Technology
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
I didn't say Youtube doesn't make money, I said it's not profitable, that is, the service alone does not generate enough money to pay for its own existence. If this HackerNews thread is to be believed, it's unlikely even google execs know whether the thing is actually profitable or not (it did generate 50B USD in revenue in 2023-24, which is obviously a lot, but only 11B more than Netflix (39B) despite serving a much, much wider audience)
Youtube exists in a situation very similar to that of Twitter pre acquisition. It's a money drain, but it's extremely useful to control and own. Elon Musk saw that he could buy Twitter, he bought it, ruined its value, but we're seeing that he didn't buy "the company", he bought a significant portion of people's mindshare, so to speak. When Google bought YT in 2006, they saw the writing on the wall, that high speed internet would lead to more people watching videos, which turned true, and they also used their power to fully consolidate Youtube as the place to watch free videos online. Facebook likely played a bigger hand in destroying any possible competition than Google, but that's a different story.
I remain skeptical despite Google's claims and I have to wonder how much money they spend on fighting stuff like ad blocking when most people don't even use any.
If they actually aren't profitable (which I doubt), it would be pretty funny if it were because they wasted a shitload of money trying to stop ad blockers.