YouTube is Removing the Dislike Count on All Videos Across its Platform (techcrunch.com) 148
YouTube today announced its decision to make the "dislike" count on videos private across its platform. The decision is likely to be controversial given the extent that it impacts the public's visibility into a video's reception. From a report: But YouTube believes the change will better protect its creators from harassment and reduce the threat of what it calls "dislike attacks" -- essentially, when a group teams up to drive up the number of dislikes a video receives. The company says that while dislike counts won't be visible to the public, it's not removing the dislike button itself. Users can still click the thumbs down button on videos to signal their dislike to creators privately. Meanwhile, creators will be able to track their dislikes in YouTube Studio alongside other analytics about their video's performance, if they choose. The change follows an experiment YouTube ran earlier this year whose goal was to determine if these sorts of changes would reduce dislike attacks and creator harassment. At the time, YouTube explained that public dislike counts can affect creators' well-being and may motivate targeted campaigns to add dislikes to videos. While that's true, dislikes can also serve as a signal to others when videos are clickbait, spam, or misleading, which can be useful.
Ohhh, goodie! (Score:5, Funny)
They plan to do a Rewind Video this year!
No Kidding (Score:5, Insightful)
At the time, YouTube explained that public dislike counts can affect creators' well-being and may motivate targeted campaigns to add dislikes to videos. While that's true, dislikes can also serve as a signal to others when videos are clickbait, spam, or misleading, which can be useful.
I suppose the best solution is to allow the channel owners who are somehow theoretically harmed by dislikes to disable them entirely or on individual videos.
Oh wait, they could already do that. And in practice, wouldn't you know it, seeing disabled ratings was also a signal that such "videos are clickbait, spam, or misleading, which can be useful." Thanks for completely removing that that last bit of useful user feedback, Google.
Re:No Kidding (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. The problem is you have Stupid Juvenile Whiners who use the bullshit excuse "dislike == hate" because all they can do is parrot the "haters gonna hate" excuse. They are incapable of understanding:
* There is a wide range between loving, liking, feeling neutral, disliking, and hating something.
* It is possible to dislike one bit of incorrect information but still like the rest of the video. All they can do is spew some myopic narrative by pretending every "issue" only has 2 sides. If you don't agree with me then you MUST be against me. They are more interested in "feelings" then (inconvenient) facts.
At least /. has context for why something is +1 or -1. YouTube has no context. It isn't "hating" a video that is clickbait or spewing incorrect facts (lying.)
I wouldn't be surprised if YouTube eventually removes the "thumbs down" button because it is "an attack".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Dislikes count as engagement and mean that someone probably watched an ad, so creators will often tell people to like or dislike because either way it helps them.
Another issue is that people dislike videos just to stop them getting recommended. They might want to watch the video, but not get bombarded with similar ones afterwards.
Brigading is a problem too, and apparently Google has no answer to that other than to turn off the dislike count.
Re: (Score:2)
Dislikes have nothing to do with the recommendation system.
Seriously? That's such an obvious way it should work.
Top Rated Comment, "This Video Is Shit," or "TVIS" (Score:5, Interesting)
It's OK, if enough people figure it out, the top rated comment on many videos will be, "This video is shit." :)
Just sort the comments appropriately.
Re: (Score:2)
It's OK, if enough people figure it out, the top rated comment on many videos will be, "This video is shit." :)
Just sort the comments appropriately.
They'll just do like eBay, where first they removed the option to leave negative feedback for buyers, then they made it so if you leave positive feedback saying "Great transaction except the part where you pay", they'll remove it and send you a nasty warning saying not to do it again or you might get Cancelled. So then sellers thought of cancelling sales to anyone without recent positive feedback, and eBay started cracking down on that.
None of this "metrics" stuff is about anything meaningful or helpful to
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. There's nothing like watching a 45 second action video with a 25 minute add beforehand. I'm sorrry, Google, not even a 45 second video of Jesus pushing the stone aside would be worth watching a 25 minute advertisement.
Re:Top Rated Comment, "This Video Is Shit," or "TV (Score:5, Informative)
It's easy for the video owner to delete negative comments. They can't do the same for the like / dislike bar without removing it entirely, which arouses suspicion from viewers.
Re: (Score:2)
You've clearly never made any youtube content.
You don't get "just one" negative comment, you get brigaded with 10,000 comments. Per hour. Why waste your time on that. Make comments "by approval only" if it's not your core content.
Go to any popular video, and you will see every second or third comment be some spam link. Who is going to spend days babysitting videos to remove spam? Nobody. Especially when then content creator is responsible for the comments, and ads will be affected if they don't delete negat
Re: (Score:2)
You've clearly never made any youtube content.
And you clearly don't watch it.
Go to a video with 10k views and say all that to me again. Most videos (>99%) don't have thousands of comments.
Likes & dislikes are the same for a channel ow (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I see most of the low number dislikes as being automated bots just dropping one during a flyby anyway and then a few from some trolls.
The primary reason for me to do a dislike is a robot voice since they always get the intonation entirely wrong so it's hard to understand them sometimes even if the words are right.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
If a video is peddling misinformation or cruelty or hate speech, you can report it (three dot menu).
Dislikes count the same as likes as far as YouTube is concerned so they are ineffective.
Re: (Score:3)
They're engagement and all engagement is good as far as google is concerned. Engagement means people are on the platform watching ads.
Re: (Score:2)
No it isn't. The dislike count just means it's highly-engaged in a negative way. That's why it gets promoted.
Every time I've seen an argument in favor of having the dislike button or counts, it's always in some sociopathic way. "how will I punish this crappy creator I don't like every time they post a new video" "how will I direct my chan/cow/drama channel's viewers to dislike-bomb it now?"
Nobody stops to ask "does my dislike of this video do anything to the video-maker", rather it's about the youtube algor
Re: (Score:3)
Every time I've seen an argument in favor of having the dislike button or counts, it's always in some sociopathic way.
You must be listening very selectively. The downvote ratio tells me whether a video is likely clickbait, has poor audio quality, or doesn't offer much eventual value after a long setup. I don't want to hurt content creators (except in the case of intentional clickbait), but other viewers have the right to do what they can to avoid wasting their time.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but I don't get the joke. The resulting discussion seemed to ignore your FP. No explanation there, and the obvious websearch came up dry. Doesn't seem funny as the J-key 7-second rewind feature of YouTube. So how about a hint?
(What I'm looking for (but so far haven't found) in the discussion is either consideration of why simpleminded absolute solutions so often fail (though there are many comments suggesting why this one will fail) or deeper analysis of the stinking EVIL that is YouTube.)
(My own (si
Re: (Score:2)
YouTube posted the past couple years "Rewind" videos at the end of the year. Until the 2018 "Rewind" video [youtube.com] became the most disliked video on YouTube [wikipedia.org], eclipsing everything that came before, or since.
In 2019, they tried to play it safe and released what was essentially a "top 10" video like many others that litter YouTube. It was equally "well" received (though it's "only" place 6 on the most disliked YouTube videos).
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the clarification. Reminds me of the composite videos and pictures that I used to get from Google Photos. Same technology? Some sort of AI, I guessed.
I didn't hate them, but I can't recall ever liking or trying to save any of them, which was a standard option. Well, except for a couple of the automatic panorama videos it stitched together from sets of pictures that I deliberately hoped would be stitched together. (Then it apparently automatically decided to erase the panorama shots even though I'
Re:Ohhh, goodie! (Score:5, Insightful)
I"m guessing the current administration doesn't really like the dislike counts to be public.
Ah yes, this is all a scheme by Sneaky Joe to hide the dislikes on his videos. They're devastated by all the rubes taking a stand and clicking that thumbs-down button.
Far more likely this is in response to the meteoric rise in corporate sponsored videos on the platform, and the negative response via dislikes that many of them have started to get. A company spending $25,000+ for a sponsorship on a big channel doesn't want to see a massive dislike bar, which usually happens for videos that are some "influencer" blatantly reading an ad copy.
I'd guess it's also to deal with the "problem" of corporate channels getting hit with dislikes on videos which "harm their brand". For example, trailers for bad movies [youtube.com] and video games [youtube.com]. Plus like the OP mentioned, YouTube themselves [youtube.com] got hit with the clue-bat pretty hard a few years ago.
Speaking of sponsored videos - if you haven't come across the SponsorBlock [mozilla.org] addon yet, do yourself a massive favor and give it a try. It automatically skips over sponsorship segments (and you can enable skipping other content as well). If you watch much on YouTube it's almost as necessary as an ad blocker nowadays.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really mind sponsorship for channels I actually like. At least here I can be halfway certain that the one running the channel actually gets the money and YouTube doesn't rake in the majority of the money.
What I don't get is that people actually go and buy that stuff. Why'd I buy a VPN service that I know is crap because someone making fun of flat earth retards gets paid for talking about it is beyond my comprehension.
The bigger threat are those influenzas that hawk their wares to kids who actually t
Re: (Score:2)
What I don't get is that people actually go and buy that stuff.
An hand tool rescue fans here? I'm likely going to give evaporust a go next time I have something I want to de-rust without damage. I've got a large tub of citric acid, but it's a bit more aggressive and can slightly etch the surface. Fine if you're painting it (good even: improves the key) but not if you want it unpainted.
Re: (Score:2)
Far more likely this is in response to the meteoric rise in corporate sponsored videos on the platform
But most likely of all is that it's for exactly the reason stated: Groups organizing to downvote content they dislike, resulting in an inaccurate signal, both for users and for the ranking algorithm. Upvotes are also subject to deliberate manipulation by groups, but it's much harder because typical numbers are much larger.
I realize that I should be more cynical if I want to be cool on slashdot, but I quit caring about that a long time ago.
Participation medals for everyone! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: Participation medals for everyone! (Score:3)
"Only positive feedback allowed; please do not hurt our precious snowflakes."
Sadly, your comment is not very far from the truth.
Q: How do you kill a room full of people?
A: Just say the words "personal responsibility".
It's probably more about bots (Score:4, Informative)
Also participation trophies are a thing that came about because professionally trained educators noticed that young children often didn't get any positive reinforcement or feedback at home because, this is a dirty little secret you're not allowed to talk about, the majority of children are accidents and unwanted. Educators studied this and found that giving them positive reinforcement rather than discouraging them from achieving prevented them from giving up entirely.
A long time ago in a galaxy far far away people on slash dot would follow the science and evidence. That was before the dark times when everything became reactionary b.s.
Re: (Score:3)
...professionally trained educators noticed that young children often didn't get any positive reinforcement or feedback at home because, this is a dirty little secret you're not allowed to talk about, the majority of children are accidents and unwanted.
Sources please.
You are stating two things:
- Most children are accidents
- Because they were accidents, they are unloved
Even if the first statement were true, which I don't believe it is given that birth control and abortions have been commonplace for decades, the second is most certainly not true. Accident or not, and regardless of socioeconomic status, parents love their children immensely. It is biological; instinctual; as hard-wired into part of being human as eating or breathing is. Only a tiny fraction
I can't give you sources (Score:2)
Also parents love for children is most certainly not biological, at least not with the fathers. Men caring for children in the slightest is a relatively recent thing (relative, e.g. last few thousand years) and even then kids were generally pack mules to men until very recently. e.g. you had a lot of them to tend
Re:Participation medals for everyone! (Score:5, Insightful)
you can still click thumbs down ... it just wont show the number to you anymore, the "precious snowflakes" still get to see how many people hate them
Only shiny, happy people allowed on here (Score:2)
But seriously, the protection of people against anything negative, from the education system, and now through young adulthood on video sites, is a little much.
What are these people going to do when they encounter their first REAL WORLD negative thing, IRL? Melt and faint? Have a coronary like a chickadee?
The world can be tough out there folks. There's an age-old and probably reasonably valid argument that people should get a gradual intro to that before they fully
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Disney probably handed over the largest sack of cash.
Corrupted and broken information (Score:3)
They need to get rid of the likes as well.
You can't have one without the other.
So now as it stands we will have a completely lopsided likes/dislikes indicator that is useless for estimating how people feel about a video, and we will have 'like mining' operations to make a bad video of misinformation and propaganda look legit. Great way to contribute to the underworld economy, with a bit of paid like mining.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Likes/Dislikes ratio isn't really that important for the videos themselves. Perhaps the total absolute number of likes/dislikes could be another possible metric to measure engagement, after all it's a sign of the viewer having bothered to click one of those. But if we can assume that YT acts on a rational basis
Re: (Score:2)
I do notice, however, that pretty much EVERY YouTube channel I follow, on every freakin' video they ask you to hit the Like button and subscribe.
(to the point of annoyance).
Re: (Score:2)
The number of likes can affect how advertisers see your content. Which is probably the main reason why such services that increase the likes on your videos are offered. I've got such offers on my small time gamedev YT channel myself, where they want to sell you 'likes' to boost your channel. Of course I'm not i
Re: Corrupted and broken information (Score:2)
There are Android apps that demand that you give it a 5 star rating before it will actually let you do anything. To me this is a huge red flag for possible malware, but most 'lay users' would just go ahead and give it the 5 star rating just to make the stop screen go away.
And there are countless stories of Amazon products, Google Play apps, and such given artificially high like counts to get people to use those bad apps and products.
I think "Like" is a far bigger problem than "Dislike". In
Re: (Score:2)
For videos with 700 likes and 300 dislikes I know better than to even begin to view the video. Now what happens when I have to watch the first 60 seconds of some execrable POS that I previously managed to filter? Does that count as a "view"? Does that count as positive engagement?
Sometimes it sucks to be alive.
This particular choice at YouTube makes me feel like it sucks to be alive. Fortunately, the feeling will only last five or ten minutes, because YouTube is just as disposable in the long run as every o
Re: (Score:2)
Though if you watched that video, while it ought to count as a view but neither as positive nor negative engagement unless you click the like/dislike buttons or write a comment.
Because in the end it's all engagement.
From my personal experience with "like bot army" offerings to boost YT channels, these entities, if not straight up scams, also do not bother to dislike y
Re: (Score:2)
That's assuming Youtube doesn't bury 'unpopular' comments. If you write a comment on a video with some already well-liked comments then your comment instantly gets buried near the bottom and seen by no-one because you have to sort by newest first on every single video you watch. Youtube is dystopian these days.
Re: Corrupted and broken information (Score:2)
As another poster here said, there had to have been some backroom deal going on to get Youtube to consider doing this. YT has been around for roughly 15 years, and all of a sudden the "dislike" button has become a problem.
This whole thing stinks to low hell, and I have no doubt that the other poster is correct in his assumption.
Yeah, take a page from the politician playbook, and accept "gifts", and muddy or flat out lie about the reason a change is taking place.
Seriously, fuck this w
Re: (Score:2)
I am good as long as they continue to publish the number of total views - I move we all just assume Views - Likes = Dislikes.
Re: (Score:2)
I think someone should start a website, that places the dislikes of a video on another site, maybe make a plugin that displays it on the youtube page. Maybe that could bypass videos who want to disable comments and dislikes as well.
I see a business opportunity here. I am just to lazy to do it.
While we are at it do it for news sites that refuse to let users comment as well.
Dissenter (Score:3)
I think someone should start a website, that places the dislikes of a video on another site, maybe make a plugin that displays it on the youtube page. Maybe that could bypass videos who want to disable comments and dislikes as well.
I see a business opportunity here. I am just to lazy to do it.
While we are at it do it for news sites that refuse to let users comment as well.
I suspect if you made something to give users a voice like that, then Google, Apple, and Mozilla would find it so intolerable that they would all trip over each other in a race to be the first to censor it.
The reason I suspect as much is because someone already did, and that's exactly what happened.
https://reclaimthenet.org/gab-comments-extension-dissenter [reclaimthenet.org]
https://reclaimthenet.org/google-chrome-web-store-bans-dissenter-extension/ [reclaimthenet.org]
https://reclaimthenet.org/firefox-rejects-free-speech-bans-free-spe [reclaimthenet.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Give the ratio of likes to dislikes as a percentage score, and leave it at that.
Re: (Score:2)
I see future in a browser plug-in, or an "app" if you will, which would post per-defined comments to videos.
So instead of an innocuous dislike we may in the future see a comment section flooded with phrases such as "This looks like shit", "This is pure garbage", "Whoever made this shit should have been aborted" and various other anatomical and vegetable references.
Hell, why not have a random insult generator [sweary.com] built in as well. Have technology work FOR US once again.
Re:Call me a synic, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
... I don't buy those arguments. No, I get the feeling this is all about the various big entities like e.g. EA or Ubisoft or similar ones wanting to hide the dislikes from the public...
Correct, but it's neither of those. It's Disney, tiring of Marvel movie trailers getting ratioed.
I would hazard a guess there has been a fair amount of lobbying and several bags of cash changing hands to make this happen.
Well yeah, but not unusual bags of cash. YouTube is listening to their customers, i.e. people who pay them money, which is not us. Disney is a huge advertiser on YouTube, including for the aforementioned Marvel movies, but many other things besides. YouTube is making a radical change to the presentation of videos because a customer complained, and the customer is always right.
YouTube doesn't give a rat's ass what we think. We're the product, lining up to be sold. YouTube doesn't give a rat's ass what "creators" think. Creators are a cost center for them. YouTube has literally billions of reasons to want to minimize the number of creators. YouTube would prefer not to have any creators at all if they could manage it. Why pay more? YouTube does not care if any particular creator or group of creators is upset with them, because there's literally a million more where they came from.
People keep thinking that YouTube is some sort of public benefit organization because they accept uploads from the Internet. They are not. YouTube is voracious commercial for-profit entity in one of the top ten most evil lines of business humanity has ever invented, namely advertising, and the public would do well to remember it.
Re: (Score:2)
They can already disable comments or scores on the videos.
I'm really not sure how this is supposed to work now. I need the ratio, rather than the absolute like # to know if I should waste my time on a particular video.
Re: (Score:2)
They can already hide the like and dislike counts, as well as disable comments. Those features have been there for many years now.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not quite as cynical about this change.
A "dislike" count is subject to manipulation. It may represent actual unique dislikes from multiple individuals, or it may represent a concerted effort from one or a small number of individuals.
The absence of "likes" still conveys the message that something was not liked, but in a manner that is less subject to manipulation.
(But the "like" count can be manipulated upwards by someone who would stand to benefit by it.)
Re: (Score:2)
For example if you have a comment section and some of the comments to the same article have a high number of likes, while others don't you can assume that those are the unpopular comments.
So that can work on twitter or facebook, or even YT's comment section (it also likely works like that here on Slashdot, if they removed downmods or no longer displayed downmods publicly).
But with every video being on its own, it becomes more difficult.
Re:Call me a bad spelller (Score:2)
You are no synic. No one can sea the future...
Re: (Score:2)
More moving the goal posts (Score:2)
All of a sudden the dislike count has become a huge problem for some reason.
But, but feewingz!
Re: (Score:2)
I highly doubt it's about that. Right now, it's popular for groups of trolls to 'bomb' videos they don't like. Most of those people probably wouldn't have seen the target videos at all if not for the organized trolling. I can think of a few reasons why YT thinks this is a problem. I suspect that trolls wreck the data, making their recommendation system less accurate, and thus less profitable. As these bombings also tend to flood comments with irrelevant nonsense, it's not unreasonable to assume that th
Re: (Score:2)
and thus less profitable.
Haven't you heard? Capitalism is now a woke tool of the radical snowflake left.
It's definitely more fun when the invisible hand is punching someone else in the nuts that's for sure.
I actually think likes and dislikes are both dumb. (Score:3)
They exist only to make you feel better. The YouTube algorithm should only care that clicked the video, and the amount of it you watched. Why do likes or dislikes even matter?
If I click on the video and bail after 10 seconds, the video probably sucked. If I clicked on the video and watched the whole thing, it was probably good.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've watched entire conspiracy videos to properly debunk it. That does not mean I enjoyed watching it or that I think more people should watch it.
You Can't Not Like This! (Score:2)
Now with even more Chinese faked videos and Tumblr headlines.
Dislikes are useful (Score:4, Insightful)
I find that the dislike-to-like ratio is often useful in determining if a video is on-topic and good content, or if it is just click-bait or an ad.
I wish that Youtube's search algorithm would take it into account, because it often presents those click-bait videos with high dislike-to-like ratio as its top search results above videos that are more worth watching.
Re: (Score:2)
I find that the dislike-to-like ratio is often useful in determining if a video is on-topic and good content, or if it is just click-bait or an ad.
I wish that Youtube's search algorithm would take it into account, because it often presents those click-bait videos with high dislike-to-like ratio as its top search results above videos that are more worth watching.
Unfortunately many people use the thumbs down as a "I don't agree with you" checkbox. When topics like politics, religion, etc are encountered the dislike ratio is always much greater. It's not fair to count those dislikes in the algorithm just because the topic is controversial.
So only like attacks are allowed. (Score:2)
Cool! Now I can post a nasty video to spread misinformation, and get those same guys to initiate a like attack to make my video look even more legit. And scince nobody disliked it, and so many love it, it has to be valid and correct!
Good! (Score:2)
The dislike button didn't do squat showing your displeasure.
The algorithm counts it as an interaction and that helps the author.
In a way doing away with it is more honest.
They ruined the neutrality of DOOP (Score:3)
Protecting Predatory Clickbait Videos (Score:5, Interesting)
There's a significant population of Youtubers who only seek to gain click/view revenue by exploiting the big rush to see new, current events on Youtube. Of course, they don't have anything to add. Their videos are usually just slideshows of screen shots from news sites backed by some of the default Youtube music.
How do you avoid these? You look at the downvotes. When downvotes > upvotes, just don't even bother.
If you get ride of downvotes, you eliminate the only crowdsourced anti-spam feature for the platform.
That makes sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Dislike counts are being removed because dislike counts can affect creators' well-being but they'll still be able to see them. That makes sense.
The point is that without the numerical feedback to show them that they're having an effect, the people who organize group "dislike" attacks will give up.
Remember! (Score:2)
Is this an issue? (Score:2)
At the time, YouTube explained that public dislike counts can affect creators' well-being
Oh. Never mind.
So use the algorithms (Score:2)
While that's true, dislikes can also serve as a signal to others when videos are clickbait, spam, or misleading, which can be useful.
Then use your fancy-pants algorithms to demote such "unliked" videos - it'll probably end up being more accurate without users knowing exactly how many others disliked it as well (since it can be a false flag anyways due to abuse).
It was weird anyway. (Score:2)
Ever notice that pretty much every video has dislikes?
A video of a kitten or puppy, a rainbow, whatever. There are dislikes.
I swear there are people out there who just go to each video and hit dislike.
Re: (Score:3)
That's because there are a lot of people using the internet (billions), so some are bound to dislike anything no big deal, I see no reason to stress about it. I personally don't like kitten or puppy videos, I do like kittens and puppies, but I think the videos are a waste of time. That being said I have never pressed the like, or dislike button on any video on youtube.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, but if you don't like something, why are you even going to go watch videos on it? It's just really weird regardless..
They could also go with a rating model similar to Slashdot, where you can only downvote (or upvote!) on occasion. Or, maybe limit how much you can downvote, like maybe once every 10 upvotes you do. 10 upvotes, you're entitled to a downvote. Would make people use a bit more discretion at least.
They should upload that announcement as a video (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I guest that more comments sections will need to be closed as a result of this.
Perhaps. My thought too. But, I have another thought...since we'll all now have to leave a comment stating that said video is shite, it will increase the engagement count for the vid (a win for the YT) and promoting its visibility (a win for the creator).
If only people could be trusted... (Score:2)
...to not work the gears in unintended ways to force their preferred outcomes...
But, on Slashdot people use "Troll" for "disagree". And on youtube, bands of both mindless sycophants and blind haters get together to abuse the tool.
People suck.
Then while they are at it... (Score:2)
... remove the likes count display as well.
Give the ratio of likes to dislikes as a percentage, approximated to one decimal point. If viewers don't need to know dislike counts, then they don't need to know like counts for basically the same reason.
The video creator would be able to see the exact like and dislike counts, however.
double edged sword (Score:5, Insightful)
"dislike attacks" are only one edge of the blade. Fake "likes" are the other.
If YouTube is going to remove the former because it can be manipulated then they have to remove the latter for the exact same reason.
Re: (Score:2)
"dislike attacks" are only one edge of the blade. Fake "likes" are the other.
If YouTube is going to remove the former because it can be manipulated then they have to remove the latter for the exact same reason.
I think you're ignoring the fact that there's an inherent asymmetry between likes and dislikes, and the reasons they may be applied.
oh so when we get some propaganda... (Score:2)
... waving some 'reason' to go to war we can only thumbs up it eh?
what's next? removing the comment feature like they did on Netflix after they started getting slammed on their garbage 'history' content?
how far are we going to go with suppression of those daring to contradict the narratives we are fed? re-education camps?
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. With main stream media’s narratives, it a sanity restorer to know the huge dislike to like ratio is calling out their BS.
It used to be much better (Score:2)
Hands up all those who remember when YouTube let you rank videos by using stars.
One star for a bad vid, five stars for a good one.
This is a much better method (IMHO) because it is a less granular way of rating what you're watching.
However, like most of the best bits of the old YouTube, Google decided to change it ... because they can :-(
Videos that suck (Score:2)
It's not an attack if the videos really do suck.
...laura
Lawsuits coming for government videos (Score:2)
Videos from political figures are technically public records, including the meta data associated with them. I'm quite sure one of the driving forces behind this is to hide the unpopularity of some public figures but just as they are not allowed to block followers on twitter, I don't believe they will be able to hide the public record associated with their videos either.
Simple solution.... (Score:2)
What's next? (Score:2)
No voting and ratings? :( I think YouTube used to have five stars ratings during its early days.
wtf ? (Score:2)
Fuck them. The option to dislike something is the #1 thing that makes YouTube better than Facebook.
But I guess one of the internal scientists came to the conclusion that the dopamine addiction cycle doesn't run so well if it stays enabled, resulting in fewer ad impressions. That's what you get when the platform sells you as the product to its actual customers.
So that... (Score:3)
So that no one can ask "why are you promoting a video that everyone hates?" And, because the answer would have to be "because we like their politics."
Re: *click dislike Facebook* (Score:2)
I 'disliked' Facebook by shutting my account and letting the "pleeze reconsider!" timer run out.
Others are disliking facebook by moving to Tiktok and other services.
"You are the product". Yeah, great. Have fun with your service being loaded with nobody except old geezers who are fully dependent on their monthly pension check posting cat pics and "inspirational quotes", and you thinking up more "innovations" to bleat about in hopes that your stockholders won't jump ship.
Re: (Score:2)
...except old geezers...
Glad you and the other snot nosed brats are leaving. Get the fuck off my lawn!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: *click dislike Facebook* (Score:2)
I think it's time that the industry steps back for a moment from all of the AR/VR/ER stuff, take a long deep breath, and really think all of this through.
Do people want to wear the funny goggles at their office job? No?
Do important company meetings need or even should take place in a fake cartoon world? No?
Are people being hammered with AR/VR/XYZR to the point that they are confused and tuning it all out? Yes?
Re: *click dislike Facebook* (Score:2)
"VR/AR stuff (in particularly for those who are unlikely to ever recover mobility)."
This should be the job of people who have deep knowledge of these types of patients, who are "in the field". Facebook is an expert at social media/pop culture and mass marketing, but I doubt they have the kind of expertise of companies that work in the medical field.
To use a rather lame food service analogy, would you expect McDonalds to be able to make it in the field of hundered dollar gourmet meal preparat
Re: (Score:2)
I think Whistleblowers, Journalists and Independent Media has stripped back the curtain if lies we've been mostly unaware of for decades.
People can't be allowed to get informed on facts. only authorised (dis)information.
The message is the narrative, and the narrative is what fools people into supporting stupid but incredibly profitable wars.