zlacker

>>babelf+(OP)
So basically:

Come up with contrived BS that caters to younger audiences, micromanage anyone who is holding you up, and attempt to game a blackbox algorithm on a site you don't pay for (YouTube)

The whole modern social media / influencer sphere seems like a huge bubble that will pop eventually. Google has already started wiping inactive accounts[0] presumably because storage isn't truly infinite or cheap. I imagine YT will also take the same path eventually.

0: https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/12418290?hl=en

>>hypeat+s5
The guy has earned a net worth of maybe $700 million starting with YouTube. Saying it's all a bunch of contrived bullshit hides the fact the he is obviously brilliantly talented and dedicated at making a business from YouTube. If you or others blow off a document he wrote or an interview he gives because most of his videos are "just" gaming an algorithm then you must not be a very curious person.

I don't like coffee but I still might learn about the business since it's so big.

>>zulban+2a
Maybe... but I read it more as (and tend to agree with) blow it off because it's explicitly an approach that makes the world a worse place in almost every way except perhaps your bank account balance. It's possible to be successful without being mercilessly amoral and there's a big difference between not personally caring for a product vs thinking a product is toxic and holding your nose anyway for the sake of a paycheck.

>>abeyer+vb
You seem to be arguing there's no use in learning about immoral businesses.

>>zulban+3f
I mean should we be learning about how to run a private equity firm that buys up all the heart clinics in a metropolitan area then jacks up prices? It's not really that interesting unless you're writing anti-trust legislation.

I'm not saying Mr.Beast is even that bad but spare us the patronizing attitude at least.