1078

submitted 10 months ago by princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

51 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

YouTube was hemorrhaging money. They were just trying to hold on long enough to find a buyer.

[-] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

I suppose you're going to argue that other video hosting sites that are an objectively better experience than youtube can't last? Or that youtube is better now that it's owned by someone else?

The point is that online sites that are around to make profit are actively sapping online communities. It's what's happening to reddit as well.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

I'm saying that any platform has to be financially viable. Bandwidth and servers cost money.

Name a platform that allows essentially unlimited uploads and hosting of HD video, doesn't have ads, is free for all users, and isn't losing money.

[-] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

Ok, and I'm saying that a platform can make money without causing a privacy crisis that requires a government to step in. Plenty do.

I'm saying that the thing that makes sites more bloated and unpleasant is when they get retooled to squeeze every last drop of profit from their users.

We don't have to turn this disagreement into "sites need to make money" vs "everything should be free". There's a middle ground, in which my original point sits.