I really wish they would make it it’s own thing and separate it from youtube.
I really wish they’d just kill it. We already have one tiktok, which is already one too many
I don’t bemoan google wanting to compete, I just want to see it as a separate product from YouTube.
removed by mod
I don’t have an issue with the shorts, I have an issue with how they’re mixed in with regular content and other than being recent often have little to no bearing on what the user is viewing or searching for
removed by mod
Advertising ruined YouTube years ago.
YouTube ruined YouTube
I swear to god these dumb social media sites are going to hell faster every day.
I used to like YouTube because I could watch all sorts of interesting things … funny things … informative things … things actually liked
Now my main YouTube recommended feed is filled with clickbait thumbnails of idiots making surprised or shocked faces to try to get your attention to get you to look at their dumb video of nonsense that has zero information and is not entertaining at all.
My take’s always been Monetization ruined YouTube.
Because if theres money to be made then theres a few million idiots that are happy to exploit the fuck out of the system and do essentially fuck all to earn cash.
But without money, the platform would have sunk.
It’s a harsh reality that all brilliant internet things have to face.
And i hate it.
Google ruined YouTube years ago.
Sounds like old guys complaining about the new move their employer is making.
Sounds like the old guys at work questioning why the 70 year old CEO started dressing like a teenager, hanging out with young women, vaping, and driving a Subaru WRX to work.
This content is better suited to TikTok and YouTube meddling with stuff like this, especially with regards to their algorithm, has killed tons of valuable types of content in the past.
Shorts are fine. Only minor complaint is that they lack descriptions and play like shit on desktop. Some of us like to browse YouTube on a computer on occasion…
There are only about 100 shorts in total on youtube, it seems. I would get 1-100 and even though I’ve disliked all of them, or clicked “don’t show me this channel again”, It will start back at #1 after I reach 100. It’s really, really bad, and most of the shorts videos are advice on how to start a powerwashing business.
what? that’s not my experience with shorts at all. There are plenty of different shorts, and I have no repetition (aisde from the regular copycats). Maybe the algorithm is like “dont like what I’m giving you? well fuck you too” lol
That person is not being honest. They want us to believe they disliked 100 consecutive shorts and on 101 it looped back to the first short? A total lie.
I suspect the same, yes
YouTubers already become a steaming pile of shit, the shorts being pushed in your face constantly is just a symptom. Their algo, content and ads are just horrific. I used to surf YouTube a ton, now I only go when I’m looking for specific instructional type videos, maybe a review. Watch that and leave.
Honestly, it’s the terrible content moderation policies that are going to kill YouTube, not a certain type of video.
Not just terrible, but incredibly hypocritical.
I’m not even sure it is bad policies. I am pretty sure that they just don’t have moderators.
I doubt anyone reads 99.9% of reports.
So you get bigotry and hate, you get insane and deadly DIYs, you get 12yo girls being creeped while posting random 5s clips from their lives.
Not to mention just the vast amount of extraordinarily low-quality content YouTube serves up. It’s amazing how bad a lot of the videos it thinks you will like are. The algorithm makes no sense.
But hey, here’s 16 different Joe Rogan clips with sigma male music in the background.
The terrible content moderation policies are what keep it alive. No one subscribes to youtube so it’s primary customers are the ad agencies. And they want content moderation
Case in point, when youtube buried one of Caitlin Doughty’s documentaries from Ask a Mortician.
The video in question: The Forgotten Disaster of the SS Eastland. It’s 43 minutes long, both well done, and respectfully done. Her team did a good job on it then some youtube automated system buried it for “violating community guidelines”.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=cN5hNzVqkOk
https://piped.video/watch?v=UCHt2MOVCbg
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
This Shorts issue seems to have measurable, constant and immediate effect in ad revenue and therefore platform profitability. Bad content moderation may or may not decrease engagement but in the end Google is a commercial enterprise that’s looking at the numbers at hand.
Yup, exactly. Some of the creators I’ve seen tell some horror stories about how YouTube work. Videos being demonised for random bullshit, YouTube giving 0 support to them as it’s Googles usual behaviour.
I feel like if some other big tech makes a decent alternative with ad revenue share it might fuck over YouTube. (And you can see how this can apply to X…)
Bingo. I don’t find shorts all that appealing (especially since I can’t cast them to a TV! Wtf, seems like core function there) but I agree, the REAL problem with YouTube is how much creators have to top toe around demonization.
“Demonetization” is just what YouTube’s promises to advertisers look like when they affect video creators.
Money on YouTube flows from advertisers. The revenue from charging advertisers to show ads is split between YouTube/Google and the video creator. If your video is not shown with ads, then there is no revenue to split.
YouTube gives advertisers a very small control over what videos their ads are shown on. They have a few different classifications of videos, and advertisers can choose which ones they want to be seen with. Advertisers are paying for the service of YouTube putting their ads on videos — but only the videos that YouTube thinks the advertiser does want to be seen with.
If your video is fully “demonetized”, that means YouTube has decided that no advertisers want to be seen with it; or that they are not willing to take revenue from showing ads on that video. But they’re still hosting it, making it available to viewers.
Video creators’ revenue is a share of the ad income from YouTube showing the video (and accompanying ads). A “demonetized” video is one that doesn’t show any ads — so there is no revenue to split. It’s not that YouTube is taking all the revenue and leaving none to the video creator. They’re not making any, because they don’t think the advertisers would be okay with being charged to be seen alongside that video.
However, the creator of a “demonetized” video is still receiving value from YouTube. It is not free to host that video — especially if it is popular. Network bandwidth, data storage, and transcoding of video for viewers’ browsers are not free; YouTube covers the cost of these. YouTube is willing to host a lot of videos that they make zero money from, at their expense, rather than censoring those videos by taking them down.
YouTube is willing to host a lot of videos that they make zero money from, at their expense
That’s just not true…they’re hosting it because they data-farm the living shit out of both the creator and anyone that gets tangentially close to their site. More content = more people visit = more data on these people = more money…They make a lot of money on this data, even if no ads are shown on a video, and are by no means doing it out of the goodness of their heart.
I didn’t say it’s charity. I said the video creator (who wants people to see their video) is receiving a service from the video host for no charge, which otherwise the creator would have to pay for. Hosting your own video on your own storage and network bill is not free. If you don’t believe me, go try doing it yourself.
If the creator didn’t think they were receiving any benefit, they would just take that video down. They sometimes do, but usually they don’t.
Publishing a book costs money. Someone has to buy the paper from the paper makers, and the ink from the ink makers. Someone has to line up the print on the page. Those people have to get paid, so they can go buy a sandwich and pay their rent. So, publishers exercise some judgment in not printing books that they don’t expect to sell, because they’ve gotta pay their bills, including parts and labor.
Same goes for video. Hosting a video costs money. Servers cost money. Power costs money. Network connectivity costs money. The people who run those services need to get paid so they can buy a sandwich and pay their rent. If YouTube is hosting your video, even if they’re not paying you a share of any ad revenue (because they’re not getting any), they’re paying bills that otherwise you would have to pay.
I’m not saying you’ve gotta be grateful or something. I’m saying if you want to understand what’s going on in the world, you can’t do that without understanding the actual bills that people are actually paying.
To put it simply: The hosting costs of demonetized videos are paid for by the hosting of monetized videos.
Don’t believe me? Take your video and store it on a server that you pay for, with network connectivity you pay for. That’s a thing you can do. You can even do it with Fediverse technology. However, it will in fact cost you some amount of money.
Hosting your own video on your own storage and network bill is not free. If you don’t believe me, go try doing it yourself.
I know this is true but why do I see so many people on lemmy pushing for self-hosting and even talking about it like its some low rent hobby?
It’s not exactly an expensive hobby, but it’s also not free.
YouTube hosts a lot of videos.
And — by the fundamental theorem of financial calculus that I just made up — “not free” times “a lot” equals “big bucks”.
And — by the fundamental theorem of financial calculus that I just made up — “not free” times “a lot” equals “big bucks”.
Finally, someone who gets my idea of math.
Yeah, but they aren’t making nearly the amount of money on the video as they would with the ads, and no where near enough to compensate the creators beyond free hosting.
You can still publish demonetized content, just don’t expect to make money from it on YouTube.
They use that data to sell ads at you across the entire internet. Google is making plenty of cash off those “demonitized” videos.
they’re all paying the bills by hawking raid shadow legends anyways, may as well not rely on youtube monetization anyways and host elsewhere
I wouldn’t know, I have an extensive set of modification over youtube that, among other thing, completely remove them from existence. Now if only I could do the same with the bad automatic translations…
It seems every new feature of youtube is something we have to fight against.
Tech has just reached the maturation point.
As with every industry, there’s a point where there’s enough growth for a win-win for the company and consumers, so consumers benefit with new features; once that dries up the company starts squeezing, so consumers endure new features and use the product despite the changes.
Shorts also cannot be cast from a mobile device. If I’m going through my curated channels while casting, the app give an error and requires me to stop casting before I can watch the short. I just skip it and don’t bother anymore.
Yeah, most of the youtube I watch is cast to the chromecast of whatever room I’m in. I can’t add shorts to the queue, so I just skip them.
Why the fuck do people still put content on that shit platform? Stop complaint about it and just leave. This Stockholm relationship shit has been going on for years now. Just quit using it.
And go where?? Most of the platforms either
-Can’t handle it
-Have no monetization plan for content creators
-Doesn’t support streaming for streamers
-Just hasn’t been hit yet by lawyersLike the only platform even close to it is Twitch, which has it’s own issues and doesn’t want to host videos to the extent youtube does.
This isn’t like Reddit or Twitter. The competitors aren’t remotely close and in some cases don’t even support the types of content Youtube does.
And go nowhere. If you have no other recourse but to post videoed on YouTube, re-evaluate your life. It’s no one’s only option. Either leave, or admit your Stockholm-like relationship, and learn to love your oppressor. Because its fucking annoying to hear people constantly complaining about their relationship while remaining in it.
So you don’t care where it ends up, you’re just whining about whiners.
Got it.
ROFL… sure. If you say so. I just think it’s hilarious to watch everyone bitch about a platform, and then keep using it.
Stop complaint about it and just leave.
You should be able to remove Shorts from your feed. I never watch them and yet they fill my feed up making it jore difficult to find real content. I’m specifically talking about the smart TV app which throws them all in together.
Surprising no one jumped onto you with thw revanced suggestions.
SmartTubeNext is what you want on TV platforms. You can turn shorts off. It blocks ads. And it has sponsorblock so it is configurable to additionally skip sponsor segments, self-promotion, intros, outros.
And as others have pointed out, you can also block them in browser with Ublock Origins and with Revanced which covers the desktop and mobile platforms.
I might have to look into that. I do wonder how it could know when a segment is sponsored.
I don’t care that much about the ads since we already have Premium so we don’t see the ads anyways.
Premium doesn’t skip the ads in the videos
That’s what 2X speed is for.
Well this is a passive function.
It’s crowdsourced and works quite well, been using it for the last year.
Thanks for the heads up
What I want is a YouTube viewer that cuts out ads that I can use on my Mac or my iPhone to use on my TV with a Chromecast.
Chromecast is how I view all my TV content.
deleted by creator
You’ll have to take that up with Apple. They’re the ones dictating that you can’t use any of the wonderful apps we have on Android.
As for Chromecast, SmartTube Next is what you want
Check out https://ghcr.io/nichobi/sponsorblockcast - run it on your LAN, and it’ll use SponsorBlock to clean up any YouTube-Chromecast stream you want.
Thanks!
And of course the thing I mentioned has now been superseded by https://github.com/gabe565/CastSponsorSkip
deleted by creator
There’s a little hidden button on the Shorts pane that you can see when you hover it. It gives you the ability to hide them for 30 days if you click it.
They’ve started putting them in the recommended videos pane on the right when playing videos in a browser. Worst of all, they put it near the top and in a much larger cell than the rest of the recommended videos.
I watch YouTube mostly on my TV (using a Shield) so I don’t think that would work for me.
deleted by creator
But the Shield was specifically bought to stream.
I’m using some custom ublock origin filters that I found somewhere to block shorts across all of youtube:
!Youtube Shorts www.youtube.com###guide-content #endpoint[title="Shorts"]:upward(ytd-guide-entry-renderer) www.youtube.com###items #endpoint[title="Shorts"]:upward(ytd-mini-guide-entry-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse #dismissible ytd-rich-grid-slim-media[is-short]:upward(ytd-rich-section-renderer) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse ytd-grid-video-renderer:has(span.ytd-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[aria-label="Shorts"]) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse ytd-rich-item-renderer:has(span.ytd-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[aria-label="Shorts"]) www.youtube.com##ytd-search ytd-video-renderer:has(span.ytd-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[aria-label="Shorts"]) www.youtube.com##ytd-watch-next-secondary-results-renderer ytd-compact-video-renderer:has(span.ytd-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[aria-label="Shorts"]) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse[page-subtype="subscriptions"] ytd-video-renderer span.ytd-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[aria-label="Shorts"]:upward(ytd-item-section-renderer) m.youtube.com##ytm-reel-shelf-renderer m.youtube.com##ytm-pivot-bar-renderer div.pivot-shorts:upward(ytm-pivot-bar-item-renderer) m.youtube.com##ytm-browse ytm-item-section-renderer ytm-video-with-context-renderer:has(ytm-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[data-style="SHORTS"]) m.youtube.com##ytm-browse ytm-item-section-renderer ytm-compact-video-renderer:has(ytm-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[data-style="SHORTS"]) m.youtube.com##ytm-search ytm-compact-video-renderer:has(ytm-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[data-style="SHORTS"])Also separately, for blocking videos that don’t exist yet, which I also dislike:
!Youtube upcoming videos www.youtube.com##ytd-browse ytd-grid-video-renderer:has(ytd-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[overlay-style="UPCOMING"]) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse ytd-rich-item-renderer:has(ytd-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[overlay-style="UPCOMING"]) www.youtube.com##ytd-browse[page-subtype="subscriptions"] ytd-video-renderer ytd-thumbnail-overlay-time-status-renderer[overlay-style="UPCOMING"]:upward(ytd-item-section-renderer)He’s talking about smart tv app. If those “shorts” are being pulled from some other subdomain then perhaps a block rule on that domain set on the router would help. But best just not to use youtube.
I’m pretty sure shorts are just Youtube videos but with a different UI.
You can take the video ID from the URL of a Shorts clip and put it in a normal Youtube URL and the shorts video plays with the normal Youtube player.
Basically.
I don’t know what I would do with this. And I mentioned to someone else that I mostly watch YT on a Shield. Is this even relevant to me?
Youtube just stopped being useful. Now it’s all republished TV and no personal expression. Totally boring.
God damn, have you tried looking for crap that is not just the front page of YouTube not signed in? There are endless streams of amazing content that is incredibly educational or hilarious or mind blowing if you know where to look. People making new music of all different genres with insane levels of skill, people literally sharing PhD level knowledge for free. There are plenty of valid criticisms of YouTube as a platform, and there is certainly some crap content out there, but don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are tons of incredibly talented and inspired content creators out there on the platform.
Can’t agree with a word said here.
A lot of channels exist for profit rather than being a hobby
But if you can find the small channels then it’s still worth it. It doesn’t help that you spend more time telling it not to recommend things than actually watching what it recommends
Not sure how small/big of an audience he has but https://www.youtube.com/@ryukahr does great Super Mario Maker content. I only ever watch his videos on YouTube, and nothing else.
They’re pushing it way too hard, just like the google+ shit back in the day but even more in your face. Stinks strongly of “we have tiktok at home”
I think they are a great addition for the short 1 minute ideas some youtubers have that may as well be posted on their 2nd channel.
Imo it could be improved with a landscape option and longer than 1min vids.deleted by creator
Idk really. At that point it would be like a regular video.
But YT treats shorts differently so idk what the upsides (currently) are on the creator side.
And if they are beneficiary for the creator in regards to <1min content, why not give them the option of uploading in landscape. The more options the merrier?deleted by creator
Fair point. I really enjoy the short sketches and clips some youtuber are doing. Usually they are also less polluted with plugging stuff.
