Our Channel Could Be Deleted - Gamers Nexus
Technology
227
Beiträge
112
Kommentatoren
1.5k
Aufrufe
-
This post did not contain any content.
The actual title of the video is:
Our GPU Black Market Documentary Has Been Taken Down by Bloomberg
Way less Click Bait sounding. And while a shitty thing for Bloomberg to do it is not any different than what tons of channels have been dealing with for years. So the Youtube sky is not falling any faster now than it was last week.
-
Just because it's being normalized by the Linuses and Tech Jesuses on youtube doesn't mean we shouldn't call it what it is.
This video is click bait and the content is rather mid. We're clearly supposed to feel some kind of outrage over a freedom of press kinda thing, but in reality the video is more like: waaah our ad revenue took a hit on this one video because of Big Evil Company abusing the copyright claim system, NOT FAIR! (Ignoring that this has been happening hundreds if not thousands of times per day for over a decade to much smaller channels than GamersNexus, without a peep from Tech Jesus on the issue).
I’m actually on your side. I was bringing up those questions to question why they would get upset with be gently applying clickbait label.
Usually fans of these channels fall in line with the rhetoric.
But once again, I tried a conversation style that failed when I didn’t get a response from who I was talking to, and I got downvotes.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Sure, then post it on peertube.
-
Isn't this a bit disingenuous to why they originally started to change the algorithm though?
People figured it out and started abusing it by spinning up proxy websites that would just link to the sites they wanted higher up in the rankings. You could argue Google only became an advertising company so that they could regulate that whilst also taking a slice.
I'm not arguing that they've since lost their way though.
SEO used to be a fulltime job.
-
The actual title of the video is:
Our GPU Black Market Documentary Has Been Taken Down by Bloomberg
Way less Click Bait sounding. And while a shitty thing for Bloomberg to do it is not any different than what tons of channels have been dealing with for years. So the Youtube sky is not falling any faster now than it was last week.
A copyright strike is a little bit more serious than a content id match, fwiw.
Understand copyright strikes - Computer - YouTube Help
Copyright strikes are different from Community Guideline strikes and Content ID claims. If you get a
(support.google.com)
-
Yeh, absolutely.
The DMCA takedown works because music/film industry execs have previously gone after YouTube for not responding to legitimate copyright infringements.
So YouTube now favours the person claiming the strike and makes it very difficult for the defendant to exonerate themselves.Changing how they publish will sidestep YouTube overplaying.
But YouTube has revenue split with content creators, and has an absolutely massive audience with discovery algorithms and community stuff. Moving away from that platform would be an insane moveWell I didn't mean not publishing on YouTube completely because we know that's not possible at this point in time, I meant like having an archive of their own videos accesible via Torrent... Kinda like how some let's players are doing by putting their uncensored versions on Patreon (with swearing and stuff) or early access to their content, but in this case, putting the YouTube version in a torrent in case some shit like this happens so the access is not lost forever.
Like, not choosing only one way of publishing or another, just casting a wider net.
-
Well I didn't mean not publishing on YouTube completely because we know that's not possible at this point in time, I meant like having an archive of their own videos accesible via Torrent... Kinda like how some let's players are doing by putting their uncensored versions on Patreon (with swearing and stuff) or early access to their content, but in this case, putting the YouTube version in a torrent in case some shit like this happens so the access is not lost forever.
Like, not choosing only one way of publishing or another, just casting a wider net.
Oh, gotcha.
I'm pretty sure they have a patreon.
They ran a Kickstarter to fund the production of this specific 3h episode, and all levels of backers got a USB key with a copy of the video on it.The issue isn't it being deleted. It won't disappear.
The issue is the contents potentially not reaching as many new viewers unaware of Nvidias shady behaviour and how the black market of GPUs actual works because Bloomberg (who have sponsorship from Nvidia) DMCAd the video.
Either because their articles were used as a source and the text of those articles were shown on screen (potentially reducing views those articles would have received if they were linked? Or something? No idea how you would provide a snapshot of the information as it was at the time of publishing the video, tho. Cause the article could be edited after GNs video was published, making any soft references meaningless).
Or because they used some of Bloombergs video of POTUS, which (in my understanding) cannot be copyrighted.So to me, it seems like GNs video was frivolously DMCAd to reduce its impact on Nvidia.
The impact of that DMCA is that: as it was starting to trend it gets taken offline for ~10 days. After which, YouTube's algorithm will be unlikely to promote it via its algorithm because it hasn't had any new views for 10 days.
Effectively killing the video.
Gamers Nexus gets a "strike" against their channel (of which they get 3).
Bloomberg has 0 repercussions.Unless we all kick up enough fuss to cause some repercussions, and support GN enough to get the exposé trending again.
-
The actual title of the video is:
Our GPU Black Market Documentary Has Been Taken Down by Bloomberg
Way less Click Bait sounding. And while a shitty thing for Bloomberg to do it is not any different than what tons of channels have been dealing with for years. So the Youtube sky is not falling any faster now than it was last week.
It's not uncommon for titles to change over the first few hours after a release (A-B testing). I've seen the title as posted by the OP yesterday on my feed.
-
Messy. Youtube could just refuse to serve his videos because they decide they don't want to
They have more lawyers than God, I can't help but think the contract they all have with Google favors Google to the extreme.
Yeh, exactly.
It's a private company.
It's a huge platform, but YouTube can choose what YouTube is.The only way any change happens is if YouTube gets raked over the coals by enough content producers (that they could collectively start their own platform) by media and potentially by governments (recognising them as some sort of critical communications or something and implementing regulations?).
Or if all the YouTube viewers decide they have had enough and go elsewhere (where, tho? Kinda goes hand-in-hand with creators starting their own platform).So the pressure needs to keep building, YouTube needs to keep doing shitty things. Eventually... Hopefully?... Something changes: YouTube gets better, a new platform is born.
-
"small."
Make no mistake. Gamers Nexus is a multi million dollar company.
Sure, Bloomberg is much, much bigger. But while gamers Nexus is the underdog, it's not the toothless underdog. That little fucker will bite in bloomberg's ankles before it dies and tbf: it looks like it's already yapping and took it's first bite.
What’s the difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars?
Answer: roughly a billion dollars.
Being a million-dollar company means nothing against a company where a million dollars can count as little more than a rounding error.
-
Yeh, exactly.
It's a private company.
It's a huge platform, but YouTube can choose what YouTube is.The only way any change happens is if YouTube gets raked over the coals by enough content producers (that they could collectively start their own platform) by media and potentially by governments (recognising them as some sort of critical communications or something and implementing regulations?).
Or if all the YouTube viewers decide they have had enough and go elsewhere (where, tho? Kinda goes hand-in-hand with creators starting their own platform).So the pressure needs to keep building, YouTube needs to keep doing shitty things. Eventually... Hopefully?... Something changes: YouTube gets better, a new platform is born.
We need monetization in peertube, and peertube to have community tools like (or exceeding) lemmy.
I think it's a pretty low bar, but it's not just going to happen without massive interest
-
People with enough of a viewership would still be offered sponsorship for videos. Like YouTubers who do their own ads in videos.
Lots of times the sponsorship is a free product (that doesn’t pay the bills) but larger channels that have several million subscribers have the leverage to ask for thousands of dollars for a sponsorship.
-
You can easily get three strikes in a few moments with frivolous takedown
So what you're basically saying is that any YouTube channel since the dawn of the DMCA has been permanently in the status of "Our Channel Could Be Deleted". That's... not exactly news is it? What makes the GamersNexus case special?
What's different is they are being targeted.
-
Why is it a big deal? Don’t you agree with Linus that clickbait is just part of the game, and we should accept the sensational thumbnails and titles? Hate the game, not the player and all that?
I don't think it's clickbait. if you made a company angry, it's not that hard to get another 2 strikes too now that they are watching more closely, and it's very hard if not impossible to get back a channel from that.
-
I’m actually on your side. I was bringing up those questions to question why they would get upset with be gently applying clickbait label.
Usually fans of these channels fall in line with the rhetoric.
But once again, I tried a conversation style that failed when I didn’t get a response from who I was talking to, and I got downvotes.
sorry, not everyone is browsing lemmy as if it was a full time job. also I'm not a fan of them in that sense. Maybe I have watched 3 of their videos and even that was years ago. I just understand that copyright strikes are very dangerous even for a big channel like that, because independently of how many videos you have, it's always only 3 strikes you need to get your channel deleted, and if they are mad and start looking it could easily happen.
-
sorry, not everyone is browsing lemmy as if it was a full time job. also I'm not a fan of them in that sense. Maybe I have watched 3 of their videos and even that was years ago. I just understand that copyright strikes are very dangerous even for a big channel like that, because independently of how many videos you have, it's always only 3 strikes you need to get your channel deleted, and if they are mad and start looking it could easily happen.
No worries are directed at you. It’s just me lamenting how I keep going about things wrong.
I need to touch grass, for sure.
-
I don't think it's clickbait. if you made a company angry, it's not that hard to get another 2 strikes too now that they are watching more closely, and it's very hard if not impossible to get back a channel from that.
So it was strike 1? And wasn’t strike 3 and the deletion is pending? It’s not the worst stretch of things, but it’s stretching it a little unless the deletion is pending.
I don’t think your perspective is invalid tho.
-
No worries are directed at you. It’s just me lamenting how I keep going about things wrong.
I need to touch grass, for sure.
nah, me too, other days I use it too much I have to admit.
-
So it was strike 1? And wasn’t strike 3 and the deletion is pending? It’s not the worst stretch of things, but it’s stretching it a little unless the deletion is pending.
I don’t think your perspective is invalid tho.
afaik (but take it with a grain of salt) at 3 strikes the decision is not pending but automatic, and very hard to reverse, partly because kost of decision making at youtube has been automatic for a long time, and just like with google they don't have a support channel (that is easy to find and reach)
-
He gets around 750 Million Youtube verified views per month , he's releasing about 5 hours of content per month.
He's not self-hosting that cheaply.
His sponsors are giving him the a nice pile of money based on his view count, he's not going to manage that on his own without the algo pumping users to him. Search engines kind of suck and video bloggers at that scale need organics to keep going.
You can't add monetization without discoverability and accessibility.
Looking at those numbers, I don't even know that peertube could handle it, he'd probably need to setup his own cluster to mirror them all.
There's a reason why we don't have a lot of competition to YouTube.
He'd probably have to have a dedicated video hosting site, not unlike GameTrailers and similars from the very early 2010s
