(it is named this way because it was an archival effort to collect the information before the dislike feature was removed)
It can be used to find things like the most controversial videos; top videos with a description in a certain language, etc.
from the article:
> It’s possible that YouTube will object to the existence of this resource or the methods we used to create it. Counterpoint: I believe that high level data like this should be published regularly for all large user-generated media platforms. These platforms are some of the most important parts of our digital public sphere, and we need far more information about what’s on them, who creates this content and who it reaches.
The gov't ought to make it regulation to force platforms to expose stats like these, so that it can be collected by the statistics bureaus.
So has been the big banks, large corporations, land but they all feed off each other and the government. What we want as a community is usually quite different to what they decide to do.
Nobody is stopping users from selecting one of the many YouTube competitors out there (eg - Twitch, Facebook, Vimeo) to host their content. We could also argue that savvy marketers/influencers use multiple hosting platforms.
YouTube's data is critical for YouTube and Google, which is basically an elaborate marketing company.
Governments should only enforce oversight on matters such as user rights and privacy, anticompetitive practices, content subject matter, etc.
With very limited exception, Vimeo imposes a 2TB/month bandwidth limit [0] on all accounts. If you exceed that limit and don’t agree to pay for your excess usage, Vimeo will shut you down.
[0] https://help.vimeo.com/hc/en-us/articles/12426275404305-Band...