Inside the ‘arms race’ between YouTube and ad blockers / Against all odds, open source hackers keep outfoxing one of the wealthiest companies.::YouTube’s dramatic content gatekeeping decisions of late have a long history behind them, and there’s an equally long history of these defenses being bypassed.

  • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Peertube is a federated system that already handles video.

    Moderation is handled by instances with more personal mods.

    Bandwidth is handled via multiple instances & p2p protocols so viewers help distribute the load.

    I think you’re overstating how difficult youtube’s job is. A lot of that work is problems youtube creates for thsmselves by trying to squeeze their platform for more money. A federated platform doesn’t have that issue.

      • Cybersteel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why do they even do that. Instagram, tiktok don’t share their ad revenue with their content creators.

        • candybrie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not sure. But it is one of the cornerstones of YouTube. Also tiktok does pay creators.

        • candybrie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          $10-$30/1,000 views doesn’t sound like much. Except the people who make a career out of YouTube are regularly producing 100k+ view videos. It adds up. It’s one of the things you can pick and choose to leave out of a competitor. But it is a major reason why people put videos on YouTube.

                • candybrie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  So did you just make up a number? I did try some searching before I spat out mine. It wasn’t extensive research and figured anyone doing any cursory check would come away with the same answer. Which is why I didn’t bother linking anything. I couldn’t find anything that said as low as $0.50/1000 and have never heard a creator saying that low. Hence me asking where you got your number.

                  https://blog.hootsuite.com/how-much-does-youtube-pay-per-view/

                  https://influencermarketinghub.com/how-much-do-youtubers-make/#:~:text=On average%2C a YouTuber earns,%2418 for every 1%2C000 views.

                  https://medium.com/swlh/how-much-does-youtube-pay-516ea8cd338d

                  • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    11 months ago

                    I don’t remember where I looked it up. This page has a similar rate: https://gegcalculators.com/youtube-cost-per-view-calculator/

                    How much YouTube pays for 1,000 views? Estimation: On average, YouTubers can earn between $0.25 to $4 per 1,000 views. This range is quite broad due to various factors like niche, location, and viewer engagement.

                    Remember that “on average” is a slippery term. There are different kinds of average. There is mean, mode and median. The mean for youtubers will skew much higher than the median, for instance, but the median will give you something more realistic for what you should expect to make. In fact half of creators will make less than the median, and even then that’s if we’re excluding all non-earning channels. Mode is even more representative for what you should expect, since it’s the most common amount, and I expect it would be lower still.

                    The distribution of incomes for youtubers is probably quite extreme, with a long, low tail and a sharp rise at the high end. Similar to this:

                    https://static01.nyt.com/images/2011/05/24/business/economy/economix-24percentilechart/economix-24percentilechart-custom1.jpg

                    Of course I can’t show you the real thing because youtube actively suppresses this information, which tells you it can’t be something they’re proud of. Unfortunately that leaves us in the position of relying on blogs and “calculators” that may or may not be reliable, but anyone seeking to market towards youtube creators has an incentive to make the market look more lucrative than it is.

                    Your own source assumes a standard rate of about $2.14 per thousand: https://influencermarketinghub.com/youtube-money-calculator/

                    That’s the calculator from your first link. It’s really strange you didn’t notice that, unless you read this paragraph:

                    Google pays out 68% of their AdSense revenue, so for every $100 an advertiser pays, Google pays $68 to the publisher. The actual rates an advertiser pays varies, usually between $0.10 to $0.30 per view, but averages out at $0.018 per view. Around 15% of viewers on average watch the requisite 30 seconds of a video ad to count for payment. This means that for 1,000 views, 150 people are likely to watch an ad. At $0.018 per view, Google will charge the advertiser $27, keeping 32% ($9) themselves. The YouTube channel will receive $18 per 1,000 views.

                    …and then you didn’t notice the weird mathematical alchemy they did where 1000 video views turned into 150 ad views and then suddenly we were talking about the revenue per 1000 ad views. You need to pay attention to when they’re talking about cost per view, revenue per view, and whether it’s per ad view or per video view.

                    This has creators at the lower end earning about $2 per thousand: https://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-money-youtube-creators-make-per-1000-views-rpm-2021-5?op=1

                    But remember, these are the people who were successful enough to warrant interviewing. The sample bias already selects for the people who are making more money than most.

                    Your list of sources seemed to originally include an article like this one, but perhaps you read it and realised it said something you didn’t like and removed it. I can’t tell. Lemmy doesn’t show edit histories yet.

                    Anyway, don’t make bald assertions and then only demand sources when someone disagrees. It looks pretty disingenuous.