Does anyone know how "auto-demonetized" videos fit in there?
Like, let's say I make a video about a controversial subject like "gays are people", and link my patreon. When the video inevitably gets demonetized, do I need to remove all mention of Patreon from the video?
demonetized videos aren't actually ineligible for the monetization system
They just don't get good rates. Companies will still bid to put ads on demonetized videos, but ones that care about image won't. This came about because of the whole "I don't want my company's ads to show before someone who is a nazi (or whatever)", so Google went and made a two-tier system. People who are "good" get in the big pool with all the big advertisers. Everyone else is in this smaller pool with less competition for ad-buyers.
I know at one point the creators didn't get any ad revenue from the video anyway, but I don't know if that's still true.
For a negative example, early Christians thought the Emperor Nero wasn't really dead, he was just biding his time. That's where 666 comes from, Jewish Numerology used to encode his name as a warning.
I suppose being a myth isn't mutually exclusive to being real.
i don't know i'm lost in pedantry.
The myth is that they're not dead
Like the myth of Saint Patrick driving out the snakes from Ireland
I mean, the patreon thing looks like people assumed youtube was a free resource in their business model who would let them use their tools forever without any kind of cost.
If one of your primary vehicles for generating revenue is youtube, they probably deserve a taste
But if they're saying "You can't link to Patreon" because they want some of that cash, where's their alternative?
Leave YouTube
Which is not possible in Google's provided time frame of "immediately".
0
Options
jakobaggerLO THY DREAD EMPIRE CHAOS IS RESTOREDRegistered Userregular
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
+2
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I mean, the patreon thing looks like people assumed youtube was a free resource in their business model who would let them use their tools forever without any kind of cost.
If one of your primary vehicles for generating revenue is youtube, they probably deserve a taste
But if they're saying "You can't link to Patreon" because they want some of that cash, where's their alternative?
you totally link to patreon still, and you let ads run on your channel, which customers can bypass by paying for youTube Red.
Or you move somewhere else where you can offer an ad-free experience to your consumers.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
Normal working hours are defined as 9 hours in a day, 40 in a week (most tariff agreements: 7.5 hours, 37.5)
anything above either is overtime. Overtime is paid at least 40% more (at least 50% is more common. Not being hourly does not matter, everybody is hourly on overtime in the eyes of the law. Employers are expected to be able to do math. Also, if you take out the extra hours in time off, it also does not matter, you still get 40% more paid.)
Leading or "especially independent" positions can be exempt.
There is also an important rule that some employers seem fond of "forgetting" and that is that overtime can not be planned. Within reason, but overtime is not a way to have longer shifts, it is a way to have people work longer when it's like you guys gotta stay or the factory will melt.
There are also limits on overtime to help enforce the fact that overtime is meant for exceptional circumstances: 4 hours per day, 10 hours per week, 25 per four weeks, 400 per 52 weeks.
In especially busy periods an employer can apply for permission to have more overtime.
I would like things to be a little bit better because the vast majority of people have better terms and it sucks for the few who have worse, but we're talking small details. Overall, I like it.
EDIT: it's 7.5 and 37.5 instead of 8 and 40 because the half hour lunch is not included, provided you are actually free to leave or do whatever the fuck. If you have to put down your bagel and pick up a single phone call it's a paid lunch.
I mean, the patreon thing looks like people assumed youtube was a free resource in their business model who would let them use their tools forever without any kind of cost.
If one of your primary vehicles for generating revenue is youtube, they probably deserve a taste
But if they're saying "You can't link to Patreon" because they want some of that cash, where's their alternative?
you totally link to patreon still, and you let ads run on your channel, which customers can bypass by paying for youTube Red.
Or you move somewhere else where you can offer an ad-free experience to your consumers.
i thought everyone had like two red symbols in the top right of their browser so they never see youtube ads anyway
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
i think the youtube problem is not that there are alternative options it's that youtube is so ubiquitous
when's the last time someone linked you a vimeo and you weren't just like
ew gross you might as well ask me to bing something you cretin
I mean, the patreon thing looks like people assumed youtube was a free resource in their business model who would let them use their tools forever without any kind of cost.
If one of your primary vehicles for generating revenue is youtube, they probably deserve a taste
But if they're saying "You can't link to Patreon" because they want some of that cash, where's their alternative?
"Your account has been marked as high bandwidth, in 15 days, your account will be disabled unless you subscribe to the high bandwidth package ($50 a month) or activate monetization on your videos to display ads to viewers."
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
now get this: you can still post your videos on youtube, with ads, and link to your website where the ad free experience is for patreon subscribers.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I mean it is a true fact that when the Ford Motor company adopted the 8 hour day along with higher pay, it was a very significant event because a lot of competitors saw that it actually made them better but come on
No they didn't. GM didn't adopt it till 11 years later, and only then after being on the receiving end of a strike. Same with Chrysler and a few other auto manufacturers.
Well, I mean, that's speedy, since it had already been a hundred years :P
but yes I rephrase it to "competitors saw that it did not kill them and thus weren't as afraid of losing that battle as they were of death"
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
Except, as I mentioned earlier, they didn't look for even a single alternative.
Like the standard "I provide a service and you pay for it" model that exists, oh, I dunno, everywhere else.
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
No one is making this argument.
The argument is that youtube shouldn't be allowed to take what are basically it's employees, change the rules to shaft them in favor of youtube, and be required to give them zero notice or warning.
I mean, the patreon thing looks like people assumed youtube was a free resource in their business model who would let them use their tools forever without any kind of cost.
If one of your primary vehicles for generating revenue is youtube, they probably deserve a taste
But if they're saying "You can't link to Patreon" because they want some of that cash, where's their alternative?
monetization
0
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
I work exactly 42 hours a week average. Week a is 36 and week b is 48.
I am physically present at work 43.75 hours a week average if you include my 30 minute unpaid lunch break.
also include your commute time
we should be paid to commute to and from work
wouldn't this end up subsidizing suburban sprawl
wouldn't it actually make companies want to decrease commute time by either increasing density or improving travel time?
im sure they'd want to, but I feel like cities would remain more expensive relative to the surrounding suburbs and people would become more accepting the trade off between cheaper living and longer commutes knowing they would get compensated for said commutes (shit, add an hour to your commute and now you're either making more money or working less)
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
Except, as I mentioned earlier, they didn't look for even a single alternative.
Like the standard "I provide a service and you pay for it" model that exists, oh, I dunno, everywhere else.
This is something we don't know.
There could have been months / years of debate on this topic while the whole thing was blowing up.
YouTube Red could have been their first foray into fixing the problem.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
You could do some sort of subscription and recommendation service similar to other aggregators like reddit,digg,stumbleupon,tumblr and allow people to "post" videos there.
You'd still have to monetize it somehow because aggregation services chew bandwidth still.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
0
Options
SummaryJudgmentGrab the hottest iron you can find, stride in the Tower’s front doorRegistered Userregular
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
No one is making this argument.
The argument is that youtube shouldn't be allowed to take what are basically it's employees, change the rules to shaft them in favor of youtube, and be required to give them zero notice or warning.
Nope, on the bolded
No way
Those are customers, not employees
Some days Blue wonders why anyone ever bothered making numbers so small; other days she supposes even infinity needs to start somewhere.
Going to Disneyland/Universal for the honeymoon. Fiancee insisted on a whole day for Harry Potter stuff and I balked. We compromised and are spending a whole day on Harry Potter stuff, but I'm going to loudly ask "Is he a Gandalf" every time we see a character.
I work exactly 42 hours a week average. Week a is 36 and week b is 48.
I am physically present at work 43.75 hours a week average if you include my 30 minute unpaid lunch break.
also include your commute time
we should be paid to commute to and from work
wouldn't this end up subsidizing suburban sprawl
wouldn't it actually make companies want to decrease commute time by either increasing density or improving travel time?
im sure they'd want to, but I feel like cities would remain more expensive relative to the surrounding suburbs and people would become more accepting the trade off between cheaper living and longer commutes knowing they would get compensated for said commutes (shit, add an hour to your commute and now you're either making more money or working less)
except presumably companies would just have a say in where you were living
you couldn't just take a job offer and then move an hour out of the city and go "ha, now you're paying me to drive".
the company would be able to turn around and drop your compensation equivalently
I mean, I don't like the idea at all to be fair, I'm just saying there are ways that it could work
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
No one is making this argument.
The argument is that youtube shouldn't be allowed to take what are basically it's employees, change the rules to shaft them in favor of youtube, and be required to give them zero notice or warning.
Nope, on the bolded
No way
Those are customers, not employees
Youtube is paying them to put content on youtube
They are also customers, sure, but they are also what youtube relies on for content and YouTube should be wary about pissing them all off.
+1
Options
YoshisummonsYou have to let the dead vote, otherwise you'd just kill people you disagree with!Registered Userregular
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
Except, as I mentioned earlier, they didn't look for even a single alternative.
Like the standard "I provide a service and you pay for it" model that exists, oh, I dunno, everywhere else.
This is something we don't know.
There could have been months / years of debate on this topic while the whole thing was blowing up.
YouTube Red could have been their first foray into fixing the problem.
Then it's a good thing they kept the content creators in the loop.
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
for some reason rancid's time bomb rewritten as a parody about fascist movements popped in my head as an idea but i only have
____ coat, brown shirt, red hat, ____, yeah
the boy's a mo-ron
and a google search for "sartorial nicknames for fascist movements" didn't return much of use
but i for some reason am really wanting to make this work
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
Except, as I mentioned earlier, they didn't look for even a single alternative.
Like the standard "I provide a service and you pay for it" model that exists, oh, I dunno, everywhere else.
This is something we don't know.
There could have been months / years of debate on this topic while the whole thing was blowing up.
YouTube Red could have been their first foray into fixing the problem.
Well uh, but if we all just heard about it today, and all the streamers heard about it today, then it doesn't matter if they had internal discussions about this for a decade or more. It's the change without any warning or chance for feedback that sucks.
+2
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
Except, as I mentioned earlier, they didn't look for even a single alternative.
Like the standard "I provide a service and you pay for it" model that exists, oh, I dunno, everywhere else.
This is something we don't know.
There could have been months / years of debate on this topic while the whole thing was blowing up.
YouTube Red could have been their first foray into fixing the problem.
You could believe this if you wanted to, I guess.
I mean, it's possible that we'll see a bunch of channels come out in the near future and go "hey guys, the ad-free thing didn't work. Google brought out the numbers and there's no way it would work in a way we were happy with, so we're going back to ads".
And as far as basic costs goes, a non-storefront Squarespace site, backed with 2 TB of storage and 2 million views of your videos through S3 a month is ~75 dollars a month.
So yes, if 2 million eyeballs are hitting your videos in a month, and you cannot afford to pay 75 buckarinos to keep the ship afloat, something has gone wrong with your patreon.
Goddamn, now I want to set up a company that is just a setup service for individual sites and run an aggregate front page which would basically be an rss feed
Posts
demonetized videos aren't actually ineligible for the monetization system
They just don't get good rates. Companies will still bid to put ads on demonetized videos, but ones that care about image won't. This came about because of the whole "I don't want my company's ads to show before someone who is a nazi (or whatever)", so Google went and made a two-tier system. People who are "good" get in the big pool with all the big advertisers. Everyone else is in this smaller pool with less competition for ad-buyers.
I know at one point the creators didn't get any ad revenue from the video anyway, but I don't know if that's still true.
The myth is that they're not dead
Like the myth of Saint Patrick driving out the snakes from Ireland
Leave YouTube
Which is not possible in Google's provided time frame of "immediately".
it's because it's a custom emoji from I think SA forums or something
People visiting a single person's website to see the videos and continuing to grow an audience? What is this madness?
you totally link to patreon still, and you let ads run on your channel, which customers can bypass by paying for youTube Red.
Or you move somewhere else where you can offer an ad-free experience to your consumers.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
shit
wouldn't it actually make companies want to decrease commute time by either increasing density or improving travel time?
Normal working hours are defined as 9 hours in a day, 40 in a week (most tariff agreements: 7.5 hours, 37.5)
anything above either is overtime. Overtime is paid at least 40% more (at least 50% is more common. Not being hourly does not matter, everybody is hourly on overtime in the eyes of the law. Employers are expected to be able to do math. Also, if you take out the extra hours in time off, it also does not matter, you still get 40% more paid.)
Leading or "especially independent" positions can be exempt.
There is also an important rule that some employers seem fond of "forgetting" and that is that overtime can not be planned. Within reason, but overtime is not a way to have longer shifts, it is a way to have people work longer when it's like you guys gotta stay or the factory will melt.
There are also limits on overtime to help enforce the fact that overtime is meant for exceptional circumstances: 4 hours per day, 10 hours per week, 25 per four weeks, 400 per 52 weeks.
In especially busy periods an employer can apply for permission to have more overtime.
I would like things to be a little bit better because the vast majority of people have better terms and it sucks for the few who have worse, but we're talking small details. Overall, I like it.
EDIT: it's 7.5 and 37.5 instead of 8 and 40 because the half hour lunch is not included, provided you are actually free to leave or do whatever the fuck. If you have to put down your bagel and pick up a single phone call it's a paid lunch.
i thought everyone had like two red symbols in the top right of their browser so they never see youtube ads anyway
This argument is that I should be allowed to reap all the benefits of this wildly popular platform for free, nobody should have to see ads, and I can use it as a primary driver to direct people elsewhere to give me money.
There was no way this model was going to last.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
when's the last time someone linked you a vimeo and you weren't just like
ew gross you might as well ask me to bing something you cretin
"Your account has been marked as high bandwidth, in 15 days, your account will be disabled unless you subscribe to the high bandwidth package ($50 a month) or activate monetization on your videos to display ads to viewers."
And YouTube is gonna let me link my patreon and i want no ads and I'm not paying for shitttttt
now get this: you can still post your videos on youtube, with ads, and link to your website where the ad free experience is for patreon subscribers.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Well, I mean, that's speedy, since it had already been a hundred years :P
but yes I rephrase it to "competitors saw that it did not kill them and thus weren't as afraid of losing that battle as they were of death"
Except, as I mentioned earlier, they didn't look for even a single alternative.
Like the standard "I provide a service and you pay for it" model that exists, oh, I dunno, everywhere else.
No one is making this argument.
The argument is that youtube shouldn't be allowed to take what are basically it's employees, change the rules to shaft them in favor of youtube, and be required to give them zero notice or warning.
monetization
im sure they'd want to, but I feel like cities would remain more expensive relative to the surrounding suburbs and people would become more accepting the trade off between cheaper living and longer commutes knowing they would get compensated for said commutes (shit, add an hour to your commute and now you're either making more money or working less)
If the combined debauchery of Commodus and Elagabalus didn't revive him I don't know what would
This is something we don't know.
There could have been months / years of debate on this topic while the whole thing was blowing up.
YouTube Red could have been their first foray into fixing the problem.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
You'd still have to monetize it somehow because aggregation services chew bandwidth still.
Nope, on the bolded
No way
Those are customers, not employees
except presumably companies would just have a say in where you were living
you couldn't just take a job offer and then move an hour out of the city and go "ha, now you're paying me to drive".
the company would be able to turn around and drop your compensation equivalently
I mean, I don't like the idea at all to be fair, I'm just saying there are ways that it could work
what, all the time
like any other example but vimeo
vimeo is where the gorgeous shit lives
youtube is talking heads and fail compilations
Youtube is paying them to put content on youtube
They are also customers, sure, but they are also what youtube relies on for content and YouTube should be wary about pissing them all off.
Then it's a good thing they kept the content creators in the loop.
____ coat, brown shirt, red hat, ____, yeah
the boy's a mo-ron
and a google search for "sartorial nicknames for fascist movements" didn't return much of use
but i for some reason am really wanting to make this work
Well uh, but if we all just heard about it today, and all the streamers heard about it today, then it doesn't matter if they had internal discussions about this for a decade or more. It's the change without any warning or chance for feedback that sucks.
abdhy just go with the joke come on man
You could believe this if you wanted to, I guess.
I mean, it's possible that we'll see a bunch of channels come out in the near future and go "hey guys, the ad-free thing didn't work. Google brought out the numbers and there's no way it would work in a way we were happy with, so we're going back to ads".
If that happens, then yeah okay.
Hey check out this one still of a girl in a bikini
Watch my shitty videoooooooo
Goddamn, now I want to set up a company that is just a setup service for individual sites and run an aggregate front page which would basically be an rss feed