zlacker

Someone on Twitter said: "Oh well, P2P mp3 downloads, although illegal, made contributions to the music industry"

That's not what's happening here. People weren't downloading music illegally and reselling it on Claude.ai. And while P2P networks led to some great tech, there's no solid proof they actually improved the music industry.

>>pyman+(OP)
Let's not forget Spotify ;)

https://gizmodo.com/early-spotify-was-built-on-pirated-mp3-f...

>>pyman+(OP)
I really feel as if Youtube is the best sort of convenience for music videos where most people watch ads whereas some people can use an ad blocker.

I use an adblocker and tbh I think so many people on HN are okay with ad blocking and not piracy when basically both just block the end user from earning money.

I kind of believe that if you really like a software, you really like something. Just ask them what their favourite charity is and donate their or join their patreon/a direct way to support them.

>>drcurs+K6
Those claims were never proved.

>>Imusta+a8
If you are someone who can think clearly, it's extremely obvious that the conversation around copyright, LLMs, piracy, and ad-blocking is

"What serves me personally the best for any given situation" for 95% of people.

>>Imusta+a8
I think that critique of this case is not about piracy in itself but how these companies are treated by courts vs. how individuals are treated.

>>Imusta+a8
And somehow actually paying for youtube which fully removes advertising and provides revenue to the service/creators is seen as an utterly absurd proposition by a staggering number of people.

>>x18746+RH2
Maybe because they don't want to reward Google for continuously running Youtube into the ground while still being worse than the free alternatives. Not to mention that they already watering down permium with premium lite, I give it two tears before you need to get premium+ to not see ads.

>>akimbo+iM2
Then don't use the service? Use one of the 'better' free alternatives. Let's see how long they remain free once (if) they actually see a meaningful amount of traffic. Complaining about advertising while using a service for which you pay nothing is immature and unreasonable. I hate advertising and have done everything I can to remove it from my life. That means paying for services that I enjoy using. I would rather provide value to the business via money than ad attention.

>>x18746+D75
Yes, The amount of traffic that youtube can sustain is really wild.

But yea one of the smallest nitpicks I have with them is the algorithm since its a hit or miss. Sure you can remove the algorithm completely but I would really wish if I could ask something like their SOTA AI models (Gemini) to make my algorithm for me right within youtube and I can say things like No clickbait etc.

>>x18746+D75
>Then don't use the service? Use one of the 'better' free alternatives

you can use alternatives but those do not have the actual content that is the reason anybody watches youtube (its in the name).

im also talking about free alternatives to premium being better for example offline videos still having DRM unlike every free yt downloader ever. the only way they have made premium better is by actively making the experience worse for everybody else is by pay walling the old default bitrate.

>Let's see how long they remain free once (if) they actually see a meaningful amount of traffic

there continues effort towards making the platform worse with every decision does not have anything to do with funding

https://www.thetoptens.com/youtube/youtube-features-were-rem...