Google raising price of YouTube Premium to $13.99 per month
Google raising price of YouTube Premium to $13.99 per month
The price of an individual YouTube Premium subscription is increasing $2 to $13.99 per month in the US. YouTube has yet to...
Google raising price of YouTube Premium to $13.99 per month
The price of an individual YouTube Premium subscription is increasing $2 to $13.99 per month in the US. YouTube has yet to...
You're viewing part of a thread.
"Free market works" is by itself a very questionable statement.
But there sure are some more options beyond that. Although some people think we shouldn't be free to pick them.
You are free to pick w.e you want. That doesn't make someone actually paying for a decent platform a corporate shill.
Our definitions of "decent" are definitely different. But this is not just about what you choose to do, it's about all the fingerwagging people do at people who don't believe this is worth paying (even more) for.
The only finger wagging going on is people calling people corporate shills for actually paying for a service.
Then you need to look better because you are down a thread pointing out how people are getting downvoted and ragged on for suggesting ad blocking options.
I find it hilarious that point out the fact that you aren’t entitled to free hosting services is getting down voted.
Actually nevermind. Just look at the mirror. You really are talking of Google like it's a struggling charity.
Then you need to look better because you are down a thread pointing out how people are getting downvoted and ragged on for suggesting ad blocking options.
No I am a thread calling people corporate shills for disagreeing with people saying we should all be pirating.
Actually nevermind. Just look at the mirror. You really are talking of Google like it’s a struggling charity.
It doesn't matter how rich google is, it doesn't owe you video hosting services. It's not a charity. You can disagree with their pricing and you can find another platform if you like. But services cost money and just because a company has money through other sources doesn't mean they need to subsidize all their products.
It doesn’t matter how rich google is
Of course it does. Not only Google has plenty of money to keep it running, don't even try to make a moral argument out of one of these companies stripmining everyone's data
If you care so much about the costs of hosting, I hope you donate to the Lemmy.
Of course it does. Not only Google has plenty of money to keep it running, don’t even try to make a moral argument out of one of these companies stripmining everyone’s data
No it absolutely does not. It is a business, not a charity. They don't owe anyone anything for free. That's how the world works. Your personal data is a part of the fee you pay for the service. And again no one is forcing anyone to use that service. There are plenty of alternatives like Nebula that the content creators themselves have set up. You are free to just not use it if you don't like it.
If you care so much about the costs of hosting, I hope you donate to the Lemmy.
I am new to Lemmy but I absolutely will just as I donate to wikipedia. If it is giving me value, then I am happy to support it financially up to the point where I think the finances are equal to the value I am receiving in return.
How the world works is that people get what they can get away with, and we who are on the bottom ought to keep that in mind instead of idealizing a model of fairness that only helps those who are already powerful get away with more.
Instead, if you do care about fairness, think more about those who need it.
Nebula is a fair suggestion though, because at least that directly helps the creators without constraining them to whatever advertisers want.
How the world works is that people get what they can get away with, and we who are on the bottom ought to keep that in mind instead of idealizing a model of fairness that only helps those who are already powerful get away with more.
It works that way because ultimately that's what drives competition and innovation. I am open to a more fair alternative however I am aware of none that has actually been successful.
Instead, if you do care about fairness, think more about those who need it.
I said things have a cost and I think based on the market alternatives, what YT is charging is still fair. You may disagree and that is your right to. I did not imply however that the world itself is fair or even needs to be fair. It's not and never has been and whether is should be is a much bigger philosophical debate outside of just YT pricing.
We are in Lemmy through rising enshittification of the internet and you still believe that Big Tech sucking up all data and charging more for worse services everyday is what drives innovation? That everyone gotta bend over and give up what they say they are owed? C'mon...
Do you even use the internet without ad blockers?
If you think that's the right and proper way to go about it, feel free. I'll still handle things my way.
Would just like to interject; while I agree with what you're saying, and yes, lots of people think an amazing service should be free, which is wrong.... But YouTube/Google is now 100% beholden to their shareholders, and this, plus the last couple of price rises, is gouging to make some millionaires richer and is fucking despicable
That's for consumers to decide. If people still pay for it and think it's worth their money, then they aren't really gouging, they were just under priced. If people don't and start cancelling their subscriptions, they have over priced it and now need to bring the price back down. For me personally, Netflix is the one teetering on that point, YT isn't there yet.