neatchee @ neatchee @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

483

Joined

2 yr. ago

Except American medication prices a) aren't supply and demand; they involve manufactured scarcity among other serious problems and b) are a matter of life and death in many cases; they deal with necessities

There are many things that should not be capitalist: education, healthcare, prisons, to name just a few

The pricing of funny Internet videos et al is not one of those things, and it's frankly inappropriate to make that comparison here. You think the ethics of lifesaving medication and YouTube videos are comparable? Gimme a break

You are describing supply and demand. Not much more to it than that. Demand for ad free services is greater than demand from advertisers. What's your point?

You're free to be indignant about the ad industry and other people's willingness to pay for services at this or that price point but at least call a spade a spade.

I have premium for YouTube Music, and because they have certain music I can't get elsewhere, so I get a better YouTube experience and a music streaming service for about the same price I'd pay for just Spotify. I'm satisfied with my purchase and the value I get from it.

The hell are you talking about? Premium is $13.99/mo, removed all ads, includes YouTube Music with all it's licensed music, among other things. What exactly does your math represent? The amount of hours you'd need to watch to generate revenue equal to the cost of the service? That's a ridiculous thing to base your calculation on. If you think watching ads is such a better value than Premium then watch the damn ads?

Like, this is basic supply and demand economics. They know that there is less tolerance for ads in terms of exchange of value so the "cost of the service" when payment is in ad viewing time is less than the upfront cost if you get premium. That is really simple economics.

My dude, do you even understand the technical details of WEI or are you regurgitating what the Internet has told you? Have you read the spec? They are not forcing anything. Nobody has to opt in. It's not even available outside of Android and right now it's only being used for Google's own products (Google Play Services specifically)

Please don't talk like you know what the deal is when you do obviously don't

You are suggesting that the symptom of her abuse is the cause of her suffering. It's completely backwards. When you put people in an impossible situation and then wave away the things they do to keep control of their life as mental illness you're not only victim blaming, you're demeaning those of us with mental health issues.

Would I have handled it that way? Probably not. But you can't arm-chair diagnose someone with mental health problems just because you don't understand or identify with their choices. It's not right.

And as long as users expect free content there will be a continued need to monetize their usage. That's not inherently bad.

Also, WEI is about so so so much more than ad blockers and DRM. Like, so much more. And the spec has nothing to do with Chrome/Google. They are just the first implementers of both sides of equation (browser feature + attester) and only works on Android right now because attestation comes from the OS. They did it for Google Play Services. Nothing else.

I meant to say that I'm much more inclined to have conversations with people about the need for stricter antitrust laws and enforcement than I am about a single subsidiary of a multinational corp. protecting their revenue stream

I'm happy to talk about antitrust and breaking up conglomerates. But that needs to be a big conversation across many industries not just "Google bad, grrr".

If you're referencing WEI, btw, it is one of the topics people have been most misled about. Can link you to my Mastodon thread where I break down all the misunderstanding if you'd like

Unpopular opinion here but service providers should be allowed to enforce whatever conditions they want (within the law) for accessing and using their service.

There are plenty of other video hosting services. If you don't like what YouTube is doing, don't use their service. Not sure why people feel entitled to free content AND the ability to keep them from earning revenue.

The expectation of free content with no revenue stream attached is unsustainable. Pay for the content, or let them monetize it

And this is coming from someone who runs pi-hole on their network for security reasons.

Please consider wearing one any time you're out of your home during any resurgence. You can be a carrier and shredding while asymptomatic. If your masking keeps even one elderly person from getting COVID, isn't that worth? Even if it just lowers the chance they'll get it by a few percent?

If your employer tries to convince you not to take days off; if you're employer doesn't say "okay" when you ask as long as you've given the handbook-defined required notice; if they punish you for taking time off; if you are required to put your foot down and take the day off even if you think you might be retaliated against for it: then your company is an absolute shit show and you need to run for the hills.

Your post is victim blaming at its finest. We accommodate requests for accrued time off without question because we have no idea what they are going through and we have no right to pry into it. If their unavailability causes significant harm to the company that is a STAFFING problem, not a problem with the person talking the time off.