Youtube TOS changes, basically allows no one to make money off their channels - Polidicks

Jerome the CoD gay thug chimes in [media]https://youtu.be/qt8CY-NHe3w[/media]

[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;50986072]Taken from Philly Ds latest video on the follow up. I don't agree to some of the guidelines. [img]https://chie.club/files/images/st/4c16bdc5-a4a3-4810-aa2a-fc9bb92b3115.png[/img] So now I can't say fuck. Why would anyone promote drugs? Sexually suggestive content is really contextual same with sexual humor. The big one that really urks me is the "controversial or sensitive subjects and events including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown". As I said before it's been a thing for a while but the fact that they will just full force remove all monetization and now tell you rather than it hiding it like it has till recently is full of shit but again as with my previous post if ad sponsors don't want their ads on that content then that's fine. Find a sponsor that's okay with that. Both YouTube and content creators need to figure out different ways.[/QUOTE] Just worth noting a video aimed at helping people cope with their depression and perhaps prevent suicide got demonitised. While the overall aim is understandable, the execution has fucked up implications.

[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;50984116]I mean sure people like leafy who make zero effort videos aren't doing real work and I'm extremely butthurt about that due to my struggle to find any sort of employment for the past 4 months, but I'm not butthurt enough to claim everyone who's primary source of income is Youtube doesn't have a real job. [B]Hell, if I didn't have a terrible monotone voice that would put everyone to sleep I'd probably make my own channel.[/B][/QUOTE] I'd like to introduce you to Cr1tikal.

Honestly, the entire situation is fucked. It seems that more and more of the Youtube community is being effected. Even baking videos are being attacked now, because the folks might put a charity in the description or talk about certain issues within the community such as certain food recalls and the like. If the advertisers want to pick and choose who they support with advertisements, so be it, but leave the content alone. People can make it out just fine if a select few advertisers and supporters come through and support them, but just automatically censoring everything because you want a safe-space for everyone is fucking stupid.

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;50988446]Most of the FP hivemind lacks awareness. [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] Besides, it's such an "old geezer" thing to say. "making videos for teh youtoobz is not a real job, hurr durr" is something my dad, a bitter old fuck, would say.[/QUOTE] Still making a few hundred pounds a month on youtube here on the side of my *real* job and I don't see it as work at all, it's easy - it's really not a job and people that say it is have no idea what real work is in the least bit.

[QUOTE=Rossy167;50988648]Just worth noting a video aimed at helping people cope with their depression and perhaps prevent suicide got demonitised. While the overall aim is understandable, the execution has fucked up implications.[/QUOTE] The video was outright tagged 'Kill yourself' so it got picked up.

[QUOTE=Combine 177;50988822]The video was outright tagged 'Kill yourself' so it got picked up.[/QUOTE] The intention was to show the video to as many suicidal people as possible, hence tags like "how to kill yourself". The perfect example to show that automatic demonetization of videos is a terrible idea. An algorithm to sort potentially inappropriate videos makes sense, but YouTube has this "shoot first ask questions later" mentality. At least wait until a human element determines that the video is indeed offensive before cutting ads.

Maybe hosting a massive global video site with arbitrary content is simply too expensive to not be forced to pander to advertisers? Maybe there just isn't enough money left at the end of the month to both cover running cost and turn profit while also paying the content creators? I don't really believe this to be the case but you'd think someone would've proved this wrong by now. Maybe youtube has grown so large that it simply isn't possible to gain enough momentum to get an alternative service off the ground?

IHE comments [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mmzf0duEYRk[/media]

[QUOTE=Im Crimson;50988933]Maybe hosting a massive global video site with arbitrary content is simply too expensive to not be forced to pander to advertisers? Maybe there just isn't enough money left at the end of the month to both cover running cost and turn profit while also paying the content creators? I don't really believe this to be the case but you'd think someone would've proved this wrong by now. Maybe youtube has grown so large that it simply isn't possible to gain enough momentum to get an alternative service off the ground?[/QUOTE] There's definitely a big barrier of entry for that sort of service. A budding startup would never have the resources necessary to provide it, and even most big corporations can't.

[QUOTE=Combine 177;50988822]The video was outright tagged 'Kill yourself' so it got picked up.[/QUOTE] Hmm, maybe the point of those tags was so it could reach as many people considering suicide as possible? What a horrible video, that had absolutely no noble or commendable intent whatsoever.

So is this when YouTube falls behind and some other new video host springs up in its place?

[QUOTE=Rossy167;50989134]Hmm, maybe the point of those tags was so it could reach as many people considering suicide as possible? What a horrible video, that had absolutely no noble or commendable intent whatsoever.[/QUOTE] True but still almost not a single company wants to be associated with video that possible is about ending oneself. The system right now is what it is but which is more important? possibly preventing someone from killing them self or making much as possible ad revenue? It all depends on tags you use on your video.

[QUOTE=Combine 177;50989176]True but still almost not a single company wants to be associated with video that possible is about ending oneself. The system right now is what it is but which is more important? possibly preventing someone from killing them self or making much as possible ad revenue? It all depends on tags you use on your video.[/QUOTE] I don't know about you but seeing advertisers reward shitty "prank" channels with mounds of cash while leaving channels that provide actual valuable content that can save lives in the dust doesn't really make me want to buy their shit. I'm sure Boogie cares more about preventing suicides than making money but when YouTube basically discourage such initiatives in favor of diluted harmless entertainment it doesn't really send a very appealing message.

[QUOTE=jimbobjoe1234;50986410]I still can't believe they would treat their community like this. You spend all these years trying to create one of the brightest and most creative communities on the internet, just to basically shit all over them because advertisers aren't happy. They were so many ways the YouTube team could've handled this, and they quite possibly chose the worst path. I hope a competitor comes along soon. I wanna see YouTube squirm for what it's done.[/QUOTE] This should not be a surprise at all. Shareholders are the ONLY people who matter to corporations. Not the user/customer, not the employees, not the government, not the public, just shareholders. Shareholders want increased value for their investment. If advertising revenue increases, that means the share price will rise. So that's why they do it. At no time does the community factor in. They don't care about the community, point blank. The money is what they care about. The community and the advertisers are two parties that Youtube is exploiting to make money, once you understand that then you'll see this is nothing unexpected. They don't care if people get mad and leave. There will always be new people coming, not to mention there will be content creators who can abide by these rules and bring in an audience. They stand to make a lot more money and won't lose anything they care about doing it.

Its like they are begging for some competition to swoop in and steal their audience, Then they'll buy them out anyways.

Y'know I think an even bigger problem than a vague ToS is the fact that they've opted for even more slapdash automation to enforce it Youtube has a whole host of problems but one of the most glaring is Google's overwhelmingly hands off approach. There's already been a huge stink about Youtube's terrible automated systems with regards to things like the DMCA claims system and how easily abused it is. I think this is more or less an extension of the same problem

Looks like some people already started working on the competition for the exodus: [url=https://lbry.io/get?r=UsPtP]LBRY.io[/url] They're doing any AMA [url]https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/50tyub/were_the_nerds_behind_lbry_a_decentralized/[/url] [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] I'm honestly surprised little people have the resources to make "new twitter" or "new youtube" everytime consumer revolt happens. Apparently there was so much freak out they raised half a million from crowdfunding just last night [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=wrv451nlp;50989745]Its like they are begging for some competition to swoop in and steal their audience, Then they'll buy them out anyways.[/QUOTE] this sounds like the plot to Force Unleashed

I was thinking about an invite-only style YouTube competitor to get the big guys over first, then build upon it. Because letting everyone upload at first is probably the expensive part. It would not allow newcomers to build up their audience but would provide the base.

I agree that it's gonna be hard to build up something like Youtube with open registration but at the same time I feel like a big factor in why VOAT isn't a big deal is that it was invite only for like ever, probably still is.

[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50990874]Looks like some people already started working on the competition for the exodus: [url=https://lbry.io/get?r=UsPtP]LBRY.io[/url] They're doing any AMA [url]https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/50tyub/were_the_nerds_behind_lbry_a_decentralized/[/url] [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] I'm honestly surprised little people have the resources to make "new twitter" or "new youtube" everytime consumer revolt happens. Apparently there was so much freak out they raised half a million from crowdfunding just last night [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] this sounds like the plot to Force Unleashed[/QUOTE] Reading the AMA it sounds pretty shitty You need a browser addon to use it at all, first of all, and then... [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/pqUM2IR.png[/IMG] And then you have this cringeworthy display: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/YKAOiJy.png[/IMG] "Memer-in-chief" please no As well as a bunch of "Save the internet!!!!" hyperbole stuff You can also apparently buy other people's channels and stuff, which sounds amazingly abusable And it's also some kind of like, blockchain thing. [quote]Unlike every other corporate owned network, LBRY is completely decentralized and controlled by the people who use it. Every computer connected to and running LBRY helps make the network stronger. But we use the power of encryption and the blockchain to keep everything safe and secure.[/quote] Even if you think it sounds good, there's no way this could ever replace Youtube. Seems more like a [I]totally coincidental[/I] announcement of a decentralized video link hosting(?) thing where you host your own videos on your own bandwidth than anything like Youtube I don't really see it going anywhere

p2p YouTube sounds terrible [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] Depending on what regulations it has the buying other channels doesn't sound like a totally bad idea, it sucks when you wanna make a channel and the name is taken by some inactive for 7+ years shithead [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] I think YT does this but doesn't really explain what you need. I think it involves trademarks

Apparently the guy who started it posts in a bunch of nutcase subreddits like anarcho_capitalism lol More and more this just looks like "ebul gubbermint!!!" wank

[QUOTE=bepassley;50983782]Oh no people have to get real jobs instead of making money off of horrible videos :-([/QUOTE][QUOTE=Cureless;50983930]Ha, I was coming here to say pretty much the exact same thing. Funny how much these people are crying because they have to go find actual work instead of being clowns on the internet.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=FalloutAddict;50984017]Being a youtuber really isn't work no matter how much they preach that it is, anybody can record themselves then edit a video and click upload, try working a 12 hour shift in a warehouse where you're constantly on your feet and have a 45 minute lunch break, that's work.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=FalloutAddict;50984041]Dense? Ok! Being a youtuber is not work and it's that simple, I do it myself, it's passive income - it's so easy it's not even funny, if you think youtube is work then you live an easy, easy life.[/QUOTE]Except there's likely over a hundred channels with more than a hundred thousand subscribers who do actually do work for their content. [QUOTE=FalloutAddict;50984065]Ok mate! Kids these days have no idea what work actually is, ha. Edit: What i'll do is keep making a few hundred pound a month on my video's (which were easy as fuck to make and upload by the way) while working an actual real job, yawn.[/QUOTE]I get this distinct impression that you're under 21 and thus have nothing valuable to contribute to any discussion about "work." Since we're waving our dicks about what is and isn't work [B]come back when you put in an 60+ hour work week consistently for two months doing hard, physical labor[/B] and I might listen to what you have to say. Until then your opinion means precisely [I]jack shit[/I] and likely just the warblings of some suburbanite island-dweller. [QUOTE=Cureless;50984390]Okay, just to clarify a little. When I said actual work, I meant having to fill out applications, do interviews, go to school, hone your skills over the years, etc. Just making videos of yourself doing whatever it is you like to do at home, is not a job. I don't care how much effort people put into their videos. I worked on [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8O7uzOgeE8]one of my videos for about 10 hours strait[/url], filming gameplay footage, editing it, rendering, etc. Aside from the fact the videos shit, I don't think I should get paid for putting that much effort into it.[/QUOTE]Nobody cares that your videos suck, channels like EEVBlog, Forgotten Weapons, InRangeTV, Kurzgesagt, and [I]many[/I] others do put in more work than pissing away at editing for ten hours. I looked at your video and I saw "Call of Duty" and immediately tuned out, I don't want to see [I]yet another video[/I] about this shit, the internet is inundated with that. Really it's no wonder why you have this viewpoint because you're projecting what you do on to the content of all these other channels, but not everyone on Youtube plays a shit video game and makes a shit video out of it; many actually do have real content that's worth the effort. Take for a moment the gun channels I mentioned. You're a Canadian and probably underage so I don't imagine you know what a box of ammo costs, or how much it costs to travel to the Cody Firearms Museum or to auction houses from across the country, and I certainly don't expect you to know what goes into building a firearm from a parts kit and a receiver flat. All of that isn't cheap, and it gets even more expensive when the ammo in question is some obscure shit from the 20's just so people can see a lost relic do it's thing. That's not free! Channels that deal with metalworking or carpentry don't just magically acquire materials, that shit costs a lot of fucking money. AvE has been doing his thing for years and actually buys things to review, he pays out of pocket for that, and he's got industry experience so you can't accuse him of not having a job by any stretch. Then there's channels like Kurzgesagt who actually have a production team that gets paid real money for their actual work. They need money to provide the content they provide, it's a significant effort that provides valuable educational content because it's well-researched, sourced, and neatly presented. Tech and maker channels are almost universally run by people who do actually have real jobs or have been in their respective industry for so long that they're well aware of what they're talking about, an example that comes to mind is EEVBlog which is run by a guy who does [I]a lot[/I] of stuff off-camera. Additionally 8-Bit Guy and others like him track down obscure pieces of technology and explain to people what they do, why they did it, and how it came to be. That takes time, effort, sometimes money, and they're not the only ones to do that. NurdRage and NileRed deal with chemistry which is absolutely not a cheap hobby, I don't think I need to explain about the price of lab equipment when you can go look that up yourself. In short you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. [QUOTE=Pretiacruento;50988446]Besides, it's such an "old geezer" thing to say. "making videos for teh youtoobz is not a real job, hurr durr" is something my dad, a bitter old fuck, would say.[/QUOTE]On the contrary I see this shit peddled by little teenagers more often than not, people with absolutely no idea what the "real work" they're talking about actually is. I hate white collar jobs but I know it's just as much of "real work" as the shit I do, actually I think sitting in a cubicle all day is more work than getting to be outside and in the sun. That's just my normal mode but instead I'm told to do a specific thing [I]and[/I] I get paid for it, yeah it's hard but I enjoy it so it doesn't feel as hard. Bottom line is if you get paid for something regularly it's a job, it's work, so even those screeching retards playing video games with the lights turned off are [I]technically[/I] doing their job. [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] Oh and if that's too long for you "it's not work!!!" kittens to read then I'll summarize it with this: TL;DR? You're talking out of your ass.

p2p youtube using anarcho-capitalism based on models of economic theory that assume that absolutely everybody has the same amount of disposable income, including corporations. Fantastic idea, retards. If I have a popular content channel, then someone can just jump in, outbid my channel, and then throw their own content which is an exact copy of mine plus malware on the URL and nobody would notice. Great.

[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50990874]Looks like some people already started working on the competition for the exodus: [URL="https://lbry.io/get?r=UsPtP"]LBRY.io[/URL] They're doing any AMA [URL]https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/50tyub/were_the_nerds_behind_lbry_a_decentralized/[/URL] [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] I'm honestly surprised little people have the resources to make "new twitter" or "new youtube" everytime consumer revolt happens. Apparently there was so much freak out they raised half a million from crowdfunding just last night [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] this sounds like the plot to Force Unleashed[/QUOTE] My money is on Vid.me. After their commercial,I think they have a fair shot at it :v: Here: [url]https://vid.me/KEnH[/url]

Leafy and Pyrocynical throw in their 2 cents [video=youtube;VlI8LPDD01E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlI8LPDD01E[/video] [video=youtube;A1z-i0ueDhs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1z-i0ueDhs[/video]

Well that's what happens when you let your payroll be decided by advertisers. I'm surprised this is affecting the bigger channels though

[QUOTE=Matrix374;50992639]Well that's what happens when you let your payroll be decided by advertisers. I'm surprised this is affecting the bigger channels though[/QUOTE] I'm tired of people thrashing youtubers for treating it as a main source of income when it's a legitimate form of entertainment (with an unfortunately large range of quality), It's stupidly close minded to try and berate people for relying on it's income. The issue isn't people relying on it, it's that the platform is still too unpredictable with the constant lingering fear of copyright strikes or channel lockdowns which can cut off your revenue And i'm not surprised at all it affects bigger channels, I haven't been hit once despite using a plethora of innapropriate language and the occasional other rulebreak. The way the system works it'll naturally target bigger channels because those channels receive more attention and pump out videos more often therefore making them a bigger issue if they aren't caught

[QUOTE=Punchy;50992763]I'm tired of people thrashing youtubers for treating it as a main source of income when it's a legitimate form of entertainment (with an unfortunately large range of quality), It's stupidly close minded to try and berate people for relying on it's income. The issue isn't people relying on it, it's that the platform is still too unpredictable with the constant lingering fear of copyright strikes or channel lockdowns which can cut off your revenue And i'm not surprised at all it affects bigger channels, I haven't been hit once despite using a plethora of innapropriate language and the occasional other rulebreak. The way the system works it'll naturally target bigger channels because those channels receive more attention and pump out videos more often therefore making them a bigger issue if they aren't caught[/QUOTE] My only problem with this controversy is that this has somehow become a "censorship" problem when Youtube is well within its right to enforce this because their advertisers are the ones paying the youtubers in the first place. You want to get paid, you play by the rules of the person paying you. Hopefully,everyone manages to transition to other revenue streams because its a shame if these youtubers cant really do what they do anymore