9 ms·

Are the people that create the content okay with this?

by pxndxx 1y ago

zoklet-enjoyer 1y ago
Who cares?
- Applejinx 1y ago
  Marketers, among others
- haswell 1y ago
  The people who spend hundreds of hours carefully creating content for their viewers care [0]. The referenced video is from a photographer who has some pretty strong and reasonable thoughts on this - specifically the features YouTube itself is experimenting with. Depending on the nature of the AI product, it has the potential to completely sideline creators. Not saying that’s what Miyagi is doing and it sounds like they’re actually working with creators on this which is good. But the broader point is that such tools need to be thoughtfully implemented. - [0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ULUSS1-G3do https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ULUSS1-G3do
  - zoklet-enjoyer 1y ago
    They put their videos out for public consumption. Not behind a paywall. Once its out there, they lose control of how people interact with it. Should cliff notes and other study guides be banned or regulated?
    - haswell 1y ago
      I don’t find Cliff’s notes to be similar at all. They represent standalone short-form content written by authors that is a purchasable option alongside more in-depth options written by other (or at times the same) authors. If Cliff’s notes were actually just AI summaries of specific books generated by an unrelated entity and presented in a way that allowed the reader to avoid purchasing the underlying content, that’d be a very different scenario. In the linked example, YouTube is essentially doing the latter. The product launched in this thread sits in a greyer area I think, but still raises some questions about content ownership and how creators will react to these new kinds of tools and modes of consumption. Whether or not it’s strictly legal is a different conversation than whether or not creators feel comfortable with these emerging options. > Once its out there, they lose control of how people interact with it. Sure. But they also have every right to choose to put it behind a paywall if new tools change the calculus that originally made publishing it publicly make sense.
tdthree 1y ago
Yes. Any content that we monetize we are revenue sharing with the creator. We already have more than 5 partnerships with creators.
- chairhairair 1y ago
  3b1b is a monetized partner? Association with that brand would be very valuable.
  - tdthree 1y ago
    Not yet! We don't monetize his content (it's not behind a paywall). But we are talking with him :)
- haswell 1y ago
  Do creators have the option to opt out? I’m still coming up to speed on the full scope of what your product does, but I’m curious what you’d say to someone like pal2tec, who has some fairly strong and what I feel to be reasonable views about the impact of content summarization [0]. Getting direct buy-in and sharing revenue is great. But it’s not clear to me that this is the only thing that creators care about, i.e. are you still summarizing content you’re not monetizing without creator buy-in? - [0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ULUSS1-G3do https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ULUSS1-G3do
  - solardev 1y ago
    Not to be ironic, but... is there a summary of that video? It's a bit long and he doesn't seem to get to the point for quite a while.
    - haswell 1y ago
      It’s an 8 minute video…and even shorter at 1.5X that will take me longer to summarize than you to watch. But in summary, YouTube is rolling out AI summarization features on some content without giving creators any say in the matter. Concerns include: - Low quality summarization of high quality content will devalue the content, and in many cases is just a worse version of the content - Impact to watch time on the channel can impact channel success over time - YouTube is not doing anything to compensate creators for reducing watch time such as sharing revenue from viewers who primarily interact with the AI summary But I think he articulates this much better than I did. Much better to watch the video.

Are the people that create the content okay with this?

by pxndxx 1y ago

Are the people that create the content okay with this?

zoklet-enjoyer 1y ago

Who cares?

Applejinx 1y ago
Marketers, among others
haswell 1y ago
The people who spend hundreds of hours carefully creating content for their viewers care [0]. The referenced video is from a photographer who has some pretty strong and reasonable thoughts on this - specifically the features YouTube itself is experimenting with. Depending on the nature of the AI product, it has the potential to completely sideline creators. Not saying that’s what Miyagi is doing and it sounds like they’re actually working with creators on this which is good. But the broader point is that such tools need to be thoughtfully implemented. - [0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ULUSS1-G3do https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ULUSS1-G3do
- zoklet-enjoyer 1y ago
  They put their videos out for public consumption. Not behind a paywall. Once its out there, they lose control of how people interact with it. Should cliff notes and other study guides be banned or regulated?
  - haswell 1y ago
    I don’t find Cliff’s notes to be similar at all. They represent standalone short-form content written by authors that is a purchasable option alongside more in-depth options written by other (or at times the same) authors. If Cliff’s notes were actually just AI summaries of specific books generated by an unrelated entity and presented in a way that allowed the reader to avoid purchasing the underlying content, that’d be a very different scenario. In the linked example, YouTube is essentially doing the latter. The product launched in this thread sits in a greyer area I think, but still raises some questions about content ownership and how creators will react to these new kinds of tools and modes of consumption. Whether or not it’s strictly legal is a different conversation than whether or not creators feel comfortable with these emerging options. > Once its out there, they lose control of how people interact with it. Sure. But they also have every right to choose to put it behind a paywall if new tools change the calculus that originally made publishing it publicly make sense.

tdthree 1y ago

Yes. Any content that we monetize we are revenue sharing with the creator. We already have more than 5 partnerships with creators.

chairhairair 1y ago
3b1b is a monetized partner? Association with that brand would be very valuable.
- tdthree 1y ago
  Not yet! We don't monetize his content (it's not behind a paywall). But we are talking with him :)
haswell 1y ago
Do creators have the option to opt out? I’m still coming up to speed on the full scope of what your product does, but I’m curious what you’d say to someone like pal2tec, who has some fairly strong and what I feel to be reasonable views about the impact of content summarization [0]. Getting direct buy-in and sharing revenue is great. But it’s not clear to me that this is the only thing that creators care about, i.e. are you still summarizing content you’re not monetizing without creator buy-in? - [0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ULUSS1-G3do https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ULUSS1-G3do
- solardev 1y ago
  Not to be ironic, but... is there a summary of that video? It's a bit long and he doesn't seem to get to the point for quite a while.
  - haswell 1y ago
    It’s an 8 minute video…and even shorter at 1.5X that will take me longer to summarize than you to watch. But in summary, YouTube is rolling out AI summarization features on some content without giving creators any say in the matter. Concerns include: - Low quality summarization of high quality content will devalue the content, and in many cases is just a worse version of the content - Impact to watch time on the channel can impact channel success over time - YouTube is not doing anything to compensate creators for reducing watch time such as sharing revenue from viewers who primarily interact with the AI summary But I think he articulates this much better than I did. Much better to watch the video.