Edit history

Yeah, it’s bad.

Non-watermarked slop is going to be impossible to detect going forward, and the false detections are going to get worse.

The fundamental issue is the monetization scheme. It’s just too lucrative for spammers. YouTube’s economics are broken, and getting worse.

…Hence, no matter what YouTube says, YouTube is going to double down on “detectors,” because Alphabet leadership couldn’t care less about destroying longstanding creators. Their only objective is to suppress just enough spam to keep ad buyers unconcerned next quarter, no matter the long term damage; that’s someone else’s problem.

Yeah, it’s bad.

Non-watermarked slop is going to be impossible to detect going forward, and the false detections are going to get worse.

The fundamental issue is the monetization scheme. It’s just too lucrative for spammers. YouTube’s economics are broken, and getting worse.

…Hence, no matter what YouTube says, YouTube is going to double down on “detectors,” because Alphabet leadership couldn’t care less about destroying longstanding creators. They just want the line to go up for next quarter, which means suppressing just enough to not bother ad buyers.

Yeah, it’s bad.

Non-watermarked slop is going to be impossible to detect going forward, and the false detections are going to get worse.

The fundamental issue is the monetization scheme. It’s just too lucrative for spammers. YouTube’s model does not work anymore.

…Hence, no matter what YouTube says, YouTube is going to double down on “detectors,” because Alphabet leadership couldn’t care less about destroying longstanding creators. They just want the line to go up for next quarter, which means suppressing just enough to not bother ad buyers.

Yeah, it’s bad.

Non-watermarked slop is going to be impossible to detect going forward, and the false detections are going to get worse.

The fundamental issue is the monetization scheme. It’s just too lucrative for spammers.

…Hence, no matter what YouTube says, YouTube is going to double down on “detectors,” because Alphabet leadership couldn’t care less about destroying longstanding creators. They just want the line to go up for next quarter, which means suppressing just enough to not bother ad buyers.

Yeah, it’s bad.

Non-watermarked slop is going to be impossible to detect going forward, and the false detections are going to get worse.

The fundamental issue is the monetization scheme. It’s just too lucrative for spammers.

…So what’s actually going to happen is that YouTube is going to double down on “detectors,” because Alphabet leadership couldn’t care less about destroying longstanding creators. That doesn’t affect short-term revenue.

Yeah, non-watermarked slop is going to be impossible to detect going forward, and the false detections are going to get worse.

The fundamental issue is the monetization scheme. It’s just too lucrative for spammers.

…So what’s actually going to happen is that YouTube is going to double down on “detectors,” because Alphabet leadership couldn’t care less about destroying longstanding creators. That doesn’t affect short-term revenue.