it).
We can debate the purposes of the change all day long; as I mentioned in an earlier post, a page where videos, comments, text updates, featured links, bla bla bla all coexist on a single page is an awesome concept, maybe they still believe "build it and they will come". This change does make Google+ considerably better as a one-stop platform for a content creator. But whatever. The single most important thing to recognise is that clicking the "yeah, OK, I'll use Google+" button doesn't improve Google's ability to track you for monetization, or nefarious government spying purposes. There's two ways to look at it: the "Google is honest" way and the "Google is in bed with the NSA way":
Google is in bed with the NSA: The "yeah, OK, I'll use Google+" button does nothing. The comments and search habits arrive at the same servers they always have, and the NSA can do all the tracking they've ever been able to do. After choosing to use Google+, you're not typing any extra information into your computer, so the NSA doesn't have access to anything more, because it was all going to Google property before and it's still all going there now.
Google is honest: The way that the terms of service are worded may mean joining Google+ gives Google more latitude to legally, honestly, in accordance with the terms of service, mine more information about you and more precisely target ads and all the stuff they say they do in the terms of service. Yawn.
Again, if they want to break their terms of service and give all their data to the NSA, you flipping a freaking bit doesn't change anything. The Google+ comments change riot is not, repeat, is not a tracking and government spying issue. It's just a buggy and awkward switchover that needs urgent work.
-
One little correction to something mentioned in the video. This change is not about tracking. They've been able to track you, and have done so, ever since you had to use your Google account (not plus) to sign in to Youtube. (At one point you could create a YT account without being signed up to Google.) This change is only about pushing G+ as a social network.
Many commentators don't agree with that, and I suspect as much as well. There seems to be much more to it than the simple dumb-arse pushing of G+, because that alone doesn't make sense, it's not worth the huge risk they took (and they knew it).
What is the risk that they're taking exactly, though? Once they get the immediate bugs and problems ironed out (like the spam comment thing) the big grey mass will just keep using the site as they always have. I bet most people just clicked yes long ago in the continual nag screens, and don't even complain, let alone consider a more drastic action, like closing their account. The potential benefit however, is that people (again in the big grey mass) after a while discover their G+ page, all their friends are added, and they think, you know what, this isn't too bad after all. You hate it, I hate it, but most people are not nerds/power users like us. (By power users for your part I mean that something very specific, namely the comment feed, is broken.)
-
Also, again, don't even continue this discussion on this thread, it's off-topic as noted above,
Hey, don't tell me I'm talking bullshit and then forbid me to respond.
Fair call, I shouldn't have instructed you not to respond. I'm just pointing out that the debate you and I are have right now is nothing to do with the video at the head of this topic.
but NSA tapped Google, which Google is well pissed about it (http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/6/5072924/google-engineers-issue-fuck-you-to-nsa-over-surveillance-scandal), and have now encrypted the internal channels that Google were using. Calling that "documented collaboration" is a bit rich.
I wasn't. I was referring to the PRISM web surveillance program which was carried out with Google's full knowledge and cooperation.
As documented by The Guardian:
Newly declassified documents show that the spy agency paid Google millions of dollars to cover the costs associated with PRISM.
Google do admit that they are legally required to reveal information in response to certain requests, and they have that transparency report thing to prove it. Furthermore, Google sent that open letter to the government requesting that they be allowed to be more transparent, and that they're pissed that they've got their hands tied behind their back with respect to what they can reveal. They also say that they push back when requests are too broad, etc, etc. Who knows that the word PRISM refers to, it's just an acronym, does it encompass these "legal" requests? But yeah, who knows what's going on. But Yahoo and Skype and Apple and Facebook are all in the same boat; like I said before, as I see it just keep your bomb-making plans off the internet, and in the mean time have fun and chill out. Fortunately I don't live in the USA, so I have no concern or ability to influence US policy, but all that aside, none of this has anything to do with comments moving from YouTube to Google+, sorry, from Google to Google.
-
Where to start. First of all, this is a completely orthogonal discussion. How does clicking "yes, make me a Google+ page" suddenly give Google an increased ability to track you? It doesn't.
Its ok for you to be clueless, but please stop trying to spread it on others.
http://www.abine.com/blog/2012/how-facebook-buttons-can-track-you-across-the-web/ (http://www.abine.com/blog/2012/how-facebook-buttons-can-track-you-across-the-web/)
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/11/01/facebook-to-silent-track-users-cursor-movements-to-see-which-ads-we-like-best/ (http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/11/01/facebook-to-silent-track-users-cursor-movements-to-see-which-ads-we-like-best/)
from horses mouth 2 years ago DEF CON 19 - Brian Kennish - Tracking the Trackers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAdtXkus-Xc#)
Two years ago about ~25% of websites tracked you with AdWords, while Facebook Like button was on more than 33%.
Those dont overlap completely. Pushing G+ as a social network will let Google piggyback its +1 Button right next to Bookface Like button closing the gap.
Its all about tracking sheeple.
Also, again, don't even continue this discussion on this thread, it's off-topic as noted above, but NSA tapped Google, which Google is well pissed about it
Its as pissed as Germans, while at the same time Germany is one of the big NSA collaborators.
-
I would go on but this is all I'm calling for here -- a bit less hysteria and a little bit more well-founded, thought out argument.
Seems some people can't see the thin end of a rapidly fattening wedge.
How long before Google require you to be logged in to Google+ for any service? You are already prompted on their search page. How long before Google require documentary evidence to support their Google+ real names policy? How long before Google know exactly who you are, where you live, where you are within a few feet from your android phone GPS, what you are looking at with your Google glass, read all your email on gmail, read all your documents on google docs, track all your usage of the internet through cookies, and google analytics?
I don't want anyone collecting and compiling that much information about me. I don't trust Google and anything Google have the US government will get on demand.
They will be able to do all this if enough fools let them.
-
Where to start. First of all, this is a completely orthogonal discussion. How does clicking "yes, make me a Google+ page" suddenly give Google an increased ability to track you? It doesn't.
Its ok for you to be clueless, but please stop trying to spread it on others.
http://www.abine.com/blog/2012/how-facebook-buttons-can-track-you-across-the-web/ (http://www.abine.com/blog/2012/how-facebook-buttons-can-track-you-across-the-web/)
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/11/01/facebook-to-silent-track-users-cursor-movements-to-see-which-ads-we-like-best/ (http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/11/01/facebook-to-silent-track-users-cursor-movements-to-see-which-ads-we-like-best/)
from horses mouth 2 years ago DEF CON 19 - Brian Kennish - Tracking the Trackers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAdtXkus-Xc#)
That's something completely different. The way a like button can track you is because it's placed on another website and can "phone home" and tell Facebook you've visited that page. There is no magic involved here. If a page doesn't have a like button (or some similar mechanism) Facebook can't track your visit to that page.
There is nothing (except laws and regulations, and their terms of service) that stops Google from doing that already with Google ads, even if you don't have a Google account. (That is, just a GMail account or similar, not even a Google+ account).
If a lot of sites start putting up"+1" buttons all over the place, that lets Google join that game even more, and a larger user base for G+ But just you getting a Google+ account makes no technical difference at all to that. Maybe just a small legal difference.
-
The day it happened I did a rant video and left Youtube. A couple of days later I found one of my videos had been removed due to a robot on it. I appealed their decision and they said they upheld their decision after reviewing my account. I wrote them back saying I never had a blotch on my account and a viewer stuck a link of one of my videos on Twitter and away it went. Considering it gave me 4k views and that "so called" robot made me exactly zero I was pissed. I told Youtube off telling them what they already know that content providers can't make money with Adblock Plus and considering this was done by an outside source that I have no control over it will happen again for sure.
Since Youtube basically told me to go eff myself and couple that with this new G+ nonsense (every single time they tried to connect me to G+ I declined) I removed all of my videos and shut my channel down. I would have deleted my account but Google doesn't allow that.
I just wish Youtube would finally die and a real content provider emerge.
P.S. Google Plus has been around since 2011 and has been an absolutely dismal failure for them (even read articles about it) so instead of making people want it they just shove it down our throats instead. Eff 'em.
-
What is g+ got to do with youtube, and forcing it down to everyone is totally not acceptable. I think it is a worthy effort for microsoft or apple to take it up and force google back.
-
I will be placing all my videos on vimeo and I will be pulling all my content from google. If I need to pay $200 per year for vimeo pro for my videos, so be it. I might not need to, but if it comes to that I will pay for the higher account.
-
I cannot agree more with the Youtube changes, there wacked and a pain in the ass. I can't fix the commenting problems, but I can somewhat control the convoluted Youtube webpage with this handy Chrome extension. I have been using this for about a year now, and it's great! Total control over your page view and other annoying aspects of Youtube.
https://spoi.com/software/yto/
-
I think I need to rethink vimeo. I have to grant them the right to use my videos for any use they want, and I get the privilege to pay for it too? Any ideas anyone?
-
I will be placing all my videos on vimeo and I will be pulling all my content from google. If I need to pay $200 per year for vimeo pro for my videos, so be it. I might not need to, but if it comes to that I will pay for the higher account.
I was just starting out as a content provider and was hoping to make enough money to buy some equipment to make even better videos but I couldn't on Youtube. I investigated Vimeo and I know I would need pro as I believe it was 1 upload per day and the giga byte limit is pretty mean for free. After you go up in plans it does get better but their partner (I forgot what they call it) program is sorely lacking imo but, then again, we have Adblock Plus keeping us from making any money (ironic that the producers of Adblock Plus are trying to sell advertising to advertise an advertising blocking plugin).
-
So much rage in this rant. It's hilarious, if a little hastily made.
There is no YouTube, and there hasn't been for years. It's just another Google property. Google's just bringing all their social content under a single umbrella. This is going to be a bumpy process, because it means changing the user experience incrementally over time.
I've been using G+ for a long time now. In fact I found out about the EEVblog videos through someone sharing one on G+ a year or so ago. Ultimately, this will just bring more viewers. G+ is far from a ghost town, or a failure.
At any rate, keep up the good work.
-
I think I need to rethink vimeo. I have to grant them the right to use my videos for any use they want, and I get the privilege to pay for it too? Any ideas anyone?
WHOA!?! I did not see that when I was investigating them as I stopped at the price but that is just wrong on too many levels.
I think we are just screwed and I know I will not return to Youtube with G+ being shoved up my ass and I am not sure if I will ever return unless they get a grip on the Adblock nonsense and implement something that will make content providers and viewers happy.
-
How to move YOUR data in and out of google products :
http://www.dataliberation.org/ (http://www.dataliberation.org/)
-
So much rage in this rant. It's hilarious, if a little hastily made.
There is no YouTube, and there hasn't been for years. It's just another Google property. Google's just bringing all their social content under a single umbrella. This is going to be a bumpy process, because it means changing the user experience incrementally over time.
I've been using G+ for a long time now. In fact I found out about the EEVblog videos through someone sharing one on G+ a year or so ago. Ultimately, this will just bring more viewers. G+ is far from a ghost town, or a failure.
At any rate, keep up the good work.
Each to their own but you must be a pretty lonely tool in the tool bin since G+ has been a complete failure for Google.
-
I am not that concern about Google+ ability to track me and aggregate data, this is not new, we were already tracked before with every move we do on the internet. Install the Ghostery Chrome extension, it shows you the list of trackers on each page you visit, it's fascinating, this site for example seems to report every page visit to to Google Analytics.
My concern is that the Real Names trend that Facebook started and Google followed makes some of this aggregation public on 'my page' in conjunction with my real name. Teenagers like it and don't see any problem, I don't. That's why I stopped any contribution via Youtube comments, Android apps ratings and Google Local restaurant reviews. Amazon still allows anonymity and so is this and similar forums and this where I provide feedback.
As for the usability regression Dave complained about, well, that's life, sometimes changes are great (e.g. Android keyboard swipe) and sometimes not (e.g. Gmail New Compose), nobody is perfect, and these decisions are often made by a not that senior product manager.
The most important thing when dealing with free services like these one is to adapt. Things change and will keep changing. Some changes we like and some we don't. When Google recently killed iGoogle I switched to Draggo and like it even more. Who Moved My Cheese is a recommended reading.
-
Well, at least now I don't have to worry about whether to start making videos for give-it-all-to-me-Google-pretty-please YouLube.
-
Each to their own but you must be a pretty lonely tool in the tool bin since G+ has been a complete failure for Google.
I'll ignore the personal slight, and just say that G+ has a thriving social community.
-
Each to their own but you must be a pretty lonely tool in the tool bin since G+ has been a complete failure for Google.
I'll ignore the personal slight, and just say that G+ has a thriving social community.
Compared to Facebook? Every article I have read has said it was failing and at the last minute Google did this instead of pulling its life support.
-
I think I need to rethink vimeo. I have to grant them the right to use my videos for any use they want, and I get the privilege to pay for it too? Any ideas anyone?
Try Dropbox. You can get public links to folders and individual files and they don't even show your user name.
-
I think I need to rethink vimeo. I have to grant them the right to use my videos for any use they want, and I get the privilege to pay for it too? Any ideas anyone?
Try Dropbox. You can get public links to folders and individual files and they don't even show your user name.
I think he wants to make money from it and how does dropbox give you a following? I only remember Dropbox from years ago as a place to grab a file (illegal and legal) and a bit surprised to see the name pop up.
-
I think he wants to make money from it ...
His post does not mention money.
-
I think he wants to make money from it ...
His post does not mention money.
Sort of inferred considering he has videos on Youtube and was willing to pay 200 a year to Vimeo. If I am in error then so be it but you didn't say how it allows a following like Youtube and Vimeo do.
-
Correct, it is not MY intention to make money from my videos directly.
-
Correct, it is not MY intention to make money from my videos directly.
Ahhhh, but that leaves indirectly and you are willing to spend cash to host them? I would love to see something from you.
-
Compared to Facebook? Every article I have read has said it was failing and at the last minute Google did this instead of pulling its life support.
A full discussion probably wouldn't make sense in this thread, but in short, no. G+ shouldn't be compared to Facebook, and thank God for that. Ultimately the integration they're doing with their other properties will make it succeed in terms of sheer numbers (as this is ultimately the bean-counter definition of success), but it's been successful as a social site for quite a while now.
If forced to compare G+ to Facebook as a user, I can only say that on G+ I get information about everything that matches my interests in tech, engineering, and a host of other areas before I ever see that stuff elsewhere. On Facebook, the noise floor is just too high.
-
Compared to Facebook? Every article I have read has said it was failing and at the last minute Google did this instead of pulling its life support.
A full discussion probably wouldn't make sense in this thread, but in short, no. G+ shouldn't be compared to Facebook, and thank God for that. Ultimately the integration they're doing with their other properties will make it succeed in terms of sheer numbers (as this is ultimately the bean-counter definition of success), but it's been successful as a social site for quite a while now.
If forced to compare G+ to Facebook as a user, I can only say that on G+ I get information about everything that matches my interests in tech, engineering, and a host of other areas before I ever see that stuff elsewhere. On Facebook, the noise floor is just too high.
Well, not a soul I know uses it AND, as I said, every article has said it was a failure since 2011 when it arrived on the scene. G+ was supposed to be the Facebook killer but it failed miserably. I am just saying that in the industry (probably those bean counters you mentioned) it has been a dismal failure.
Oh, did you know I also read where Google let it slip that Youtube was a failure and costing them money to run thanks to Adblock Plus, et. al., and what they let slip was beginning to charge a subscription for Youtube. Most people feel that will not happen but something will since 70-90% of Youtube users use Adblock and Google can't make any revenue without ads (nor can we content providers).
-
If I am in error then so be it but you didn't say how it allows a following like Youtube and Vimeo do.
His post did not mention following either.
With Dropbox you share a link to a file or folder. It recognizes certain file types like videos and allow you to play online in a browser. Here is an example https://www.dropbox.com/s/ow6ft1r8lwyqqud/sport_mode.mp4 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/ow6ft1r8lwyqqud/sport_mode.mp4)
-
If I am in error then so be it but you didn't say how it allows a following like Youtube and Vimeo do.
His post did not mention following either.
With Dropbox you share a link to a file or folder. It recognizes certain file types like videos and allow you to play online in a browser. Here is an example https://www.dropbox.com/s/ow6ft1r8lwyqqud/sport_mode.mp4 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/ow6ft1r8lwyqqud/sport_mode.mp4)
So, nothing changed then but maybe he is one of those scammer types or those bloggers that post to Youtube and make it private? I have no idea but most people don't just shove videos up on Youtube without wanting people to see them (hence the following I mentioned) but if he is one of those that just uses Youtube like a dropbox making the video private and linked on their blog then Dropbox could do it though it wouldn't open the video up on the page it would just be a link.
I personally feel Youtube was retarded for allowing videos of the private nature because people then use them like a drop box and Youtube is just a hosting site of the file. Far less potential for them to make money that way and if anything Google should disallow that practice since it doesn't really fit in with their growing community theme they are after.
Want to make a video private? I can see some profit in it via forcing you to be a subscriber for pay. So it would be like Youtube pro or something.
-
I`ll throw my suggestion into the mix/fire and grab some popcorn :box:
;D SKYDRIVE ::)
-
I`ll throw my suggestion into the mix/fire and grab some popcorn :box:
;D SKYDRIVE ::)
You're just evil, lol.
-
I make review videos of test equipment, mostly multimeters but others are coming. No scamming or making money from that.
I am also going to start publishing other types of videos and also to start showcasing some of my other multimedia services and work which are where I actually make money but not from showing them on the internet.
Youtube and google can die off for all I care. Youtube won't be getting any more of my content. Not that I am important or a big player but if everyone who doesn't make money from actually posting o youtube were to pull their content they would be in trouble I think.
-
Well,,, at least some people get money out of this. >:D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTq8TrA3hb4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTq8TrA3hb4)
-
David,
Lets face it... Google likes controlling our lives, and seems to have an agenda. Bunch of self impressed Management, and software NOT written for users. I bet the sucker engineers don't even bother to really test, or even give a damn about usability. If any of my engineers had cut a corner to make it easy for them.. and not the user.. they would have road rash on their ass from skidding across the pavement as I kicked them out.
This is major upsetting... of all the content producers.. YOU are the only one I follow every single day, learn from often, see new equipment to consider, and yeah.. get a good chuckle often.
I would just put at the top of the info for each video NOT to use the comments on Youtube but to comment here in the matching forum... fuck them. Bypass the comments problem all together. For those that don't read the note and use the Youtube comment then it is an automatic "Idiot Gauge" and their post is most likely :bullshit: to begin with.
-
That's something completely different. The way a like button can track you is because it's placed on another website and can "phone home" and tell Facebook you've visited that page. There is no magic involved here. If a page doesn't have a like button (or some similar mechanism) Facebook can't track your visit to that page.
Did I ever claim any magic? Im confused as to why you found it important to explain to me how it works. :o
There is nothing (except laws and regulations, and their terms of service) that stops Google from doing that already with Google ads,
?
Google IS doing it from the start.
If a lot of sites start putting up"+1" buttons all over the place, that lets Google join that game even more, and a larger user base for G+
Wow, its almost like you retyped what I wrote :)
But just you getting a Google+ account makes no technical difference at all to that. Maybe just a small legal difference.
Its the other way around. Larger G+ user base, pumped artificially with mandatory Youtube integration, will MAKE third party sites think G+ is significant and add google's +1 button.
YouTube had >300 million accounts in 2009. Currently google claims "More than 1 billion unique users visit YouTube each month", probably at least 2/3 are accounts. FB has ~1 Billion accounts.
Converting YT to G+ would make G+ userbase almost equal to FB overnight. Currently G+ is a JOKE and nobody serious uses it.
After YT integration it will be a joke with significant numbers, and sadly numbers rule (just look at all the fake twitter accounts).
My concern is that the Real Names trend that Facebook started and Google followed makes some of this aggregation public on 'my page' in conjunction with my real name. Teenagers like it and don't see any problem, I don't. That's why I stopped any contribution via Youtube comments, Android apps ratings and Google Local restaurant reviews. Amazon still allows anonymity and so is this and similar forums and this where I provide feedback.
There is nothing anonymous if you have enough data, you can extrapolate and extract real identity by just leveraging big data.
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~shmat/shmat_oak08netflix.pdf (http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~shmat/shmat_oak08netflix.pdf)
http://randomwalker.info/social-networks/ (http://randomwalker.info/social-networks/) (sane author, one year later)
http://randomwalker.info/luther/kaggle-deanonymization/index.html (http://randomwalker.info/luther/kaggle-deanonymization/index.html)
http://www.iseclab.org/papers/sonda-TR.pdf (http://www.iseclab.org/papers/sonda-TR.pdf)
+ stylometry
Stylometry and Online Underground Markets [29c3[preview]] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRY2mfLpPCs#ws)
http://youtu.be/oaiEZxOPS1Y?t=7m20s (http://youtu.be/oaiEZxOPS1Y?t=7m20s)
http://randomwalker.info/publications/author-identification-draft.pdf (http://randomwalker.info/publications/author-identification-draft.pdf)
http://www.gizmag.com/identifying-authors-of-anonymous-emails/18091/ (http://www.gizmag.com/identifying-authors-of-anonymous-emails/18091/)
As for YT alternatives, I heard good things about twitch.
http://www.twitch.tv/p/partners (http://www.twitch.tv/p/partners)
-
The question is : do you really care ? i bet 99% of the comments appear on the forum.
I never read the comments on youtube.
As a content producer : simpy turn off commenting on the video and put a clear link to the forum below the video and mention it at the beginning of the video.
problem solved.
nobody needs to log in to a google+ account and the comments end up where they need to be.
-
As a content producer : simpy turn off commenting on the video and put a clear link to the forum below the video and mention it at the beginning of the video.
problem solved.
This is an excellent idea. If a question, the viewer is likely to get a better more complete response here than the comments section of YT. If a reasonable criticism, more likely to get noticed, and if it's just a jab or spam they are less likely to bother when they have to hit the forum or register to post.
-
I just really wonder, but for me, I was a real G+ user, I wanted to get in during the beta but however they had an 18+ and above limit, so I couldn't join it. Then it exited beta and Google started this rubbish by unveiling a new loo, for YouTube that was OK except for the "(g+)Upgrade account" thing on the homepage, which only took me to an error page. Later, they brought down the limit, and I was finally able to join. It was great, and to me, better than Facebook. End of story. Or is it?
Now a (censored) google employee had this (censored) idea to shove G+ in the comments section because he/she loves to SHARE from the COMMENT section (http://youtu.be/bVGp8Z8Yb28). Nobody does that except for this person who should be fired from Google. What's more, I believe Google pays all those big-time "verified name" celebrities to not complain about G+, more like G-. What's more, this employee decided to make YouTube work in his favour and YT seems to be ignoring the settings you set. For example: - G+ comments on YT: forced default to "Top comments"
- Video playback: forced default to "Auto"
- Inbox button hidden, need to go to youtube.com/inbox
That's all I know of. Even though I connected my account to G+ intentionally, I've watched users' complaints of G+ comments on YT and they mentioned that the G+ bell is cumbersome to use to reply to comments because it focuses on the video rather than the comment. So I decided to take the idea of creating accompanying forum posts for videos(which Dave has done with this video) and take it further. Here's how I did it. (Steps 1 through 9 are for creating the board by the way)
- Took my forum I normally use for extended discussion on my blog posts
- Go to Admin CP
- Create a new board called "YouTube"
- Set permissions as follows(I use Proboards v4.5, your forum system may be different)
- Create threads: Only staff
- Reply to threads: Everyone
- Create polls: Only staff
- Post attachments: Registered members
- Click save
- Create new thread
- Insert title, video and description
- Click save
- Copy URL of thread
- Go to edit video description on YT
- Type "Comments go here:" without quotes and paste URL into top of description
- Go to "advanced" and uncheck "Allow comments"
- Click save
- You're done!
Note the "Reply to threads: Everyone" setting. I feel sorry for those who had to get G+ to comment on videos, so I set it to "everyone" so that users don't need to sign up, they can just enter a name and the CAPTCHA to comment. Here's an example (http://kbhasi.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=youtube&action=display&thread=9).
-
...That's all I know of. Even though I connected my account to G+ intentionally, I've watched users' complaints of G+ comments on YT and they mentioned that the G+ bell is cumbersome to use to reply to comments because it focuses on the video rather than the comment. So I decided to take the idea of creating accompanying forum posts for videos(which Dave has done with this video) and take it further. Here's how I did it....
Good for you, that's the beauty of free market and competition.
As for EEVBlog, never took the youtube comments too seriously. The content on this forum is much better.
-
:rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant:
Hate Google+ vehemently! I have never managed to get my head around the garbage that is supposed to be my G-Spot page!
Of all the people that I personally know, literally just one has a G-Spot account!!!!
Disable all the comments and just use the forum.
-
Well,,, at least some people get money out of this. >:D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTq8TrA3hb4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTq8TrA3hb4)
I seem to get the vague impression she doesn't like Google+.
-
Some of us do not want any one company or organization to know that much about us, especially an advertising company. The aggregate of all the the data they collect from the vast number of services they operate is staggering. The seemingly innocent individual connections mask the big picture.
If you use Chrome, search, YouTube, Google+, Maps, Gmail and Android, think for a moment just how much data passes through Google and google controlled properties and how much someone would know about you if they had access to all of that data.
What does Google do as a company? Apple is a technology company, they make money selling hardware and software. Microsoft, same thing. How does Google make money? Selling technology? Nope. They OWN technology but they don't make any money from it directly. They allow people to use it for free, all of it. So how do they make money if not from selling technology or the use of technology?
Google is an advertising company. That is how they make money, that is what they do. You thought they were a technology company? Think again! Technology for Goggle serves three purposes:
1) it is a means of delivering ads which Google gets paid to deliver,
2) it is a means of collecting data for accurately targeting those ads,
3) it is a means of measuring the effectiveness of the ads in modifying your behaviour.
The better targeted an ad, the more you can charge for it. The data Google collects from and about you allows them to charge top dollar for the ads they are sending you. Those ads don't have to be on Google properties, they can be on sites like EEVBlog.com as well. Being able to demonstrate the effectiveness of those ads in modifying you behaviour further justifies the premium rate charged, and so it should, it's good value...for the advertiser.
You are not getting Google services for free. Advertisers pay for those services and in return they get to target you with their advertising. Google uses the information they collect about you to charge premium prices to those advertisers in a way most advantageous to them as a corporation. If that doesn't bother you then fine, but don't expect everyone else to give as few fucs as you do about being more effectively manipulated. The next time you walk into Wal*Mart to buy some rubbers and your Galaxy 4 pops up a message reminding you to buy lube as well, think of me, but thank Google.
-
I think I need to rethink vimeo. I have to grant them the right to use my videos for any use they want, and I get the privilege to pay for it too? Any ideas anyone?
You need to grant vimeo the right to use your videos so they can offer the service. The "anything they want" part is probably just a blanket opt-in so they can develop the service without having to ask every single publisher for permission for every change. If they had to tell you specifically how they were going to display your videos they wouldn't have many options.
YouTube has the same license grant.
-
The question is : do you really care ? i bet 99% of the comments appear on the forum.
No, youtube is a huge comments base.
As a content producer : simpy turn off commenting on the video and put a clear link to the forum below the video and mention it at the beginning of the video.
problem solved.
I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. Doing that kills your ranking on google, because commenting, liking, and general interaction with your channel is a major part of how youtube/google ranks your videos in search results. How many comments you get in the first X hours etc, contributes greatly. And youtube is the worlds 2nd biggest search engine. It's a big deal.
-
I make review videos of test equipment, mostly multimeters but others are coming. No scamming or making money from that.
I am also going to start publishing other types of videos and also to start showcasing some of my other multimedia services and work which are where I actually make money but not from showing them on the internet.
Youtube and google can die off for all I care. Youtube won't be getting any more of my content. Not that I am important or a big player but if everyone who doesn't make money from actually posting o youtube were to pull their content they would be in trouble I think.
I didn't mean to insinuate you were a scammer I just know of those money making schemes that use youtube as a private link and there are also normal blogs that do that as well. I sort of figured you were the latter not the former. :)
-
Well,,, at least some people get money out of this. >:D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTq8TrA3hb4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTq8TrA3hb4)
I effing love it. Thank you for sharing and I think she pretty much summed it up, lol.
-
Dave is right about everything and I am SO grateful he made a rant about this. To the average youtuber the new system may have advantages and I can see why they may like the new comment system but content creators have gotten SCREWED. The average Youtuber will never have any idea how awful this Google+ thing is for content creators. Dave is triple fucked because his entire livelihood depends on Youtube being functional and efficient and right now it's worse than Friendster.
-
just deleted my youtube account and the ramaining associated google stuff.
i dont let myself getting blackmailed into using google+ just for commenting on videos.
edit:
Doing that kills your ranking on google, because commenting, liking, and general interaction with your channel is a major part of how youtube/google ranks your videos in search results.
i've also deleted adobes flash a long time ago (since ccc's "defending the poor", see youtube for that video) so i cant view your videos the normal way - you're using some feature that prevents html5 video playback, so i have to download them "manually" before viewing.
does that still contribute to your youtube-ranking? i hope so :)
-
just deleted my youtube account and the ramaining associated google stuff.
i dont let myself getting blackmailed into using google+ just for commenting on videos.
How? I could not find a way to actually delete the account only shutdown the channel (it deletes everything).
-
Has anyone noticed the bizarre Google+ Legion that somehow completely dominated all the top comments of the latest EEVBlog, all pretty much saying the exact same thing?
-
How? I could not find a way to actually delete the account only shutdown the channel (it deletes everything).
cant remember. just clicked my way through some logically inconsistent pages, marked some checkboxes with a "i want so get rid of that 5hit" connotation and now i cant log in any more (youtube and gmail), which is sufficient for me.
-
Has anyone noticed the bizarre Google+ Legion that somehow completely dominated all the top comments of the latest EEVBlog, all pretty much saying the exact same thing?
Yes, the Google Asslicker Team has been out at all of these anti-G+ videos.
-
Has anyone noticed the bizarre Google+ Legion that somehow completely dominated all the top comments of the latest EEVBlog, all pretty much saying the exact same thing?
There's nothing bizarre about it. When Dave posted the video, it was shared to his EEVblog Google+ page. 2759 people have his EEVblog in their circles, so many of them would have seen the video show up in their feed. Here's what happend next:
Now that comments are integrated, the act of sharing the video showed up as a 'comment' by EEVblog in the Youtube comment area.
Whenever someone +1'd the video share on G+, it's the same as giving the comment a thumbs up on YouTube. So that comment bubbled to the top.
Now that comments are threaded, all the folks who commented on the video share through Google+ had their comment nested under the highly rated share comment. Any G+ +1's on these comments were counted as a thumbs up on YouTube.
So, all those comments, are merely the conversation happening on G+ by people who follow EEVblog there, and are talking about it there. Since they're all G+ users, they likely won't share the distaste for the change, as things are working as usual there, apart from an increase in YouTube video shares.
-
Has anyone noticed the bizarre Google+ Legion that somehow completely dominated all the top comments of the latest EEVBlog, all pretty much saying the exact same thing?
No ::)
-
Google is worried about our secutity.
Securiotic (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Dk2awGVJ-g#ws) >:D
-
I really hate this "default to top comments" which in many cases now fails since the up/down-vote system is removed.
Another annoying thing is that the youtube inbox is gone. I don't get much comments, but the inbox did actually work...
-
Fully concur, it's ridiculous to have each comments laid out in a separate email/page, instead of a easily browse-able list. I'm astonished that they thought this was acceptable.
And when you click on the reply button, it just take you to the general video page instead of a comment reply form.
FAIL.
-
I deleted my google stuff ages ago including youtube. I'm convinced youtube is an experiment to see how much they can piss off a userbase before they leave a website.
-
The question is : do you really care ? i bet 99% of the comments appear on the forum.
No, youtube is a huge comments base.
As a content producer : simpy turn off commenting on the video and put a clear link to the forum below the video and mention it at the beginning of the video.
problem solved.
I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. Doing that kills your ranking on google, because commenting, liking, and general interaction with your channel is a major part of how youtube/google ranks your videos in search results. How many comments you get in the first X hours etc, contributes greatly. And youtube is the worlds 2nd biggest search engine. It's a big deal.
ah. didn't know that.
Guess i'm becoming an old codger ... i never read comments under youtube video's or comment on them. I figured the interesting comments will pop up on the firum.
but i guess advertising clicks depend on video ranking and if that depends on commnets it now depends on the viewers and commenters having a google+ account.
if nobody comments anymore on any youtube video because a g+ account is mandatory then google just shot themselves in the foot...
-
Hey Dave,
here is an offer:
If you change from Youtube to another video service, or host it by yourself, and on your "http://www.eevblog.com/" mainpage you embed those videos, instead of youtube;
I will subscribe to those Monthly Paypal Donations with 6 AUD Montly for at least 3 years.
If you move to a video service that does not do commercials first, or host them yourself (and embed your own hosting on your mainpage) I will subscribe with 10 AUD.
I know, not much, but hey, maybe others will join.
cheers,
chippy.
Update : Here have a list of services : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_hosting_services (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_hosting_services)
-
Well this is my email to them perhaps if everyone sent them emails it may do something after all their really interested in is advertising revenue.
There is a saying you may not be aware of !!! “If it ain’t broke don't fix it” . What the bloody hell have you lot done google +, like just about everyone one else I don’t want people like you following my every move or as you lot would put “Tailoring the advertisement to suit your needs”this google is a marketing & profit move one step to far. therefore like a lot of other people I will be closing my google account.
I’m disgusted with your antics.
Paul Collins
UK
here's their email address press@google.com
-
I surrendered months ago. Figured that by now they will be knowing everything already :) , and my real life is not on the internet anyway.
They must have been able to create my consumer profile by now, after so many years on the web - I'm using my own name in blogs and fora - But when I look at the Ads they put in front of me, they're doing a lousy job.
-
Hmm, I would just ask for my money back. Oh wait, it was free... And they actually drive traffic to your sites so you can sell ads. Or am I missing something?
-
Hmm, I could just live with it. Oh wait, there are laws against it... They tell that you may not do whatever you want if you have a monopoly.
These Laws are the reason Windows does not require you to install Internet explorer, and there is even a Windows version N being sold without the mediaplayer.
Somehow the anti-monopoly laws until now only have hit microsoft. I would love to see what happens when google or apple are hit by them.
Some ruling like " You cannot shove G+ up the ass of your users just because you are the biggest video sharing platform" would be appreciated.
-
If you move to a video service that does not do commercials first, or host them yourself (and embed your own hosting on your mainpage)
I can assure you that hosting video myself is not an option in any way. It's barely a workable option for the 640x360 podcast version I have now, let alone with full HD and 20+ times as many viewers.
-
been watching all this G+ integration since it started last week... tbh i hardly ever posted a comment on YT as i just thought it was a crap system, all the comments were just pointless and it was hard to navigate. Though i think it could have been improved they didnt need to integrate it like this.
I have G+ account but never use it, pretty much like everyone else.
Given how much backlash there is from this i might expect some backtrack, but then it is google, which makes me think of this slightly altered quote from THX1138
Google: What's wrong?
Us: I just bought one of these yesterday, and it doesn't fit my consumer, and the store doesn't have any of the other kind.
Google: For more enjoyment and greater efficiency, consumption is being standardized. We are sorry ...
-
Even one of the Youtube founders, Jawed Karim, made a re-appearance on Youtube since very long time, only to post his opinion on the matter: "why the f*ck do i need a google+ account to comment on a video?"
https://www.youtube.com/user/jawed/feed (https://www.youtube.com/user/jawed/feed)
-
If you move to a video service that does not do commercials first, or host them yourself (and embed your own hosting on your mainpage)
I can assure you that hosting video myself is not an option in any way. It's barely a workable option for the 640x360 podcast version I have now, let alone with full HD and 20+ times as many viewers.
It might be possible with h265, but that's still at least 6 months to a year away. You can basically do the same quality in about half the size (or more if it's a lot of low motion stuff), so you might be able to encode 640x360 in as much disk space as a high quality MP3 file (256-320 kbps)
-
Even one of the Youtube founders, Jawed Karim, made a re-appearance...
Yup, I know the guy (worked at PayPal with him). A bit duplicitous of him too. That acquisition made him a multimillionaire, now he is inconvenienced too?
-
What's really happening here is Google's war on anonymity. There was already an uproar a year ago when Google started forcing a strict real name policy on G+. Lots of people left G+ then.
Now they're forcing G+ identities onto Youtube, therefore forcing a strict real name policy onto Youtube.
F-ed up UI issues aside, that's what is really happening here. No more nicknames on any Google product. All this crying about everything else is just a red herring.
Separation of your online identity from your offline identity is now STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. Have a nice day!
-
Put wireshark on your connection while using anything made by Google.
You will be shocked and if you have any sense be smashing it into pieces with a sledge. If you have a chromecast get rid of it right now. All of your info short of your SSN is being transmitted in plaintext.
Do you want to tell the nsa your home address, GPS location, phone number, full name, email, all relevant serial numbers, webpage url (in tab mirror), inferred related user IDs
-
Here's some insight into how the YT changes affect a more mainstream channel. It's far worse than anything I've seen on any channels I subscribe to. PLEASE Fix Youtube and Google+ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQjocZXHOg4#ws)
-
Nothing sums up this giant, smelly fart better than the comments on that guy's video. Wow, if you thought the YouTube comment section was a wretched hive before... it's gone from "wretched hive of scum and villainy" to "pathetic hive of trolls and puerility".
You'd think by 2013 we'd have figured out how not to fuck up this whole "ranking comments" thing. It's like they are sorting by I.Q. of poster, ascending.
-
As one that doesn't want Google to "know everything" , i use startpage.com and/or https://duckduckgo.com/ as my search
engines. And have g-analytics tamed also .... (noscript + hostfile).
So i hope i can watch the videos wo. a G+ account , and i will just comment here.
If i can't watch the videos wo. G+ , i will miss Dave's performance.
But will have to live with that decision :-(
I fear the worst , but hope for the best ....
Even though $$$ rules this world and soon all of the "net"
/Bingo
-
https://www.change.org/petitions/google-change-the-youtube-comment-section-back-to-its-original-form#share (https://www.change.org/petitions/google-change-the-youtube-comment-section-back-to-its-original-form#share)
Here's the petition
-
I know that from my subscribed users "Skallagrim" and "Aussie50" both did also a video about this nonsense. First one even provided the same link for this petition that I also signed.
What kind of dislodged mind takes to make such a mess that frustrates such a variety of people? I never seen anything so badly designed and wrote site than Google+. Looks like a work of an 5 year old kid.
I managed to keep my YouTube ID as DjResR though, suck on it google :P .
Hope for the best, expect the worst.
ResR.
-
Well known Science blogger ViHart is leaving Youtube..
http://vihart.com/google-youtube-integration-kind-of-like-twilight-except-in-this-version-when-cullen-drinks-bellatubes-blood-they-both-become-mortal-but-cullen-is-still-an-abusive-creep-also-it-is-still-bad/ (http://vihart.com/google-youtube-integration-kind-of-like-twilight-except-in-this-version-when-cullen-drinks-bellatubes-blood-they-both-become-mortal-but-cullen-is-still-an-abusive-creep-also-it-is-still-bad/)
-
:o
People with 15 mil subscribers are turning comments off. This has to send some message to Google.
-
I'm not sure about a message. I refuse to believe that managed to become this huge without employing lots of people with the foresight to see this coming. No, they knew this would happen, but something else was more important.
They know G+ is a failed shitstain.
-
Google did this because they have firm grip over peoples throats, people that invested many hundreds of hours building viewer base.
At this point all that needs to happen is FB offering revenue sharing Video platform and YT will dry up overnight. You know its bad when people with 15 MILLION (:o) subscribers turn off comments and sent people to Reddit instead.
-
Dave, maybe time to look at another service, must be something out there that isn't designed by committee and programmed by trained chimps.
-
The clowns in the Google marketing dept. all got together, brainstormed, and came up with this camel of a comments system/Google+ integration. It's why they earn the big bucks.
If they wanted to improve the comments system in Youtube, they could certainly have done that without going anywhere near G+. They didn't need G+ to introduce a nice nested/threaded comments design. And there are better ways to limit spam. The spam now is worse than it's ever been, and a lot of the genuine comments aren't getting through the retarded spam filter.
And what on earth made them think doing this would reduce anonymity? It's just as easy to be anonymous on G+/broken Youtube as on Youtube "classic".
-
Dave, maybe time to look at another service, must be something out there that isn't designed by committee and programmed by trained chimps.
Looking at current circumstances, I don't see Dave can easily dumps youtube and jumps ship, and I guess he has to live with it for a while. :-//
-
Well known Science blogger ViHart is leaving Youtube..
http://vihart.com/google-youtube-integration-kind-of-like-twilight-except-in-this-version-when-cullen-drinks-bellatubes-blood-they-both-become-mortal-but-cullen-is-still-an-abusive-creep-also-it-is-still-bad/ (http://vihart.com/google-youtube-integration-kind-of-like-twilight-except-in-this-version-when-cullen-drinks-bellatubes-blood-they-both-become-mortal-but-cullen-is-still-an-abusive-creep-also-it-is-still-bad/)
NOOOOOOooooo! I love Vihart! So sad.
-
And finally this is where Google plans to end:
http://tinyurl.com/kf4pvlg (http://tinyurl.com/kf4pvlg)
Now, for all us WW2 history aficionados, what does that remind you of ?
Maybe in the future it will not be Google+ but Auschwitz-Birkenau+ !?
-
People with 15 mil subscribers are turning comments off. This has to send some message to Google.
Who's that?
-
People with 15 mil subscribers are turning comments off. This has to send some message to Google.
Who's that?
https://www.youtube.com/user/PewDiePie/videos (https://www.youtube.com/user/PewDiePie/videos)
btw I have no idea who this guy is and what are those vids about :D I think Im 'too old for that shit' to quote the classic.
-
Holy damn, he is shutting off comments? I have never watched any of his videos.... but every single person I know has. Yeah, Google, you fucked up.
-
https://www.youtube.com/user/PewDiePie/videos (https://www.youtube.com/user/PewDiePie/videos)
Yeah, he's huge, 3rd in the world, or #1 according to social blade.
I know social blade can overestimate earnings, but holy cashcow batman:
http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/PewDiePie (http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/PewDiePie)
and little old me at #5629 on Youtube :-+
http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/eevblog (http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/eevblog)
Ah, found his reason why posted here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml7XA9BZ3iw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml7XA9BZ3iw)
-
http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/PewDiePie (http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/PewDiePie)
He is like Conan Obrien/Oprah of YT :-DD
Edit:
Correction, watched one vid, He is more of a AWW MY BALLS guy :/ oh the humanity
-
Ah, found his reason why posted here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml7XA9BZ3iw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml7XA9BZ3iw)
Probably unfair of me to judge entirely on that one video, but how in the hell did that guy get popular?
I want my 5 minutes back.
-
You made it through five minutes? I got one minute in and shot myself.
-
I though when I finally made it to the YT comments part, it might be worth it. :palm:
Francis HATES Google+ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZNHuFjnmUo#ws)
-
I noticed that you are not able to give thumbs up/down to comments before the change. I hate this because my question on the Q&A announcement was on top but now it is buried deep down (Thanks to everybody who liked it) (I am T.H. that asked about the most beautiful circuit).
Seriously speaking, I spent lots of time (before the change) reading through all the 200+ questions and giving thumbs up to the questions I really liked.. because I though it would help them to make it to the Q&A.. and now all the thumbs are gone for those "old" comments!! I really look forward for this Q&A and now google is screwing things up. Good thing is that Dave says he is reading the comments actively (at least trying, after the change).
- T.H. from Finland. (Not Tom of Finland)
-
You made it through five minutes? I got one minute in and shot myself.
Chill, bro. Pewdiepie is totally sick :-+
Actually, I think he must get really sick - he plays a lot of games with an Oculus Rift.
-
I'd give him another chance, but unfortunately, I am dead now. Dude shouldn't have made me kill myself!
-
I'd give him another chance, but unfortunately, I am dead now. Dude shouldn't have made me kill myself!
Hey, at least you're chilling... (http://i.imgur.com/Pq2hKiP.png)
-
Probably unfair of me to judge entirely on that one video, but how in the hell did that guy get popular?
Gamers.
I know a young guy in Australia who makes a full time living from doing gamer videos (I think there are a couple in oz actually), and there are hundreds like him. People just like to watch them playing games.
-
Seriously speaking, I spent lots of time (before the change) reading through all the 200+ questions and giving thumbs up to the questions I really liked.. because I though it would help them to make it to the Q&A.. and now all the thumbs are gone for those "old" comments!! I really look forward for this Q&A and now google is screwing things up.
Yep, I'm really pissed off at that.
I'm in two minds whether to turn comments off like others have done.
-
I'm in two minds whether to turn comments off like others have done.
please do that!
and add a link to this forum to the video description - maybe even the link to the thread related to the specific video :)
-
and add a link to this forum to the video description - maybe even the link to the thread related to the specific video :)
+1
Comments turned off always meant someone didnt want/care about feedback, but now comments are useless anyway, not to mention people that have something interesting to say would register anyway.
-
and add a link to this forum to the video description - maybe even the link to the thread related to the specific video :)
I've been doing that for the last few hundred videos!
-
and add a link to this forum to the video description - maybe even the link to the thread related to the specific video :)
I've been doing that for the last few hundred videos!
oh sorry - never noticed!
maybe because in the past i could simply ralf a comment just below the video… so by all means continue doing that *and* lock the comments :)
-
and add a link to this forum to the video description - maybe even the link to the thread related to the specific video :)
I've been doing that for the last few hundred videos!
I fully understand that you are hesitating to change the current way of "things".
Because it is part of your income.
But, maybe because i am not a "professional/experienced" youtube user, i think (maybe i am wrong) the comment system is totally independent of the thumbs up/down voting system.
So, if your revenue is only depenent of the number of views (i'm just speculating, i don't know how youtube calculates your revenue) you maybe could just add a explanatory statement why the link to the forum is (now) the only way to comment.
But, as i said, i don't know if his would cut down your status/income on youtube.
Regards, Martin
-
I want my 5 minutes back.
:-DD
Don't you wish you could do that?
-
I fully understand that you are hesitating to change the current way of "things".
Because it is part of your income.
I don't care about the money too much. It's more than that, it's about the nearly 100,000 loyal subscribers I have on Youtube.
For me to turn the comments off for my own personal protest would just hurt those people who chose to use Youtube to send me comments. I get many hundreds of comments every day across all my videos.
But, maybe because i am not a "professional/experienced" youtube user, i think (maybe i am wrong) the comment system is totally independent of the thumbs up/down voting system.
So, if your revenue is only depenent of the number of views (i'm just speculating, i don't know how youtube calculates your revenue) you maybe could just add a explanatory statement why the link to the forum is (now) the only way to comment.
But, as i said, i don't know if his would cut down your status/income on youtube.
No, it likely wouldn't affect my income that much. I make the majority of my money outside of Youtube.
What turning off comments would do (assuming it doesn't turn people off actually viewing) is to lower the ranking of my videos in the search results.
The search results are quite dependent upon which videos have the most "social interaction" in the time after it is released.
So what that does to my channel overall in the long term I don't know. But I know it ceratinly wouldn't kill my channel.
-
For me to turn the comments off for my own personal protest would just hurt those people who chose to use Youtube to send me comments. I get many hundreds of comments every day across all my videos.
...snip
What turning off comments would do (assuming it doesn't turn people off actually viewing) is to lower the ranking of my videos in the search results.
The search results are quite dependent upon which videos have the most "social interaction" in the time after it is released.
So what that does to my channel overall in the long term I don't know. But I know it ceratinly wouldn't kill my channel.
I think i understand. I intially thought that all that counts for this "social interaction/ranking" is the number of views. Apparently it seems to be much more complicated. Are there any official (or even unofficial) numbers how the different ways (number of views/number of comments) are weighted into this "social interaction/figure of merit"?. I stupidly assumed that the number of views would be the only (at least the most importent) number?
Regards, Martin
-
For me to turn the comments off for my own personal protest would just hurt those people who chose to use Youtube to send me comments.
Unfortunately none of us can comment on YouTube videos any more unless we accept the forced connection to G+, regardless of any changes you may make. So it would be interesting to know if you experience a drop in the comment volume following the impact event...
-
Unfortunately none of us can comment on YouTube videos any more unless we accept the forced connection to G+, regardless of any changes you may make. So it would be interesting to know if you experience a drop in the comment volume following the impact event...
At the moment I'm not sure, because the comment counter in video manager is broken! Currently only shows 19 comments for the new dumpster teardown video ::)
EDIT: The number shows up (maybe correctly) on the comment page itself. 94 comments. That's a bit low, but not uncommon for a video that's been there that long.
I won't be able to really tell for a week weeks until I get a decent graph to see the trend.
-
Were the rest trapped as SPAM?
This is beyond ridiculous. They have to rethink it... I can't imagine that they'd really be willing to alienate so many just to try to push a failed idea...
-
This is beyond ridiculous. They have to rethink it... I can't imagine that they'd really be willing to alienate so many just to try to push a failed idea...
They are not mutually exclusive. They can push their failed idea (G+) and make the comments work like it used to.
-
I wasn't implying that it was one or the other, just that they need to rethink the way they're doing it.
If they're going to insist on using G+, then at least make the site useable.
I guess I'm just not getting the thought process... if that's what anyone wants to call it. Seems to me that it was not well thought out at all. I won't pretend that I know the answer... but it seems to me that what they really ought to do is actually *fix* the comments, let people log in using whatever ID they want, and let G+ stand (or fail) on its own.
Makes you wonder what the real purpose here is. Would Google be willing to alienate so many people for the requirement that "real names" are used? Why? What (or who) is really behind that?
Choices like this kill small businesses. Just because Google is big, they get away with it? A bit like Microsoft, right? They choose to follow their own rules, ignoring standards wherever they want, because they can... just had a customer that wound up receiving appointments as plain email because Exchange had their addresses cached and thought they were Outlook clients. (They weren't.) The fix was to delete the addresses from the Exchange server and re-send the appointments fresh so that they went out in iCal format instead.
I don't know. :-// It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. It would be more interesting to really understand the thought process.
-
Choices like this kill small businesses. Just because Google is big, they get away with it? A bit like Microsoft, right?
Yep, that's how it works when you have a customer base invested in your stuff.
Same thing happened with Altium over the last 12 years. The only thing that saved them was that:
1) there was no competition in the feature set/price bracket
2) The customers are heavily invested in the tool in various ways
3) They keep doing stupid stuff, and moving in stupid directions small steps at a time. No one step is enough to cause people to throw up their hand and jump ship.
Youtube's problem here is that they forced G+ and screwed up comments. Either one would have been Youtube just doing it's regular thing, but now it's a double whammy and the rant effect multiples, not adds.
They choose to follow their own rules, ignoring standards wherever they want, because they can...
Forget standards, how about just sticking with what works, and what your users have come to expect.
Same thing with me, if I changed my videos to 2 minutes KipKay style, or over-produced Ben Heck style, I'd be out of business real quick!
-
Forget standards, how about just sticking with what works, and what your users have come to expect.
Same thing with me, if I changed my videos to 2 minutes KipKay style, or over-produced Ben Heck style, I'd be out of business real quick!
For me.. I don't watch either... I did watch KipKay somewhat but most of his videos/ideas are either stupid or obvious marketting and thus worth not watching. :--
This comment-spaming seen to have gone really bad. As far as I have seen a lot of well known channels (Earth Unplugged, Grant thomson, Asap science, minutephysics, Simonscat, DaSquirrelNuts, tyt, veritasium, vsauce1/2) are flooded with this same idiotic Ascii.art automated spam. Some others I follow (like Vihart, Fran) have closed the shop entirely while others seem just closed the comment sections since they just don't have time to filter out spam/porn etc.
On the other hand it seems not reached all youtubers. (Jeri Ellisworth, Ben krasnow, mikeselectricstuff, numberphile, HackaWeekTV, Techmoan, Bogotter, European Space Agency) don't seem to have any visible spam yet. I must admit that my check was quite fast so I don't know if this is due a lot admin work or if they have just been lucky so far.
-
This comment-spaming seen to have gone really bad. As far as I have seen a lot of well known channels (Earth Unplugged, Grant thomson, Asap science, minutephysics, Simonscat, DaSquirrelNuts, tyt, veritasium, vsauce1/2) are flooded with this same idiotic Ascii.art automated spam.
My channel has been hit by those, a few dozen at least. I've been going around deleting them. They weren't detected by the new spam filter! :palm:
Spam was very limited before.
-
This comment-spaming seen to have gone really bad. As far as I have seen a lot of well known channels (Earth Unplugged, Grant thomson, Asap science, minutephysics, Simonscat, DaSquirrelNuts, tyt, veritasium, vsauce1/2) are flooded with this same idiotic Ascii.art automated spam.
My channel has been hit by those, a few dozen at least. I've been going around deleting them. They weren't detected by the new spam filter! :palm:
Spam was very limited before.
Only a few dozen? Have you seen the state of some videos' comments areas!? Hundreds upon hundreds of ascii-bobs, tanks, swastikas, penises, etc all in a row. Spam galore. The so-called spam filter seems to filter out the legit comments and let the junk through. :-//
-
Only a few dozen?
I just found another 19 tanks on my rant video. Don't know about the 550 other videos...
Ban & delete time....
Make that 27 total since last time I deleted some + a few dozen actually in the spam folder (along with all the good comments of course)
-
Only a few dozen?
I just found another 19 tanks on my rant video. Don't know about the 550 other videos...
Ban & delete time....
Make that 27 total since last time I deleted some + a few dozen actually in the spam folder (along with all the good comments of course)
And there's more of them, at lest 3 tanks and some other 'ascii-art' on front page, not to mention other werbal trash.
-
Youtube's problem here is that they forced G+ and screwed up comments. Either one would have been Youtube just doing it's regular thing, but now it's a double whammy and the rant effect multiples, not adds.
Indeed. I think that they've outdone themselves.
Same thing with me, if I changed my videos to 2 minutes KipKay style, or over-produced Ben Heck style, I'd be out of business real quick!
Thank goodness you're a bit smarter than that. :phew:
Really though -- it wouldn't be you. In fact, I'd be surprised if you weren't chewing the bark off of trees in ten minutes if you had to put up with the production team. One of the things that I think everyone finds most endearing about you is that you "shoot from the hip", to use a very old and well-worn Americanism. (For those that don't get it, that means that Dave's honest, to-the-point and no-nonsense.) You couldn't do what you do in bite size pieces. And it wouldn't be anywhere near as entertaining, or informative, if you had to do that.
No, you know exactly what you're doing, and that's a very good thing indeed. Still amazes me that you aren't dropping F-bombs when you get going... I can imagine that would happen if you weren't vigilant...
-
Make that 27 total since last time I deleted some + a few dozen actually in the spam folder (along with all the good comments of course)
If it weren't such a pain in the arse, you'd have to laugh at it... I wonder if it would have even been possible for them to do any more damage. Whenever someone thinks they can idiot-proof something, someone comes along and makes a better idiot... :-DD
-
Really though -- it wouldn't be you. In fact, I'd be surprised if you weren't chewing the bark off of trees in ten minutes if you had to put up with the production team. One of the things that I think everyone finds most endearing about you is that you "shoot from the hip", to use a very old and well-worn Americanism. (For those that don't get it, that means that Dave's honest, to-the-point and no-nonsense.) You couldn't do what you do in bite size pieces. And it wouldn't be anywhere near as entertaining, or informative, if you had to do that.
That's not to say the others aren't of course. The point is that everyone builds up an audience based on their own style. It's when you change that, that's when people get pissed off. People hate change!
It's the same for any medium like TV, movies, Youtube, text bloggers, print media etc.
No, you know exactly what you're doing, and that's a very good thing indeed. Still amazes me that you aren't dropping F-bombs when you get going... I can imagine that would happen if you weren't vigilant...
I'm an F-bomb machine when the camera is off ;D
-
Here is another way to consume the EEVBlog videos
http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog (http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog)
-
You couldn't do what you do in bite size pieces. And it wouldn't be anywhere near as entertaining, or informative, if you had to do that.
That's not to say the others aren't of course.
Of course. Speaking personally, I much prefer your approach. Refreshing... a bit like a glass of perspective and soda.
I'm an F-bomb machine when the camera is off ;D
I'd suspected as much. I catch myself doing it at times too... but hey, few words can express what one good expletive can. >:D
-
Here is another way to consume the EEVBlog videos
http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog (http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog)
fixYT is a YouTube UI experiment that...
is much simpler and faster than youtube.com
supports privacy and stores no information
gets rid of amazing features (like recomendation)
I like it!
-
Here is another way to consume the EEVBlog videos
http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog (http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog)
It's brilliant. I like it a lot.
Why can't anyone at google comprehend that:
- Less is more
- Simple is better
- KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid!
They need to hire a designer who "gets it" and can advise the code-monkeys on how the whole Youtube site could be designed and laid out to make it logical and usable... and scrap G+!
-
Here is another way to consume the EEVBlog videos
http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog (http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog)
It's brilliant. I like it a lot.
Why can't anyone at google comprehend that:
i
- Simple is better
- KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid!
They need to hire a designer who "gets it" and can advise the code-monkeys on how the whole Youtube site could be designed and laid out to make it logical and usable... and scrap G+!
On my iPad they even got rid of the much overrated concept called 'sound'.
No :blah:.
-
On my iPad...
…something doesn't work, so it's the site's fault!
fixyt.com offers html5 video which plays better on my boxes as native youtube does. since i have no flash installed (like on iDevices) i had to manually download daves videos from yt to watch them - so YAY! fixyt.com!
-
does having the eevblog videos in several places fragment the view count to the detriment of Dave?
In this case the video are still on Youtube, and I still get the all the views counted, so no problem. Just like embedding my video anywhere else.
-
I've deleted my Google account now. I told them that if I wanted a social media account, I would be using Facebook.
-
and another fail
chernobyl 2013: radioactive ant bites & 115 mSv/h of pure gamma radiation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kg4vVYKc90#ws)
bionerd23 1 hour ago:
youtube just told ME, the fucking CHANNEL OWNER, that i cannot reply to a post from +antiprotons.
i'll post it here and hereby also STOP ANSWERING to any comments.
sorry for the inconvenience, but i'm no longer taking this fucking bullshit. seems like i cannot answer to posts older than 15 hours, haha. this is ridiculous!
i'm writing a complaint to google instead.
if you dont ever hear from me again, it's because google didnt change it and i refused to set an alarm clock for every 3 hours, even at night, to be able to reply to comments. seriously, i took all the bullshit, the new channel designs, etc. without much whining, but THIS makes me want to fucking quit youtube!
-
(http://i.imgur.com/fmsQk7W.gif)
:-DD
-
This is beyond ridiculous. They have to rethink it... I can't imagine that they'd really be willing to alienate so many just to try to push a failed idea...
They are not mutually exclusive. They can push their failed idea (G+) and make the comments work like it used to.
Know what is a little frightening? I logged out of my gmail account and when I tried to log back in it wanted me to attach G+ to it. What in the hell does a social network have anything to do with my personal email? This is getting out of hand if you asked me.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/fmsQk7W.gif)
:-DD
An animated GIF is worth a thousand words. ^-^
-
I refuse to join G+, so I won't be commenting on your videos on YouTube any more. Sorry Dave! I do enjoy watching them. Are you getting more activity on the forum as a result?
-
Looks like the connecting of Google+ and YouTube accounts is being used by others to shutdown channels. (http://www.dailydot.com/lifestyle/youtube-google-auto-shutdown/)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPOl2s7mjRc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPOl2s7mjRc#ws)
Edit:
We are still completing the work needed to fully disconnect your channel from Google+. Connecting will be available in about 20 minutes.well this is new
-
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/7049_569523236465498_28224629_n.jpg)
-
Well, it seems Google is winning or has won and the sheeple have just bent over for them as even my associates have told me to just get G+ and take it. They asked me why I am being so stubborn about it as people have finally learned how to use G+ to their advantage and I remain steadfast. Call it stubborn I don't care but never ever demand me to do something. You may ask but never demand and Google is demanding and for that they can shove it up their collective poo holes.
A bit sad that this generation, or should I say the modern person, seems so complacent and willing to have anything shoved on to them. :(
-
Another gripe about Youtube now, is with the annotations. I've turned annotations OFF by default in the settings, but still, every video starts with annotations ON, and I have to click the settings cog, and manually switch the buggers off every video I watch. Dammit, why have a preference for turning something off if you're going to just ignore it and force them to be on by default regardless? Grr. :rant:
-
:rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant:
My views:
http://youtu.be/MxrhOaKfgXk (http://youtu.be/MxrhOaKfgXk)
http://youtu.be/y18uZN-7Npo (http://youtu.be/y18uZN-7Npo)
http://youtu.be/hJ6lUfH36qk (http://youtu.be/hJ6lUfH36qk)
I am unable to express how much I HATE! these changes and how they have buggered the experience for me, while I have decided to continue making content. I refuse the link the accounts with this bullshit and I cannot receive comments, even the bloody view counter is dead. This change has brought nothing good, not even 0.000000000000000000001% of it has improve the site in any way. The site had decreased the functionality YouTube by 100% * 20 orders of magnitude to the power of 1000. could say it's a Googleplex worse. It has ruined to community and damaged free speech.
-
Is it possible to get your money back ?
-
:rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant:
My views:
http://youtu.be/MxrhOaKfgXk (http://youtu.be/MxrhOaKfgXk)
http://youtu.be/y18uZN-7Npo (http://youtu.be/y18uZN-7Npo)
http://youtu.be/hJ6lUfH36qk (http://youtu.be/hJ6lUfH36qk)
I am unable to express how much I HATE! these changes and how they have buggered the experience for me, while I have decided to continue making content. I refuse the link the accounts with this bullshit and I cannot receive comments, even the bloody view counter is dead. This change has brought nothing good, not even 0.000000000000000000001% of it has improve the site in any way. The site had decreased the functionality YouTube by 100% * 20 orders of magnitude to the power of 1000. could say it's a Googleplex worse. It has ruined to community and damaged free speech.
The thing is that if the content providers manned up and grew a pair and told Google to go Eff themselves by closing down their channel, as I did, then Google would have taken notice and reversed itself but as long as people even half way goes along they win.
This whole effing mentality of the modern sheeple of going along to get along has to cease or it will be the end to more than just freedom for a lot of people.
-
If only...
Because Google is monetizing YouTube, they don't much care about most content providers. They're going to make their money off the big guys -- the commercial content producers like TV networks, etc. The smaller guys like you just don't represent a big enough market.
At least that's the way they're behaving. I don't claim to have any inside knowledge here.
You are right that the only solution is to vote with your feet, but then someone has to man up and build another CDN that can replace YouTube. And you can't expect it to be free either, unless you can find a large number of very geographically-dispersed people willing to give up some of their bandwidth for the cause. Even then it's likely to require some support to keep it going.
I just don't think you'll be able to convince the average "sheeple" to go along with you on this one. They don't care enough about it... they only want to be entertained, and many of them will be more than happy to part with some of their hard-earned money to get that.
-
If only...
Because Google is monetizing YouTube, they don't much care about most content providers. They're going to make their money off the big guys -- the commercial content producers like TV networks, etc. The smaller guys like you just don't represent a big enough market.
At least that's the way they're behaving. I don't claim to have any inside knowledge here.
You are right that the only solution is to vote with your feet, but then someone has to man up and build another CDN that can replace YouTube. And you can't expect it to be free either, unless you can find a large number of very geographically-dispersed people willing to give up some of their bandwidth for the cause. Even then it's likely to require some support to keep it going.
I just don't think you'll be able to convince the average "sheeple" to go along with you on this one. They don't care enough about it... they only want to be entertained, and many of them will be more than happy to part with some of their hard-earned money to get that.
Lets say they have 10 "stars" and the rest of us. Alright if the rest of us closed down our channels those 10 "stars" wouldn't be enough of a revenue stream for Google and they would take notice.
As to your second idea you do realize that Youtube is considering going for pay, right? One of their execs let it slip as one of their ideas to combat the Adblock Plus fiasco.
-
Because Google is monetizing YouTube, they don't much care about most content providers.
As to your second idea you do realize that Youtube is considering going for pay, right? One of their execs let it slip as one of their ideas to combat the Adblock Plus fiasco.
Um... isn't that what I said?
-
The thing is that if the content providers manned up and grew a pair and told Google to go Eff themselves by closing down their channel, as I did, then Google would have taken notice and reversed itself but as long as people even half way goes along they win.
It ain't that easy.
Have you considered that shutting down your youtube channel in protest can:
1) hurt your viewers who still choose to watch through youtube
2) kill the channel and content for those for eek out living from it. most youtubers get very little or no revenue from other means, that means they would no longer be able to do it full time, and hence the content will ultimately suffer.
So for a full time content creator to shut down their youtube channel hurts the viewers, themselves, and the content. And for what?
-
I just don't think you'll be able to convince the average "sheeple" to go along with you on this one. They don't care enough about it... they only want to be entertained
And really, you can't blame them.
Now if ALL of my audience, or even the majority of my audience wanted me to move away from youtube then I'd certainly consider doing it (and take the financial hit), but the fact is they don't, and then are the silent voices of the 25,000 or random viewers I get per day just from searching for my content and stumbling across it.
-
Lets say they have 10 "stars" and the rest of us.
You are off by an order.
They have (exactly) 100 channels who have more than billion views:
http://socialblade.com/youtube/top/5000/mostviewed (http://socialblade.com/youtube/top/5000/mostviewed)
And almost 1900 if you count 100 million views as being a "star".
As to your second idea you do realize that Youtube is considering going for pay, right? One of their execs let it slip as one of their ideas to combat the Adblock Plus fiasco.
Link?
-
Lets say they have 10 "stars" and the rest of us.
You are off by an order.
They have (exactly) 100 channels who have more than billion views:
http://socialblade.com/youtube/top/5000/mostviewed (http://socialblade.com/youtube/top/5000/mostviewed)
And almost 1900 if you count 100 million views as being a "star".
Wow...26 out of the top 100 are VEVO channels for pop music stars. I think YouTube has taken over the entire music video game from MTV and VH1. Neither of those channels show music videos at all any more, so that means that pop groups are making videos solely for broadcast on YouTube.
-
Now if ALL of my audience, or even the majority of my audience wanted me to move away from youtube then I'd certainly consider doing it (and take the financial hit)
No, don't even think about that, Dave. You're not in this for altruism, it's your vocation, and you have a family that depends on you.
Stand for what you believe in, by all means -- but don't hurt yourself in the process. It's not worth it.
-
The thing is that if the content providers manned up and grew a pair and told Google to go Eff themselves by closing down their channel, as I did, then Google would have taken notice and reversed itself but as long as people even half way goes along they win.
It ain't that easy.
Have you considered that shutting down your youtube channel in protest can:
1) hurt your viewers who still choose to watch through youtube
2) kill the channel and content for those for eek out living from it. most youtubers get very little or no revenue from other means, that means they would no longer be able to do it full time, and hence the content will ultimately suffer.
So for a full time content creator to shut down their youtube channel hurts the viewers, themselves, and the content. And for what?
So, you rather take it up the poop shoot and allow them to walk all over you just for the lousy bit of money you are making? Well, that is pretty bad of anyone who does that as it is rather whorish AND that is exactly how come their G+ scam is working.
-
Lets say they have 10 "stars" and the rest of us.
You are off by an order.
They have (exactly) 100 channels who have more than billion views:
http://socialblade.com/youtube/top/5000/mostviewed (http://socialblade.com/youtube/top/5000/mostviewed)
And almost 1900 if you count 100 million views as being a "star".
As to your second idea you do realize that Youtube is considering going for pay, right? One of their execs let it slip as one of their ideas to combat the Adblock Plus fiasco.
Link?
I am looking but this one report had one of the Google, or it was YT, exces spouting off about going for pay since adblock plus, and no script, was hurting revenues.
I did just find this from 2012 http://nypost.com/2012/05/11/youtube-considering-introducing-subscription-based-streaming-service/ (http://nypost.com/2012/05/11/youtube-considering-introducing-subscription-based-streaming-service/)
http://adage.com/article/digital/youtube-set-introduce-paid-subscriptions-spring/239437/ (http://adage.com/article/digital/youtube-set-introduce-paid-subscriptions-spring/239437/)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270489/YouTube-takes-TV-subscription-channel-plan-charging-3-month.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270489/YouTube-takes-TV-subscription-channel-plan-charging-3-month.html)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/01/30/youtube_subscriptions_coming_says_report/ (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/01/30/youtube_subscriptions_coming_says_report/)
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/technology/reports-youtube-considering-subscription-channels/49760 (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/technology/reports-youtube-considering-subscription-channels/49760)
Those are about channels but the one I saw was about all of us so maybe they are going to try this on a per channel basis first?
-
Now if ALL of my audience, or even the majority of my audience wanted me to move away from youtube then I'd certainly consider doing it (and take the financial hit)
No, don't even think about that, Dave. You're not in this for altruism, it's your vocation, and you have a family that depends on you.
Stand for what you believe in, by all means -- but don't hurt yourself in the process. It's not worth it.
That right there is why Google won. Thanks for playing.
-
Now if ALL of my audience, or even the majority of my audience wanted me to move away from youtube then I'd certainly consider doing it (and take the financial hit)
No, don't even think about that, Dave. You're not in this for altruism, it's your vocation, and you have a family that depends on you.
Stand for what you believe in, by all means -- but don't hurt yourself in the process. It's not worth it.
That right there is why Google won. Thanks for playing.
When was the last time you walked away from an income because you didn't like the rules? And how did that work out for you?
-
Now if ALL of my audience, or even the majority of my audience wanted me to move away from youtube then I'd certainly consider doing it (and take the financial hit)
No, don't even think about that, Dave. You're not in this for altruism, it's your vocation, and you have a family that depends on you.
Stand for what you believe in, by all means -- but don't hurt yourself in the process. It's not worth it.
That right there is why Google won. Thanks for playing.
When was the last time you walked away from an income because you didn't like the rules? And how did that work out for you?
I have done it several times in my life and never regretted it. I have this thing called morals and scruples and they are not for sale.
-
Morals and scruples really have nothing to do with it, though I can appreciate taking a stand for something you feel strongly about.
Most people wouldn't do that, and with good reason. In China and Taiwan, they refer to it as "breaking the rice bowl" -- culturally not such a good thing.
I'm glad you never regretted it, but it would be foolish of Dave to work against what he's worked so hard to build.
-
So, you rather take it up the poop shoot and allow them to walk all over you just for the lousy bit of money you are making?
No. What part of the "it will hurt my viewers who still choose to watch through youtube" didn't you understand?
The vast majority of my users watch via youtube, and youtube alone.
THAT is the primary reason I'm sticking with youtube.
If you don't agree, fine, but please don't give me shit for caring about my audience and how they chose to watch my content. It's not just about me and my hatred of this G+ change.
-
I'm glad you never regretted it, but it would be foolish of Dave to work against what he's worked so hard to build.
It's not just that, I'm one of the few full time youtubers (except the mega stars) who would stand a good chance of surviving dumping Youtube. But like I said, it's not just about me. My audience chose to watch me on youtube, so I stick with it. Even if I had a million bucks and didn't need the money, I'd still stick with youtube because my audience would want me to.
-
I am looking but this one report had one of the Google, or it was YT, exces spouting off about going for pay since adblock plus, and no script, was hurting revenues.
I did just find this from 2012 http://nypost.com/2012/05/11/youtube-considering-introducing-subscription-based-streaming-service/ (http://nypost.com/2012/05/11/youtube-considering-introducing-subscription-based-streaming-service/)
You've got that completely wrong. Youtube never had any intention at all of forcing channels into charging for content to view it. It's just a "premium" content option if a channel owner chooses to use it. Never happened for the masses anyway, I don't have access to it.
-
No, don't even think about that, Dave. You're not in this for altruism, it's your vocation, and you have a family that depends on you.
Stand for what you believe in, by all means -- but don't hurt yourself in the process. It's not worth it.
The point is moot, because hardly anyone would want me to switch from Youtube anyway.
-
I am looking but this one report had one of the Google, or it was YT, exces spouting off about going for pay since adblock plus, and no script, was hurting revenues.
I did just find this from 2012 http://nypost.com/2012/05/11/youtube-considering-introducing-subscription-based-streaming-service/ (http://nypost.com/2012/05/11/youtube-considering-introducing-subscription-based-streaming-service/)
You've got that completely wrong. Youtube never had any intention at all of forcing channels into charging for content to view it. It's just a "premium" content option if a channel owner chooses to use it. Never happened for the masses anyway, I don't have access to it.
I bet it was a PR scare tactic they were doing and I said when I read it (wish I could have found the link but oh, well) but you, me, and everyone else on Youtube have been immensely hurt by AdBlock plus. Google has been really hurt with noscript and Adblock plus because it removes all revenue from them, and us. Don't try and tell me that out of 4k views I made nothing from it and that is due to adblock plus mainly. No one is kidding anyone about adblock plus hurting everyone but you know what is funny, Dave, about the ADP fiasco? When I went scanning to understand why people were watching my videos and I wasn't getting jack for the views (this is when I saw the snippet with the YT exec saying they were thinking about going pay) I stumbled onto a lot of channels against ADP. Know what the overwhelming response was from their comments? I was a tad shocked by it but the overwhelming people told them all to get a job and stop trying to use YT to make money.
So, you have an audience. You quit your day job to make YT work for you (grats on that part your hard work and time paid off) but your audience, that you care so much about, is more than likely using ADP + noscript so all of your hard work is a few pennies per 10k views if that.
Frankly I do not see how you manage to make any living wage off of YT unless you have 5 million views each vid and you pump out a lot of vids. I mean I had 8k view spread out over a bunch of videos and made $2.02. Extrapolate that to a living wage and you can see how bad ADP + Noscript has hurt us now think of Google and what they must be doing about those addons and why they are trying to shove G+ down our throats. How they think that will make them the revenue they once had before ADP and NoScript is beyond me but I am sure this was a huge factor in it in back room underhanded discussions. Most companies would have just admitted G+ was a failure and move on OR try and make it way better and something people would want to flock to not be demanded to have it.
-
Honestly, the only reason I watch the EEVBlog videos on You Tube is because that's where they're hosted.
If they were hosted elsewhere, I'd watch them there.
I have a You Tube account, but have never uploaded anything to it. Instead I have used Vimeo, less restrictions, it was free (unless I wanted more space or longer video uploads).
I recently added adblock to my Chrome browser, why? Because I HATE all of the freaking commercials that come up on You Tube now. When it was just the banner at the bottom of a video, I could click on to close, that was fine. but now there's ads between videos, some you can't skip, some are 30+ minutes long (though, those ones you can skip), but still if, I put on a playlist and walk away because I'm listening to the stream, more than watching it, I now have to sit through those ads listening to them.
In short, if the videos started being hosted elsewhere, I'd gladly watch there.
-
^^
I agree 100% with what SixShooter says. I have installed Adblock on my Chrome browser and my YT watching experience improved greatly. It also allows me to look at newspaper web pages without my browser having to reboot every 5 seconds during uploading of the home page!
Only problem is that YT has a monopoly on internet videos and Vimeo has shortcomings (eg no capacity to add closed captions/subtitles)
I am missing being able to interact positively with YT content producers now that I deleted my YT channel.
-
So, you have an audience. You quit your day job to make YT work for you (grats on that part your hard work and time paid off) but your audience, that you care so much about, is more than likely using ADP + noscript so all of your hard work is a few pennies per 10k views if that.
No, you are wrong, it's nothing like a few pennies per 10K views. I'm not allowed to say the exact figure but it's way higher than that on average
Frankly I do not see how you manage to make any living wage off of YT unless you have 5 million views each vid and you pump out a lot of vids.
Once again, youtube views alone is not enough to live off, that's why I have other revenue streams.
And like I said in my Ignite video, you need roughly 100K views per day to make a full time living from it. But depends entirely upon what your idea of a full time wage is.
I mean I had 8k view spread out over a bunch of videos and made $2.02.
That is likely because your channel is right down the food chain (i.e. not popular enough). The higher up the youtube food chain you go, the more slice of the higher paying ad revenue you get. It's not one value for all people, it's all about how youtube ranks your channel and a particular video, and how the big advertisers want their ad money spent.
If you stuck with youtube for long enough and your channel got popular enough, you would see very significant step changes in your revenue as you progress up the food chain.
Also, it is highly dependent upon the type of video and the keywords. Not all videos are equal, one video can make a lot more than another video with the same views, once again it's the spread of how the advertiser wants to spend their money.
But it's clear that never happened for you, so you've wrongly concluded it's the same linear extrapolation for everyone.
-
I would also follow the EEVBlog wherever it went.
-
Honestly, the only reason I watch the EEVBlog videos on You Tube is because that's where they're hosted.
Agree ... Actually I agree the entire post.. but wanted to cut the quote. Since the files are there, I\ll use youtube. Not cause I want to.
Also there are quite many (under 100) channels I regularly watch on youtube, so even if Dave would move, I would keep on following at lease some of those on toob.
-
Honestly, the only reason I watch the EEVBlog videos on You Tube is because that's where they're hosted.
Agree ... Actually I agree the entire post.. but wanted to cut the quote. Since the files are there, I\ll use youtube. Not cause I want to.
Also there are quite many (under 100) channels I regularly watch on youtube, so even if Dave would move, I would keep on following at lease some of those on toob.
That's why I said it's likely I'd survive moving away from youtube.
At least in the short term, my website ad revenue wouldn't stop overnight. But long term is a different matter. A very large part of the industry deems social media success and influence to be popularity on youtube. If I don't exist at all on youtube, then to many of them I'm "off the grid" and hence lack the influence and visibility I currently do, and not backed up by publicly accessible figures etc. That could lead to a large drop in revenue over time.
For youtube to be booted as the "only game in town" would require almost every content producer to abandon ship, and that's simply not possible. There is no other video CDN system that can compete on the same scale.
-
What about using another CDN in addition to YT?
-
If the advertisers value you based on YouTube views, any additional source for the videos would have negative impact.
-
With all of the backlash against G+ it's pretty obvious, at least to me, that there will be a migration away from You Tube use. I'm sure you'll see less new channels being started on You Tube and started on other video sharing sites, it's just going to take time. Which site will that be? Who knows, it may not even exist yet. I don't see this happening very quickly, because people are so used to using You Tube, that it's almost ingrained in our society, much like Google has become. It used to be when we needed to look up information, we would go to an encyclopedia, or the library to look through the collections of books, now we "Google" something, just like it used to be "I'm going to share this video with my friends" has become "I'm going to You Tube this."
Once people start breaking free of this mentality, it won't be seen as something to measure success by, personally I've never measured someone's success by how many views they get on You Tube, nor would I penalize them for using another source, but that's beside the point.
At this point You Tube just has a very strong market share of video sharing, but if they keep going the way they are, they will push more and more people away from the service and will be abandoned by everyone but the hard core users, remember MySpace?
-
When that happens, how are we going to know if it is because of G+ ?
-
You won't, at least it won't be solely because of G+, it will be a combination of everything that keeps changing that doesn't need to, forcing people to move to other video sharing sites.
This latest G+ fiasco is just the tipping point.
-
What about using another CDN in addition to YT?
That would just dilute my views, comments, and cost me extra time in upload and management. It pays for a full time content producer to consolidate all this stuff in one place.
I grudgingly produce a podcast version of the show because some people still want it, but no one is really asking for an alternative host to youtube. A couple of people just want me to quit youtube in protest, which as I've explained is a very poor option.
-
With all of the backlash against G+ it's pretty obvious, at least to me, that there will be a migration away from You Tube use. I'm sure you'll see less new channels being started on You Tube and started on other video sharing sites, it's just going to take time.
Why would any new video content producer chose anything other than Youtube?
Virtually all video bloggers use youtube, so any newbie who wants to make a go of it will naturally chose youtube. You need a g+ account to do it? they won't care.
At this point You Tube just has a very strong market share of video sharing, but if they keep going the way they are, they will push more and more people away from the service and will be abandoned by everyone but the hard core users, remember MySpace?
I don't like the comparison with Myspace because it's chalk and cheese. Youtube isn't the huge success it is just because "it's Youtube", it's because it works on a huge technical level. CDN hosting for video is incredibly complex and expensive business (perhaps THE biggest problem in all of internet service hosting), and no one else can touch youtube in that regard. And it's not like someone can just start a site (e.g. Facebook) that competes and rent some cloud server space until they grow, the technical infrastructure is much more complex than a social media site like MySpace.
-
It's popularity cycles. At some point YT will fall out of favor will the masses, and it's already moving that way, which is why there are other video hosting sites popping up. If YT was the great success they want us to believe, no other sites would exist.
There seems to be enough people that don't want G+ accounts and so anybody looking to start a new channel (blogging or otherwise) that doesn't want a G+ account will go elsewhere.
I've always found that if one form of a certain type of item, real or virtual, can be created, another and possibly better version can also be created, regardless of how difficult it may be.
-
It's popularity cycles. At some point YT will fall out of favor will the masses, and it's already moving that way, which is why there are other video hosting sites popping up. If YT was the great success they want us to believe, no other sites would exist.
Not so. Other sites will always appear as there will always be people who think they can do it better. That's the same for every industry.
-
I consume a lot of online video content, and I have seen some major channels (namely Channel Awesome/TGWTG) moving to alternatives to YouTube such as BlipTV. I don't like the Blip player because of inconsistent compatibility with Apple computers, but it is a viable alternative to YT. A lot of YouTubers are also producing content on TwitchTV, and storing some of their videos as Twitch highlights instead of uploading to YT.
There's no doubt that YT is the 800 pound gorilla right now, but content producers looking to simply maximize ad revenue are actively seeking other providers.
-
I consume a lot of online video content, and I have seen some major channels (namely Channel Awesome/TGWTG) moving to alternatives to YouTube such as BlipTV. I don't like the Blip player because of inconsistent compatibility with Apple computers, but it is a viable alternative to YT.
How so?
It doesn't even show the number of video views, have a rating system, or have audience interaction with comments.
-
In the case of Channel Awesome, they host the video comments and rating system on their own site. EEVBlog could probably do the same since you already have a fairly active forum, but they system has a high barrier to entry for new content providers trying to gain an audience.
-
In the case of Channel Awesome, they host the video comments and rating system on their own site. EEVBlog could probably do the same since you already have a fairly active forum, but they system has a high barrier to entry for new content providers trying to gain an audience.
But that's the whole point. It's about being a competitor to Youtube, which it clearly isn't the same league if it doesn't have that basic stuff.
-
For the record, I'm not in favor of you dropping YouTube. YT does have some technical issues that annoy me at times, but for the most part, it works well. I don't like G+, but then again, I hardly ever leave YT comments. I also already had a G+ account, so the switch didn't really affect me at all.
I was just providing an example of other content providers that have dropped YT in favor of an alternative. I think they have greater control over the advertising on Blip, and they get a larger percentage of the revenue. Of course, that is a guess on my part since I don't know their finances.
-
I agree that YT isn't here to stay. The most important thing I've learned about technology is that it is always changing and unpredictable. There will be newer, more forward thinking ideas, and websites like YT will become a memory. You have to keep your mind open. For example, two trends I'm seeing are the convergence of technology, and new ways to interact with it.
-
I agree that YT isn't here to stay. The most important thing I've learned about technology is that it is always changing and unpredictable. There will be newer, more forward thinking ideas, and websites like YT will become a memory. You have to keep your mind open.
Sure, and if a suitable competing site comes along, I'll jump on it. But at present, there isn't really anything that competes that makes it worth the switch.
And as stated, given the huge logistical issues with video CDN, any competition isn't going to happen overnight, esp if everyone switches.
e.g. Vimeo and BlipTV might work fine in their current niche state, but do they have the infrastructure to handle the volume Youtube handles?
-
So, you have an audience. You quit your day job to make YT work for you (grats on that part your hard work and time paid off) but your audience, that you care so much about, is more than likely using ADP + noscript so all of your hard work is a few pennies per 10k views if that.
No, you are wrong, it's nothing like a few pennies per 10K views. I'm not allowed to say the exact figure but it's way higher than that on average
I said a few pennies because ADBlock Plus, and Noscript makes sure you do not get paid (a subject I noticed right off you did not even respond to).
Frankly I do not see how you manage to make any living wage off of YT unless you have 5 million views each vid and you pump out a lot of vids.
Once again, youtube views alone is not enough to live off, that's why I have other revenue streams.
And like I said in my Ignite video, you need roughly 100K views per day to make a full time living from it. But depends entirely upon what your idea of a full time wage is.
A living wage is that which I would not make doing a for pay job or say what I used to make in 1998 which was 21 an hour. An almost godly wage back then and now I consider a simple living wage considering most people in the USA make $7.25 to $8.50 an hour (our federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour).
I mean I had 8k view spread out over a bunch of videos and made $2.02.
That is likely because your channel is right down the food chain (i.e. not popular enough). The higher up the youtube food chain you go, the more slice of the higher paying ad revenue you get. It's not one value for all people, it's all about how youtube ranks your channel and a particular video, and how the big advertisers want their ad money spent.
If you stuck with youtube for long enough and your channel got popular enough, you would see very significant step changes in your revenue as you progress up the food chain.
Also, it is highly dependent upon the type of video and the keywords. Not all videos are equal, one video can make a lot more than another video with the same views, once again it's the spread of how the advertiser wants to spend their money.
But it's clear that never happened for you, so you've wrongly concluded it's the same linear extrapolation for everyone.
Too many variables and all tricks to make sure they make the money and most people do not.
-
No, you are wrong, it's nothing like a few pennies per 10K views. I'm not allowed to say the exact figure but it's way higher than that on average
I said a few pennies because ADBlock Plus, and Noscript makes sure you do not get paid (a subject I noticed right off you did not even respond to).
Huh?
I responded to your (incorrect) statement that I would get paid pennies because of Adblock etc, I do NOT get paid pennies or anything close to the low value that you got paid, and I went to some length to explain to you why that you got bugger all, and I and others get paid fairly well (but not enough to live on for me). It seems that Adblock has little effect on my youtube income, although it's hard to get data on that if at all. Your problem of lack of income is more likely to be the reasons I mentioned, instead of being due mainly to Adblock etc. I would like to know exactly where you get your data from that shows how many of your viewers use Adblock and how much you actually lost because of it. To my knowledge no such data is available, but I stand to be corrected.
I've been using Adsense since before Adblock came along, and meager income was common back then for me too when my sites were not very popular.
A living wage is that which I would not make doing a for pay job or say what I used to make in 1998 which was 21 an hour. An almost godly wage back then and now I consider a simple living wage considering most people in the USA make $7.25 to $8.50 an hour (our federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour).
I get around 25K-30K views/day, and at that level I could live off that if I absolutely had to, I would not starve. It is above the minimum wage. Like said in my Ignite thing, I recon you need about 100K views to day to make a really comfortable living by Australian standards.
Look here for any channel:
http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/eevblog (http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/eevblog)
That Social Blade earning estimate has a large window, why? because there are many factors involved in how much anyone can and does earn.
Too many variables and all tricks to make sure they make the money and most people do not.
I think you are under some misapprehension about how Adsense works. Don't blame Google, blame the advertisers if they don't want to spend their ad dollars on a channel with poor keyword SEO, a few 10's of thousands of views, and poor interaction metrics. Google Adwords provides the intelligent mechanism to allow the advertisers to spend their money however they want. It's a well known fact in the industry that the big advertisers like to pay more to be featured on the top channels when it comes to blanket advertising. Different ballgame again for targeted keywords, and you may not have had keywords that anyone wants to spend any money on, or the money get diluted because of blanket use of the keyword.
Simply put, there are many variables that would explain why you paid bugger all, to say it's due mainly to Adblock is to ignore those facts.
-
Bah, youtube. I have considered deleting my account, but I keep it since I like Daves videos, etc. As others here have said youtube popularity will wane and a new sensation will come along, and do the same thing Google has. It's depressing and a right annoyance that Google continues to rip the website apart, but so many like Dave can't just leave their majority veiwer base behind. Like when so many in Daves latest contest comments section were complaining that they had to use the forum to enter it, so there is clearly a lot of people who would be angry if he switched.
-
Let me break it down for you Dave. You would not need near as many views to make the same amount of money as you do OR you could have the same amount of views and make a ton more if it were not for Adblock plus and NoScript. Don't deny it because everyone, including Google, has admitted how much revenue it has "stolen" from them and from them means from you as well.
That was my point.
edit: So, if I had used keywords of say SEX, TOYS, CARS, SPORTS CARS, and my content had nothing to do with them they would have made more just not as much as if 70% of viewers weren't using adblocking software (no ads no pay)?
As far as where I get my data it comes from looking around the web and spending weeks listening to CEOs/CFOs and content providers. I followed links to links that had links in them. If you want just a one click point of reference it isn't going to happen for various reasons but even Google had enough of ADP, finally, and had pulled them off of the cell phone store. They said, was back around 2007, they wouldn't touch them as they figured it was a non issue but that was 6 years ago and it is a HUGE issue now because if an ad is blocked they don't get paid either.
I use Noscript and Adblock Plus since they came out and the first place I block is google-analytics.com the next is anything with google in its name. They get nothing from any site I visit, nor the people using that for money, and that hurts everyone but most people do the same.
Was sort of funny to see ADP advertise recently.
-
... but most people do the same...
I'm not sure about that. I think most people don't use the blockers and look with the default browser with default settings.
- note that my claim is not backed up by any evidence.
-
Let me break it down for you Dave. You would not need near as many views to make the same amount of money as you do OR you could have the same amount of views and make a ton more if it were not for Adblock plus and NoScript. Don't deny it because everyone, including Google, has admitted how much revenue it has "stolen" from them and from them means from you as well.
Show me the actual data to back up this claim, you have not done so.
I don't doubt it's had some impact, but like I said, I don't think it's a large impact for me and for other full time youtubers I know. The data just does not back that up.
You made the claim that because of Adblock I would only be getting pennies for my views, and backed that up with your income figures.
I have told you the reasons why you got those low income figures, and it's NOT entirely due to adblock, or even a majority due to it.
My (and others) $/view figure is orders higher than yours ever was, and that is because of how the youtube/adsense system and advertising $ distribution system works which I have tried to explain to you.
I have been using Adsense before Adblock ever came around, and $/view figures has only gone UP since then, so I have little to complain about in that area.
Could I be making more if Adblock didn't exist? Yes, but not a huge amount.
But I'm sick of repeating myself on this issue, and won't engage any further on this issus.
-
Let me break it down for you Dave. You would not need near as many views to make the same amount of money as you do OR you could have the same amount of views and make a ton more if it were not for Adblock plus and NoScript. Don't deny it because everyone, including Google, has admitted how much revenue it has "stolen" from them and from them means from you as well.
Show me the actual data to back up this claim, you have not done so.
I don't doubt it's had some impact, but like I said, I don't think it's a large impact for me and for other full time youtubers I know. The data just does not back that up.
You made the claim that because of Adblock I would only be getting pennies for my views, and backed that up with your income figures.
I have told you the reasons why you got those low income figures, and it's NOT entirely due to adblock, or even a majority due to it.
My (and others) $/view figure is orders higher than yours ever was, and that is because of how the youtube/adsense system and advertising $ distribution system works which I have tried to explain to you.
I have been using Adsense before Adblock ever came around, and $/view figures has only gone UP since then, so I have little to complain about in that area.
Could I be making more if Adblock didn't exist? Yes, but not a huge amount.
But I'm sick of repeating myself on this issue, and won't engage any further on this issus.
Then don't engage because you are wrong on some of it. If they can't stream an ad to someone you make zip as they make zip and the whole point in ADP and Noscript is that no ads are streamed. No banners, no bottom of video ads, no anything ad related and you sit there saying it has minimal impact is just foolish at best.
Now if you seriously think Google isn't trying to defeat ADP because it IS hurting their profits then why did they reverse their stance about it? http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/02/13/google-has-effectively-killed-adblock-plus-in-android-4-2-2/ (http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/02/13/google-has-effectively-killed-adblock-plus-in-android-4-2-2/)
http://seekingalpha.com/article/701731-google-adblock-and-the-future-of-internet-advertising (http://seekingalpha.com/article/701731-google-adblock-and-the-future-of-internet-advertising)
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/troubles-ahead-for-internet-advertising/?_r=0 (http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/troubles-ahead-for-internet-advertising/?_r=0)
Know what is even funnier? Google seems to have paid ADP to not block some of their properties (google that and there is a lot of links to various sites about that story).
-
Then don't engage because you are wrong on some of it. If they can't stream an ad to someone you make zip as they make zip and the whole point in ADP and Noscript is that no ads are streamed. No banners, no bottom of video ads, no anything ad related and you sit there saying it has minimal impact is just foolish at best.
You are honestly being a bit obtuse here and I have no idea why you are arguing.
Dave says, "I know how much income I get from YouTube and it's not zip."
You say, "You must be making zip from YouTube because Adblock Plus."
Now between you and Dave, who knows most accurately what Dave's YouTube income is?
-
Now between you and Dave, who knows most accurately what Dave's YouTube income is?
And it's not just about the actual income, it's about the $/view ratio, the $/click ratio, and the click-through ratios.
As as I have tried to explain, that only keeps on going up for me (+the step levels I have also explained), both before and after AdBlock came into existence. That just shoots a complete hole in Dark Prognosis's theory.
The simple fact is you can't get any data on how much AdBlock is causing a revenue drop, as a content producer, not only can yu not know how many of your viewers are using it, even if you did you can't discriminate that from the usual large variability in the different types of revenue and the sporadic nature of ad campaigns. So anyone who claims they know how much drop it causes is just talking bull.
Is AdBlock causing an issue and drop in income for producers, yes. Is it as end-of-worldish as Dark Prognosis makes out? No, not even close, he's got it completely wrong.
-
What's the difference between "click" and "click through" ratios?
-
Then don't engage because you are wrong on some of it. If they can't stream an ad to someone you make zip as they make zip and the whole point in ADP and Noscript is that no ads are streamed. No banners, no bottom of video ads, no anything ad related and you sit there saying it has minimal impact is just foolish at best.
You are honestly being a bit obtuse here and I have no idea why you are arguing.
Dave says, "I know how much income I get from YouTube and it's not zip."
You say, "You must be making zip from YouTube because Adblock Plus."
Now between you and Dave, who knows most accurately what Dave's YouTube income is?
Fact is he isn't owning up to the truth and that is if he stopped all other avenues of his income EXCEPT for YT videos his income would not be going up IF the same metric was used as when he first started. Price you get per ad goes up but the number who are seeing those ads has went down.
Sure, the outcome is more money but only because the longer he stays around the more revenue he gets for the ads that someone does see who isn't using ADBlock Plus. That is the part he isn't mentioning so we are both correct about this issue only I am saying that the revenue increases per ad seen (even if clicked to go away/skip) but the number of ads seen as drastically went down due to ADP and this has caused Google to start trying to take action.
-
It fundamentally won't work. The people using AdBlock are the people who don't care about the ads anyway, so even if AdBlock was disabled it would only make things worse. The advertisers would now be paying more money to reach an audience that hates them and will ignore their ads.
I am the advertisers' worst nightmare. I don't use AdBlock, but I don't care for their ads either. So by viewing their ads I am costing them money >:D
-
Fact is he isn't owning up to the truth and that is if he stopped all other avenues of his income EXCEPT for YT videos his income would not be going up IF the same metric was used as when he first started. Price you get per ad goes up but the number who are seeing those ads has went down.
I'm fed up telling you that you are wrong. Obviously nothing will convince you. I have data that backs up what I say. My income has INCREASED and continues to increase using the SAME METRIC as when I started. |O
-
It fundamentally won't work. The people using AdBlock are the people who don't care about the ads anyway, so even if AdBlock was disabled it would only make things worse. The advertisers would now be paying more money to reach an audience that hates them and will ignore their ads.
I am the advertisers' worst nightmare. I don't use AdBlock, but I don't care for their ads either. So by viewing their ads I am costing them money >:D
^ This! I understand peoples adversity to adblock since it is a "detriment" to youtubers, but as Dave said, the numbers just aren't there to back that up. The people who have adblock got it for a reason!
-
Fact is he isn't owning up to the truth and that is if he stopped all other avenues of his income EXCEPT for YT videos his income would not be going up IF the same metric was used as when he first started. Price you get per ad goes up but the number who are seeing those ads has went down.
I'm fed up telling you that you are wrong. Obviously nothing will convince you. I have data that backs up what I say. My income has INCREASED and continues to increase using the SAME METRIC as when I started. |O
I think we have a misunderstanding because if you started right now you would make less per ad and would have less ads delivered to viewers due to ADP. Now after all of the years you have done this, and your subscribers has went up, your revenue per ad shown has went up, by a lot, and I know this from Google themselves when I asked how this worked for my own channel. Now the amount of ads shown has went down for everyone BUT if your subscriber count goes up, or you go to an external 3rd party like Maschima (or any revenue sharing partner), and you have paid your dues each ad that does get streamed will net you more.
So, that one ad that makes it through gives you 1 dollar whereas before it might have taken 20 or 40 ads to make that same amount so ADP in that case would cripple you but the bigger channels bring in so much more per ad that gets through ADP has a little impact on them but not as drastic as someone who needs 20 to 40 ads streamed to make a buck because those 20 to 40 ads may take 5k-10k views to get.
-
I don't understand the viewers fuss around youtube. Don't like the real-names policy or don't want to use G+?, then don't use it (that's what I do). Want to leave comments?, avoid the rif raf and post them directly in the forum thread (you already have an account here), don't like the youtube page for some reason? (I don't mind), use this http://www.eevblog.com/ (http://www.eevblog.com/) or this http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog (http://fixyt.com/search?q=eevblog) (I do). Want to watch off line?, get a youtube downloader or a podcast player (I am using Pocket Casts). Want to watch on your TV? Use one of those smart TVs or streaming boxes.
So many options to avoid any annoyance and the videos are ad free. I really don't understand the heat.
-
Google is forcing us to make google+ accounts and invading our social life to comment on a youtube video and trying to take away our anonymous profile. They are also trying to censor us unless we share the same worldview as they do.
New information has been brought to me by one of the supporters of this petition that their account was suspened by google for telling people about this petiton. Just another reason to sign this petiton.
If you want to spread this petiton around Youtube, make sure to do it on a seperate account because others have told me people have been suspended for shareing this petiton with others.
This link is all of Google's locations given to me by a very generous person, it might help some people.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/about/company/facts/locations/ (http://www.google.com/intl/en/about/company/facts/locations/)
contact me at deriklawl@gmail.com if you want to ask a question.
Here is the petition to sign and they are close to having enough signatures.
https://www.change.org/petitions/google-change-the-youtube-comment-section-back-to-its-original-form (https://www.change.org/petitions/google-change-the-youtube-comment-section-back-to-its-original-form)
-
Here is the petition to sign and they are close to having enough signatures.
https://www.change.org/petitions/google-change-the-youtube-comment-section-back-to-its-original-form (https://www.change.org/petitions/google-change-the-youtube-comment-section-back-to-its-original-form)
Enough signatures for what? If they get 300k signatures, will Google be compelled to change the comment system back to the old form? I don't think so.
-
Here is the petition to sign and they are close to having enough signatures.
https://www.change.org/petitions/google-change-the-youtube-comment-section-back-to-its-original-form (https://www.change.org/petitions/google-change-the-youtube-comment-section-back-to-its-original-form)
Enough signatures for what? If they get 300k signatures, will Google be compelled to change the comment system back to the old form? I don't think so.
Agreed but it will be wonderful to see what would happen.
Just like EBay stole the market out from the competition of other auction sites I figure Google has this as well. Eventually I know I will go Google-less because their goal is to have everyone use G+ as a unified login for all Google services and most people are not complaining about how Google uses all of our information (including working with the US govt) but there is no anonymity as G+ uses real names. That seems to be what most people are complaining about across the web.
It is a shame they aren't complaining about the real issue of using our information for their gain both in monetary ways AND with favors of the US govt. Terrorism can suck the big boom stick as it is used to get all sorts of things done that wouldn't otherwise be allowed (I love the Federal Judge who just spanked the US govt for all of the data collecting it does, and Google is part of that as well, as it is against the 4th amendment).
-
terisum is the most bullshit bogee man in exsistance. Never have times been so safe, there no world wars or any threats to the west, well apart from thUS government, I have a pasinot hate for them.
-
Something I learned yesterday is that Google talk (this is old news but new to me) is going bye-bye as the open source protocol it used Google has ditched. All of those hardware devices that used Google talk for free phone calls will cease as of May 14, 2014 when Google shuts off the XMPP stream and to get to use it you MUST have a Google+ account and use Google+ Hangout.
-
Google have gone and done it again, had a site that made this abomination look nice and easy to use. Now they are messed with it and it's back to being an unuserble turd, THERE ARE NO DAM OPTIONS TO CHANGE IT GERRRR!!!!
It does not even make what I have watched any more. There is nothing more annoying than a problem out of my control!
-
There is nothing more annoying than a problem out of my control!
Does it make you feel like your hands are tied? :-DD
-
At least the names are back. For a while there was just the icon, and you had to hover to see the link to get info from the URL.
-
YouTube has added a new button called 'community'.
At least you can see recent comments a lot easier rather than going through each video.
Found about 40 comments 'marked as spam' - most were genuine and was able to tick them.
But you still can't make them if you don't have G+
-
YouTube has added a new button called 'community'.
At least you can see recent comments a lot easier rather than going through each video.
That's progress, but STILL no reply button there! ARRRGH!!
I've been screaming for that for years now, why is it so hard?
-
Does it make you feel like your hands are tied? :-DD
Doh! :palm:
-
Not reading the whole topic. But This is my first post here because google fucked youtube and I wanted to comment on a teardown and just was disabled.
Fucking assholes! They do not understand within ten years everyone shares video from its own server,just like home brew sites now share pictures.
The whole youtube thing only exists because home users have bad connection.
I totally agree with all rants posted here and in the video. Some human stuff is really stupid and youtube is part of that.
-
I'm already noticing some YouTubers banding together with other channels with similar content and opening their own web pages. They are still cross-posting content between the new sites and YT, but I think this is a step in the right direction. If they can get their viewers to accept the new site, then they can gradually phase out YT. If this trend catches on and actually works, YT may have sealed it's own fate. It's still far too soon to make any bold statements like that, though.
-
It's not ideal, but one workaround that viewers seem to like is to occasionally produce an 'inbox' video answering the better or most common questions received.
Sort of like a mailbag but without the parcel ripping.
The main disadvantage is you lose the immediacy of a quick one line written comment.
(and in my case an excuse to test a lash-up 1970s cassette recorder dynamic mic with the modern camera!)
-
That worked well, much better audio for that QA session. Keep that mic setup for future use, and get a cat tail for it or a foam condom for the wind noise.
-
That worked well, much better audio for that QA session. Keep that mic setup for future use, and get a cat tail for it or a foam condom for the wind noise.
Thanks. Definitely a keeper. An electret might be smaller (and have broader frequency response) but would require an external supply as the camera doesn't have voltage on its mic connector. Have had the Canon camera for a while but due to its MOV (rather than AVI) output it was a pain to transfer and convert files to the old 7yo / XP computer. The new computer (plus the new Movie Maker software) has made things easier and better.
-
I'm already noticing some YouTubers banding together with other channels with similar content and opening their own web pages. They are still cross-posting content between the new sites and YT, but I think this is a step in the right direction. If they can get their viewers to accept the new site, then they can gradually phase out YT.
That only works for a small scale fan base. To go bigger requires the huge infrastructure of Youtube or some other big player.
-
That only works for a small scale fan base. To go bigger requires the huge infrastructure of Youtube or some other big player.
Hey, you gotta start somewhere. A ton of YouTubers are very pissed off at the changes, and if they can band together enough to make a noticeable drop in YT revenues, maybe Google will take notice.