Of course it does. Not only Google has plenty of money to keep it running, don’t even try to make a moral argument out of one of these companies stripmining everyone’s data
No it absolutely does not. It is a business, not a charity. They don't owe anyone anything for free. That's how the world works. Your personal data is a part of the fee you pay for the service. And again no one is forcing anyone to use that service. There are plenty of alternatives like Nebula that the content creators themselves have set up. You are free to just not use it if you don't like it.
If you care so much about the costs of hosting, I hope you donate to the Lemmy.
I am new to Lemmy but I absolutely will just as I donate to wikipedia. If it is giving me value, then I am happy to support it financially up to the point where I think the finances are equal to the value I am receiving in return.
That's for consumers to decide. If people still pay for it and think it's worth their money, then they aren't really gouging, they were just under priced. If people don't and start cancelling their subscriptions, they have over priced it and now need to bring the price back down. For me personally, Netflix is the one teetering on that point, YT isn't there yet.
Then you need to look better because you are down a thread pointing out how people are getting downvoted and ragged on for suggesting ad blocking options.
No I am a thread calling people corporate shills for disagreeing with people saying we should all be pirating.
Actually nevermind. Just look at the mirror. You really are talking of Google like it’s a struggling charity.
It doesn't matter how rich google is, it doesn't owe you video hosting services. It's not a charity. You can disagree with their pricing and you can find another platform if you like. But services cost money and just because a company has money through other sources doesn't mean they need to subsidize all their products.
No i am not. But I am happy to support actual content creators and the platform that they host on and gets them the most views because I spend more time on YT than I do on any other streaming platform.
Youtube spends more on revenue sharing than some big streaming services do on content creation. Content creators who also have sponsored segments are essentially double dipping but that's on the content creator.
Also I don't know how much it is in the US, but in Canada, YT is one of the cheapest streaming services if not the cheapest, and I get way more value out of youtube than I do from Netflix, Crave, Prime, or Disney+.
No I just think it's stupid to call people who would pay for a service a corporate shill. I have no issue with someone who doesn't think a subscription is worth it. Maybe read the whole thread first next time.
As someone who's actually worked in this industry, your data isn't enough to pay for video hosting services to the scale youtube provides. Youtube makes up a significant chunk of all network traffic in the world. It costs money.
Whether you think that service is worth it or not is up to you.
But don't act like you have some moral high ground here and that people who are actually paying for a service that you are stealing from and a service that actually shares revenue with it's content creators and encourages independent creators are just corporate shills.
Some of us are adults and realize things cost money and not entitled children that expect everything for free.
Ok? And? They aren't a charity and don't owe you free video hosting services.
EDIT: I find it hilarious that point out the fact that you aren't entitled to free hosting services is getting down voted. Lmao how old are the people here?
Ya how dare people actually pay for a platform that hosts billions of videos and streams to billions of users essentially lag free and is actually decent and shares revenue with it's content creators. /s
Things cost money. You don't have to be a corporate shill to not expect everything to be free, you just have to be an adult.
So you are pissed off that people are actually willing to pay for service? Youtube hosts millions if not billions of videos and streams them to billions of users, dozens of times a day and they do all this essentially lag free. That infrastructure is not cheap.
Additionally youtube actually shares their premium revenue with content creators allowing people to actually make a successful living with their creative pursuits and you control how that revenue is shared by which videos you watch.
That's great for now. Scale that up to billions of videos and that won't be sustainable. Video hosting, especially at the scale that youtube does it, is incredibly expensive.
I almost never watch YouTube on my computer and it is almost always used on my TVs by my family. YouTube premium is probably the most useful streaming sub I have.
No it absolutely does not. It is a business, not a charity. They don't owe anyone anything for free. That's how the world works. Your personal data is a part of the fee you pay for the service. And again no one is forcing anyone to use that service. There are plenty of alternatives like Nebula that the content creators themselves have set up. You are free to just not use it if you don't like it.
I am new to Lemmy but I absolutely will just as I donate to wikipedia. If it is giving me value, then I am happy to support it financially up to the point where I think the finances are equal to the value I am receiving in return.