Replying to @⁨return2ozma@lemmy.world⁩

Well that's a great incentive for clickbait content - cause now it won't matter if you can keep people watching after you've reeled them in.

You'd think this would be against YouTube's own best interest, considering they want to keep you watching, and people don't often like watching that kind of clickbait-farm slop...

Or maybe I and the people I know are in the minority, and a lot of people just watch it whether they like it or not, which would be disappointing to hear.

Replying to an earlier post

this is definitely against their interests, unless they just plan on having people watch ads everytime they open a video, watch that video for like 1 second and go to next and watch more ads. There is no depth of depravity i wont put past corporation executives, so that feels very plausible how they think and how detached they are from humans.

It could even be prelude to some other even more horrible, like they start gatekeeping actually decent stuff with premium aggressively.

We should really start archiving the good content of youtube more, just in case… I would too, but i dont have that much extra harddrive space and i dont have energy enough to start learning to build a personal storage system that is secure and fault resistant.

Replying to an earlier post

I mostly watch videos from channels I’m already subscribed to, but recently a few shows I watch have dropped new seasons and I was looking for recaps on YouTube. It was nothing but AI slop channel after AI slop channel. I would click off as fast as possible to not give them the view, but I guess they will all count going forward. It really sucks because we can’t opt out of these channels and many of them don’t even admit to being AI anyway.

I have no idea how this change is good for them. I totally agree that it seems like it’ll encourage low quality content. After a few of those videos I can’t imagine most people sticking around for another, but what do I know. I’m sure they have more accurate stats than I do.

Replying to an earlier post

Videos under 10 minutes can’t be monetised, I’m guessing they’re keeping that bit.

Videos under 8 minutes can’t have mid-roll adverts, but a 2-3 minute video can be monetized and serve front and end roll adverts. Even a 30 second idiot video (IE Shorts) can be monetized but if it’s in the slack-jaw brainslop category (IE Shorts) you need a crap ton of views on it to make money.

About 2 months ago I did an experiment on my youtube page where I made a stupid 40 second video and then formatted it for regular format and idiot format. Regular format got 1400 views and made $5.86. The shorts video got 2293 views and made .54 cents.

Most of the shorts views were in the first 4 days and then the algorithm dumped the video. That’s one is done. It won’t been seen again. The long form format got most of it’s views in the first 10 days but it continues to get views every week.

Replying to an earlier post

They already do that, sort of. The last I heard, people watching with an ad-blocker also blocked the mechanism that incremented the watch counter. This may or may not have been deliberate. The interesting thing is that the video appears in people's Watch History ad-blocker or not, so there was always an easy fix sitting in plain sight.

They told creators about the watch count problem along with at least one other secret thing that they said they weren't allowed to talk about. Charlie / Cr1TiKaL / penguinz0 said as much as he could about it a few months back.

I think the secret thing was probably "we're working on a way to get those view counts back, but don't tell anyone because we want to discourage people from using ad-blockers and if you tell them they're costing people views, it might convince them to turn it off."

Assuming true, that's all now out of the window because they've "fixed" the problem.

I expect another fierce attack on ad-blockers in Q4.

Replying to an earlier post

It makes it easier for advertisers because all views on the internet are equally inflated I guess but it also destroys 2 decades of internet history in that views played a huge role in Youtube culture and they will soon become meaningless with this update. Getting a million or a billion views on anything won‘t matter at all anymore.

But yeah Facebook, Xitter and TikTok have been doing it for years so it makes sense when you compete with them.

Replying to an earlier post

Same, but I don’t think it will. Luckily YT is demonetizing AI slop channels, so people running those at least have to do more legwork now in order to make it worth it. Overall, it’s good that all indicators suggest YT is recognizing AI slop as a problem for their platform.

I made a video about training your personal version of the algo to suggest less of it, in fact, but since you can’t outright turn it off, there’s no magic bullet.

Replying to an earlier post

Sounds like a desperate attempt to convince investors that there is growing user engagement by decreasing the amount of time needed for a video to be considered engaging. Must be that people are moving through shorts at breakneck speeds. I haven’t touched YouTube in many years as the platform turned into one giant ad service (even if you pay for to remove ads). I guess that is what Google is primarily anyway, a company aiming to serve personalized (maybe also behavioral) ad to people.

Replying to an earlier post

Here is my take - They are adding a new metric called “Engaged Views”, this is the same metric that a “View” was previously, something like - the person stayed after 30 seconds so they are “engaged”. Then they are going to sell ads based on the now inflated view number and use the “Engaged view” metric against creators so they can cut the amount they are paying for monetization.

Replying to @⁨return2ozma@lemmy.world⁩

So after butchering the like/dislike ratio, the view-count will also become utterly useless… What’s next, automatically subscribing users to inflate subscriber-count too? All these universally liked videos (no dislikes), views/exposure (zero engagement), advertiser-friendly content (threatened (shadow)banning or demonetization)! Now the only red flag to any malinformed advertiser might be a low subscriber-count; so just do it already. Well, alongside the lackluster performance of the ads themselves of course (which can only be measured after the transaction). And the best part: non of the ad-revenue will be shared with the propped up channels: as the recently heightened threshold, requires additional engaged viewers; as opposed to the TikTok-level, worthless kind.

Replying to an earlier post

I assumed they were already doing that. They’ve never been forthcoming in regards to what actually counts as a view.

  1. Especially weird if I view videos from my own channel, on my end it seems to tally each time I watch my own videos, which isn’t supposed to happen.

  2. And videos I never chose or clicked on automatically start playing as soon as I open the app or switch from “Me” to “Home.”

  3. Or if one person watches a video multiple times, does youtube count each of those views? Because for YouTubers whose livelihood depends on likes & views & subscribers, YouTube needs to make sure a creator isn’t manipulating the system with bot farms or friends/family/paid losers to repeatedly watch the videos.

Now my brain hurts & I’m grumpy. Bye.

Replying to @⁨return2ozma@lemmy.world⁩

So every time your mouse activates the thumbnail preview: that’s a view.

Don’t bother trying to turn that feature off. They just turn it back on. Flipping those fake settings buttons is just more engagement “money” for them to harvest.

On PC you need to turn off view history and use Ublock Origin to block EVERYTHING on YT but the player and some basic UI buttons and maybe comments.