310
Please! I can only post Riker so many times before it starts turning into a thing like beans did a while back!
Dare to dream, I see nothing wrong with a little Riker and beans
Gah, I can hear that sour note
You love to see it
Twitter for Nazis was never a viable business model. Neither is Netflix for Nazis.
NRA already had Netflix for Nazis for a while. It didn't go well.
Trump TV can recycle the same content.
Trump TV can recycle the same content.
Human centipede style?
"I just don't understand. Twitter did well. Netflix did well. What's so different about our platforms?" - some stupid fucking nazi.
Mastodon for Nazis, actually.
From what I've heard lately, Twitter is Twitter for Nazis.
And do they look like they still have a viable business model?
Someone tell Daily Wire that.
So, Republicans are against state-owned media, but have no problem when the President owns a media platform? Because that's what this is turning into. MAGAs are going to get their Three Minutes Hate (since three is more than two, so it's better) directly from their Dear Leader, without any other opinion getting in the way.
Ah yes, the good ol' pivot to video. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pivot_to_video
From the wiki page:
only advertisers, not consumers, prefer video over text.
This is so goddamn true it's not even funny. One thing in particular that really pisses me off is when I'm looking for a relatively simple piece of information, like how to beat a level I'm stuck on in a game, and every single result is a 15 minute video I need to scrub through in order to find the same information I could have scanned a text block for and found an under a minute.
I will search around for 10 minutes before I watch a video if I need a simple answer. I realize that's probably a bigger waste of my time, but I don't want to encourage that shit by adding to the algorithm.
The search engines like it if you take longer to get your result, they get to show you more ads.
I guess I'm screwed either way then, but at least I don't have to wait for the video to get to the fucking point to find out whether or not it's even helpful.
This is another reason I'm a fan of Kagi.
At a large technology conference I attended recently I saw a demonstration where the URL of the video was handed to an AI bot. Some very detailed prompts for requests for information were given to the bot and it pulled out all the info the user requested.
So maybe we'll have ubiquitous AI to do the scrubbing for those 5 second answers now buried in 15 minute videos.
Sounds like it searched the subtitles, found the time stamps, and returned the relevant text. Useful, but ultimately a pretty simple bot.
Much more impressive if it "watched" the video for the first time, formed it own subtitles, then pulled the data out. That would be a feat.
Much more detailed than that. In the video there was a 3 piece band playing for a few seconds on screen. The user prompt asked: "Tell me where I can buy the shirt the keyboardist is wearing at timestamp 32 seconds". The Bot found the website of the vendor selling the shirt.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Or game completion guides that insist on using 10 minute video clips instead of just putting a mark on a map.
Makes you wonder how much google search getting shitty enhances their YouTube profits.
I have a related thought. A lot of people are not good at reading. Those people are underrepresented on a text platform like this, but they're out there.
Something like half of US adults cannot read at an 6th grade level. ( https://www.apmresearchlab.org/10x-adult-literacy )
The us' education system is spotty. That doesn't help. There's also a long podcast about how reading is often taught badly: https://features.apmreports.org/sold-a-story/ (yes, it has a transcript)
But there are probably a lot of people who secretly sigh with relief when they find that five minute video instead of the two paragraph answer. They legit struggle to read it, and that's uncomfortable and embarrassing.
It's a fair point. Someone close to me would be like this.
That said, if a chatbot can explain verbally, would that be better than video in most cases ?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Not to mention, if the truth socialers can see each other, they'll be able to see what fugly chuds they all are.
There's no way any of them would be on camera without the bare minimum of: old baseball cap backwards, bandana, tacticool sunglasses
Beard or goatee. Filmed vertically in a pickup truck. Parked and non-moving optional.
Every single Adobe tutorial ever. Why the fuck do I have to scrub through 30 minute videos to figure out where the fuck they moved some feature to after the last update?
Unfortunately written walk throughs are often terribly written and the pictures are usually a fucking mess.
load more comments
(8 replies)
I doubt this was the reason. It's not stopped plummeting since day one.
Why on earth would running a service that actually costs money be a good idea for company so deep in a hole on a webservice that's comparatively free to run.
You’re expecting logic from a company that’s being run by idiots, grifters, and idiotic grifters?
It's almost definitely a bogus or halfhearted announcement to pump the stock price. Announce a new service to make people think that there's some future SOMEWHERE for big profits. Like you see Musk doing (recent 8/8 announcement for Tesla) for example.
In this case specifically to preserve a Trump payout.
And...It did not work.
If I had extra money to short a stock I would have gone all in when the stock got around $80. What an obvious meme stock.
This is where Fox News stop backing him.
Bruh a what platform
Can someone ELI5 why launching a streaming platform out of all things is causing the stock to drop?
Probably because of expected expenditures; creating and hosting a streaming platform isn't cheap, and if you have a company that already seems to be floundering, announcing "we're going to spend a boatload of money we don't have" doesn't instill confidence.
It's probably unrelated. The stock dropped before and after the announcement.
Video hosting is wildly expensive and unprofitable. Even Youtube, by far the most successful video hosting platform on earth, backed by the technical giants at Google, who literally own a "make money on the internet" engine, lost lots and lots of money for a decade.
Its not a good buisness to get into if all you have experience with is a Mastadon fork where you already spend 50mil/yr to make 5 mil/yr.
An old Stock Market adage is "Buy on rumor, sell on news". It's possible that some people were anticipating a larger announcement, and sold when they saw what the announcement actually was.
Or, it just went down because it is a bad stock to own, and it's just a coincidence there was a press release at the same time.
To be completely fair it’s been a shit week for the markets. Literally all of my holdings have been negative, including enormous ETFs with decades of consistent growth. This isn’t to say that Drump’s stock is doing well at all, just that this immediate 7% loss is more indicative of larger market trends than anything I’d reckon.
It definitely exceeded the overall market drop. Ended down 14% today alone.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Guess they don't have the cash to buy Rumble.
I'm expecting banned.tv to be up for sale soon!
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
310 points (97.5% liked)
News
23627 readers
2580 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS