I click the dislike button on videos that I like
ivanca.tumblr.com
ivanca.tumblr.com
> Youtube has one of the worst user experiences out there
A bold statement, considering it’s the #1 video website in the world.
(Sub-quoted text)
> The ads are incessant, the up next related videos are horrible inaccurate, autoplay is a major pain, and for the last time NO I don’t want to sign up for youtube premium
The author doesn’t want ads but then doesn’t want to pay anything? How would anyone expect a video site to stream 4K video for free then?
YouTube Premium is a product I wish existed for many other social media sites like Facebook. It’s really an excellent option for heavy YouTube users (and includes a music service) and the author shouldn’t dismiss it.
Autoplay can be easily turned off in settings, that’s like YouTube 101.
Relevant videos are often quite within the wheelhouse of your history. And you don’t have to watch them, turn off autoplay and use your subscriptions tab or just search for what you want. They’re recommendations not mandatory entertainment.
> One part that really stands out is how bad is recommendation engine is, and one of the main reasons is so bad is that is the user cannot chose what their recommendations are based on
Yeah and? Is this a problem? Can you choose what’s in a newspaper or what comes back when you type something in a search engine?
Smashing the dislike button is not really a solution and it’s no wonder that YouTube is ignoring that input. The author watched the entire video to the end perhaps even in full screen and then hit dislike, YouTube’s algorithm actually knows they’re just lying because they have that information about your browser behavior.
I guess I expected free/cheap hosting to scale enough for video by now. Little geocities sites used to only have a a banner ad and many others had free web hosting with their ISP or purchased some web space. We never evolved a video equivalent of this, probably mostly because youtube exists and could take billions in losses for years. There are distributed alternatives but I don't think any of them are quite like cgi-bin for video.
Have you considered is the #1 number in the world despite its UI not thanks to it? Maybe more to do with the net effect of people uploading videos since 2006 more than being the best out of the competition.
>Yeah and? Is this a problem? Can you choose what’s in a newspaper or what comes back when you type something in a search engine?
Comparing a digital personalized experience like twitter/fb/yt offers with a newspaper may be not that apt.
This, I think, speaks to the true tragedy of our freemium internet culture: users expect all services to be free of cost, free of nuisance, and heavily moderated and curated.
Google and Facebook have come to dominate because they offer the best, or least worse, offerings in this regard; and their monopolistic role and ability to run services at a heavy loss has prevented meaningful competition.
Wikipedia does that, basically. There are a few overzealous donation banners, vandalized pages, etc. but for the most part it's fine.
Isn't YouTube, with all their analytical data, supposed to be smarter and more tailored for me than a print newspaper? Is that really where the bar is?
> Smashing the dislike button is not really a solution and it’s no wonder that YouTube is ignoring that input. The author watched the entire video to the end perhaps even in full screen and then hit dislike, YouTube’s algorithm actually knows they’re just lying because they have that information about your browser behavior.
If I watch a video, and choose to thumb it down, who are they to assume I actually want to watch more of that content, when I've specifically said I don't. This is just another case of a company thinking they're smarter than the users of the product.
Isn't YouTube, with all their analytical data, supposed to be smarter and more tailored for me than a fucking print newspaper? Is that really where the bar is?
> Smashing the dislike button is not really a solution and it’s no wonder that YouTube is ignoring that input. The author watched the entire video to the end perhaps even in full screen and then hit dislike, YouTube’s algorithm actually knows they’re just lying because they have that information about your browser behavior.
Second, if I watch a video, and choose to thumb it down, who are they to assume I actually want to watch more of that content, when I've specifically said I don't. This is just another case of a company thinking they're smarter than the users of the product.
A good example: I liked "Azealia Banks - 212" on Youtube. Then, I got some random article about some crazy thing she did on Google Now and clicked. Now, there's some article about her in my feed literally every single day. I see how it happens, but it's annoying and makes me hate the product.
The last time I had Netflix it was still telling me that because I watched Sky Captain, it is recommending a bunch of stuff (that is similar to Sky Captain).
All I can think is, how about we pretend that never happened?
So, this isn't a problem unique to YouTube. This is a problem everywhere the computers are left to make recommendations for me.
I think the word "prosumer" encapsulates why she's wrong. Wikipedia defines it as
> This increase in participation has flourished following the increasing popularity of Web 2.0 technologies, such as Instagram, Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. This rise in user participation blurs the line between production and consumption activities, with the consumer becoming a prosumer.
This is wrong. Youtube is producing a product which she uses. The fact that she decides to give YouTube videos for internet points doesn't make her some special new category of economic actor that deserves special "pro" rights if she'll watch YouTube ads and give them videos irregardless.
firefox multi-account-tab-containers is another way to create separate "identities" that get a different set of recommendations each.