• Peffse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is such bad news. I’m sympathetic to content creators who have to step on eggshells to please the algorithm/advertisers… But this?

    Yeah, this is not that. We all know who this is for.

    • Ledericas@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      almost all the right wing contents get pushed to the front. there are some that are also rw that is buried by the algorithim, because they are loud mouths, i wonder if this will change for them too.,

  • The2b@lemmy.vg
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    199
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is just going to be used to allow fascist propaganda, isn’t it?

    • marlowe221@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I assume you mean fascist propaganda over and above the right wing rabbit holes that already exist on YouTube….

      Ugh, this is terrible.

    • Leon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well yes. You obviously still can’t say “le dollar bean” without getting nuked from orbit. YouTube is a goodly Christian corporation after all, can’t have such content.

    • Pirata@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yep. It’s exactly what Facebook did not long ago. It’s just the most open oligarchy you can imagine, just consolidating their interests to push fascism at full throttle.

      Its gonna be interesting, knowing some world cup is gonna happen on US soil as well.

      • kratoz29@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Fuck this place

        Are you implying you don’t use YT at all? Or you use it and choose to be unhappy with it?

        Just curious, I often get mad because they need to censor words, but not to the degrees to say 'fuck this place" and move to the other (unborn) alternative.

        • Squizzy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m not sure of what you mean at the end there.

          I see youtube content. I do not pay for it and they are likely unhappy that I get to use it as they get zero benefit from it.

        • Ada@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          The alternatives are there. They don’t have the volume of course, but they’re very much born…

          • kratoz29@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes they are, some from the very conception of YouTube perhaps, but they are not real alternatives a real alternative would be one where all your subscriptions also upload the same content there, it is totally not YT based and you get the same or similar ecosystem Google provides, I don’t think too many channels fit this.

            • Ada@piefed.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              I mean, if your requirement for a youtube alternative is that it’s as big as YouTube, you’re just guaranteeing that there will never be a YouTube alternative…

              • kratoz29@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                Yeah perhaps, we are here on Lemmy after all, which I consider a Reddit alternative, but with YouTube the thing is different because we follow individuals, and here we follow subjects, hopefully somebody can truly stand out against Google in the video field, a movement big enough to motivate content creators to check it out, the last thing I hear was about Odysee, which I think is a step in the right direction.

                • Ada@piefed.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Peertube is also a thing. Obviously, someone can’t make it on Peertube alone, but lots of folk out there upload to YouTube and to Peertube

        • Darren@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Personally I don’t use YouTube the website at all at this point. I’m 100℅ Freetube and yt-dlp/Plex for watching the channels I like.

  • Devolution@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Intention: YouTubers can stop with the whole self censoring shit.

    Example: Unaliving; PDF file; grape; etc.

    Reality: Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, and other right wing grifters receive zero censorship while YouTubers still have to self censor to receive monetization.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Actual reality: Right-wing grifters are already on a “whitelist”, as long as they also talk about lower taxes, lessening regulations and worker’s protections, and also got popular enough. Source: knew a former moderator for Google.

      • mctoasterson@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        2 months ago

        They won’t ever say it out loud but they have always removed videos for mentioning alternative frontends or other technology they view as direct threats to their revenue stream.

      • DFX4509B@lemmy.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        How long before Google locks YT down to loading only on Chrome, and only on Windows, Mac, ChromeOS, or Android, and only without ad blockers of any kind, including hardware ad blockers like PiHole being implemented anywhere, and straight-up blocking it from loading at all on non-Chrome browsers (to also include other Chromium browsers) and on Linux or iOS, and enforcing TPM2 and SecureBoot mandates for authentication, and blocking downloading and re-uploading of YT vids, using DRM?

        Basically, I wouldn’t put it above them to ensure their video platform only runs on their browser, and only on hardware that they deem worthy of running it, even if it means somehow implementing a Vanguard-style rootkit. Something else I wouldn’t put it past Google to try, is completely discontinuing the YT browser client and fully locking the API down to the official app, and still implementing a Vanguard-style rootkit on that.

  • Brewchin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Muh freedums profit” outweighs life. The silent bit spoken aloud. Cool cool.

    As expected from this timeline and this garbage conglomerate.

  • answersplease77@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    youtube shadowbanning, demonitization and censorship is the most retarded shit that’s ever happened to the internet. the whole website is videos and comments of people who cater to kids and commercial advertisers and cant say shit.

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    We will (still) allow children’s cartoon characters to be mutilated and put into explicit situations and then push them as child friendly, but how dare you use a swear in the first 15 seconds of a video or say the work kill.

  • mhague@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    Moderators were previously told to remove videos if one-quarter or more of the content violated YouTube policies. Now, that limit has been increased to half.

    This seems like alien speak to me. They announce that shit, someone read it, and then repeated it in an article. But what does it mean?

    Can you have 6 contents and make 2 really crazy? Can you tell people to commit violence for 5 minutes and then review a game for 6 minutes? Is there a dude with tvtropes open going through and marking the contents of content?

    • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve worked for TnS at a different company.

      I would guess it is likely per video, or they have multiple types of review going over it on a per video basis and then also maybe the channel as a whole?

      So you could have half of any video contain the violating content, and it would be clear.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It depends on who is being targeted.

      If you make a video calling for attacks on women, palestinians, gay people, etc., that’s all good!

      If you talk about taxing rich people, that’s extreme violence. Immediate ban.

  • ckmnstr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 months ago

    Great, now that 50% of a video can be a direct call for genocide, does that at LEAST mean I can use ONE instance of a “bad” word or speak of “icky” things like death and drug abuse without being demonized?

  • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    Videos are allowed if “freedom of expression value may outweigh harm risk”

    oh it’s that easy huh. why didn’t we think of this before lol.

  • Binturong@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Introducing: Pay More, Say More

    Surely this can’t become deeply problematic for the social fabric.

  • atlien51@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Wait what??? This came out of nowhere ??

    YouTube not cracking down on free speech??

  • Twoafros@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    This sucks but I think this will lead to a Youtube exodus and other platforms like Peertube will creator and user base will grow