0
36

[–] Troll 0 points 36 points (+36|-0) ago 

Shit like this is what happens when you let corporations be the government. I'm all for capitalism and all, but this shit right here is pure communism. Corporations enjoy capitalism as long as it allows them to grow, but when they become big enough all of a sudden they decide Marx and Trotsky are just fine and that you should let them control fucking everything. This is why Google and the likes need to be broken up as nothing more than a shit monopoly with a death grip on the US economy.

1
10

[–] WhiteMakesRight 1 points 10 points (+11|-1) ago 

Goyim, what you're saying is highly Commiephobic. Just turn on CNN and relax for a while.

0
5

[–] CheeseboogersGhost 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Exactly! Well said. It all has to be destroyed now

2
4

[–] Caesarkid1 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

It's interesting how people fail to see the connection between the lack of a secretive ballot system for voting on bills in the house/senate and such bills granting monopolistic powers to behemoth corporations.

Then when you bring it up they act like it is important to them for the voting record to be available when the vast majority of useful idiots vote for whatever party they are told to/feel loyal too based off of the manipulation they have received through advertising, news and other media.

Many people don't even realize it is easily publicly available online.

Fuck.

1
3

[–] weezkitty 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

This is chrony capitalism at it's worst. The ruling on corporate Personhood was pure cancer

0
24

[–] door_ 0 points 24 points (+24|-0) ago 

When I saw the title of the article I was thinking.... "Blender? What, like the 3D modeling software?"

And it actually was. Now they are forcing ads on popular videos? Man, that's low.

However, BF already has an ad-free Youtube account since 2008. We have monetizing disabled . . .

Wow, massive respect for the Blender Foundation.

0
3

[–] no-hurry-no-pause 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

forcing ads on popular videos?

How is a video hosting site supposed to make money?

Man, that's low.

Only from a socialist "everything should be free" perspective. In the real world, if you use a service youre supposed to pay for it.

0
2

[–] opticbit 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Yea I was thinking Bender is open source that cant be it. So i thought must be BlendTec got banned for some Will It Blend video. https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=KWqw5SpITg8 yes an iphone will blend

0
7

[–] StoneRights 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago  (edited ago)

(((youtube))) gonna (((youtube)))

this is some top shelf jewing

0
6

[–] mc1472 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Why!?!?

Do I need more reasons to use bitchute!

0
2

[–] Tazzermalt 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

exactly people need to move to another platform

0
4

[–] IDintDoNuthin 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Not applying rules and policy equally is the injustice, should be viewed like discrimination. Jim has a Trump sticker and was asked to remove it. Shakwanda in HR had an Obama sticker, no one cares.

0
3

[–] RollinDaGrassTyson 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Just another day at google

0
2

[–] dt1 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

"We have monetizing disabled"

OK, I may be a beta cuck, but what motivation does Youtube have to host a channel with over 100K subscribers if it can't make any money off it?

0
2

[–] notenoughstuff 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

My (initial) thoughts are along the same lines, but one major issue is that Google has been anything but upfront about it. Switch and bait to an extreme degree as far as I can see. And even when it comes time for them to force monetization or GTFO, they are not honest, clear or direct about it. If they had been (or are currently) upfront about it, there wouldn't have been much issue regarding it. I wonder if this silence is in part in order to maintain their huge market share regarding video sharing by trying to hide the potential problems and issues of using or even relying on Youtube.

That said, I still consider monetization through ads problematic. Partially because the vast majority of advertising today strongly encourages toxicity, breaking people psychologically bit by bit and extreme manipulation. Partially because it gives many tools to (extreme) manipulation and indoctrination among other. And partially because it makes it (in the short term and relative to other options, at least) very profitable to make or have people being more destroyed, wretched and incapable of defending themselves (against advertising, among other) and therefore easier to profit from regarding most advertising).

I still don't like using or depending on services where it is not obvious what the other part gets out of it, but while I am OK at avoiding such things, it is definitely something I could be better at avoiding. There is the somewhat old saying: "If you are not the customer, you are the product".

[–] [deleted] 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] weezkitty 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Then why is there a switch to turn monetization off?

0
2

[–] Alopix 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

It looks and sounds like all of their videos are being hit by copyright claims from themselves, and not having ads means content ID can't steal the ad revenue from those videos to give it to the rightful owner... who is the same person that uploaded the video... so it blocks the videos entirely?

Computers don't understand what it means to be evil, so when you tell an AI to be evil it gets confused and you have weird shit like this, a direct manifestation of the nonsensical thoughts of the people running it

load more comments ▼ (10 remaining)