Hacker News Reader

Comment by bitwize | Hacker News Reader

Thief!!!!

"Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing programming." --Jamie Kellner, former Warner executive

View on HN

I'm okay with this. They've deplatformed or suppressed most of my favorite YouTubers anyway, and they are trying to push a culture that I don't agree with.

Then stop using YouTube. If I don't agree with the grocery store's business choices, I can steal from them?

They're a monopoly and the leader of a winner-take-all market. They leverage their power to control the narrative on many topics. I think of any company to not support, YouTube is a good one to do so.

Not supporting is not the same as stealing. It's your business as to whether you want to support YT or not, but your disagreeing with their business practices or business model does not give you the right to steal. Perhaps I've misunderstood you (I'm reading this in context of your previous comment where you said you were okay with this, which I take to mean you're okay with stealing their content)?

We have different ethical standards then. If a company is a monopoly that actively leverages its power to manipulate entire populations, then I am fine with exploiting services which it makes available. They have the ability to keep me from accessing the site if I use an ad blocker. If they want me off the platform that much, they can boot me off.

True but this is a better argument for leaving. They will retain you without ad income largely because that is valuable to them compared to people leaving their platform and what a group of actual non-spectators might entail afa the marketplace.

I see what you're saying, but that's a prisoner's dilemma[1]. By that I mean it would require the coordination of millions of others who are also sick of the platform to behave irrationally. It also assumes that people who leech off of YouTube would be unwilling to try a different site because of their leeching.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma

This, I think, is your argument. It's helped me to see where you're coming from and - I don't disagree. This is a good point. Thanks for helping me see things differently!

Sounds like a Nash equilibrium.

You wouldn’t download a car!

> They've deplatformed or suppressed most of my favorite YouTubers anyway

> They're a monopoly and the leader of a winner-take-all market.

There is some cognitive dissonance in there, particularly with "deplatforming" and "monopoly" part. If your favorite creators are all gone, why don't you just stop using that service? (I have done exactly that, tbh).

There's no dissonance. A monopoly has the capacity to remove anyone from their platform with no real reprocussions, so that's what they do.

why don't you just stop using that service?

There are no real alternatives to YouTube that any real content creators are willing to move to, and there are still some users that I watch, so I download the videos and don't support the platform. I have my cake and eat it too, so to speak.

That’s not how the web works. The host (YouTube) serves the content, my user agent (Firefox and add-ons) renders it. Stop trying to turn the internet into cable TV.

YouTube can create its own client software (like it does for iOS/Android) and do what it wants. As long as it openly serves content via HTTP then I can render the content it sends anyway I want on my computer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com