6 ms·

I had three YouTube titles, this one got about 2x the watch time as the other two, so I let YT pick it. For technical readers, I write my blog posts. I don't h

I had three YouTube titles, this one got about 2x the watch time as the other two, so I let YT pick it. For technical readers, I write my blog posts. I don't have to (I lose money hosting that thing and all it's mostly just free training data for Anthropic, OpenAI, et all), but I enjoy writing, so I do it anyway. If you don't like the YT game, please subscribe to the blog's RSS feed. I much prefer text over video.

testing22321 1mo ago
> I had three YouTube titles, this one got about 2x the watch time as the other two, so I let YT pick it. I think you’re being mid leading here Jeff. You almost make it sound like YT actually came up with the title. For anyone that is not a YouTuber, Jeff wrote three different titles himself, then YouTube ran an A/B test and just kept the one that resulted in the most watch time. Jeff consciously chose to write a click bait title, he could equally have chosen not to.
- wasfgwp 1mo ago
  He also consciously chose to post it on Youtube, he could have chosen not to.
throwawayZvY7QV 1mo ago
[dead]
aurareturn 1mo ago
Just because this title did the best doesn't make it not misleading. If you are a serious reviewer, it wouldn't have been an option in the first place. You can make an even more outlandish title and get even more views. Doesn't make it right.
- HeWhoLurksLate 1mo ago
  since it's too much to paste in here, here's 10 recent tech review videos from each of the top 10 most viewed tech youtubers: https://pastebin.com/4PZe9iTf https://pastebin.com/4PZe9iTf Here's a few of them: - Humane AI Pin Review: The Worst Product I've Ever Reviewed - I Tested the World's Craziest Smartphone - Do NOT Buy These Fake Tech Products! - This Is Not a Normal Laptop... - Unboxing the $10,000 Mystery Tech Box - Don't Make This PC Building Mistake - This Desk Accessory Changes Everything - I Didn't Expect This Phone to Be This Good - I Bought a Mystery Tech Box from Amazon - Testing the Craziest Cheap Tech on Temu Jeff Geerling's videos have fine titles. Declaring that Jeff can't be a serious reviewer because he uses clickbait is kinda silly. Have you seen the state of journalism? Somehow the tabloids are frequently less clickbaity.
  - joshspankit 1mo ago
    It also seems that YouTube is steering the ship: they could simply push content that’s straightforward and non-clickbait (and in fact: downgrade clickbait), but as Geoff says the clickbait got 2x the traffic. That’s not “the same amount of people were shown the video and 2x the people clicked in”. The algo is always skewing.
  - testing22321 1mo ago
    Sounds like you’re trying to justify kicking dogs because everyone in the industry goes around kicking dogs. Say it ain’t so. Just because lots of people are doing something that sucks does not make it OK.
    - HeWhoLurksLate 1mo ago
      It's a hook. That's been a standard part of writing for like at least a hundred years. It's not kicking dogs. Or, if it is kicking dogs, society has been doing it for at least as long as publishable media has been a thing, probably longer with the likes of bards. This is ridiculous
      - testing22321 1mo ago
        I’m a writer, I write for a few magazines and have published three books. I write hooks all the time. A good hook does not have to be clickbait. In my experience, when a person struggles to come up with a good hook, they write clickbait.
Eufrat 1mo ago
You are trying to launder responsibility for a clickbait title to a computer program. Then you try to shift the topic to the public good you are providing. I don’t think it’s wrong to use clickbait, but come on, own up to it. You consciously chose to “let [YouTube] pick it.”
- deleted 1mo ago
  [deleted]
- geerlingguy 1mo ago
  I never said it wasn't clickbait. If you don't like it, either install DeArrow or subscribe to my blog, where I tone it down for the more technical audience. (Or block/ignore my content, no skin off my back!)
  - whyagaindavid 1mo ago
    Overall you can always say - if you don't like it then ignore my content. Then... people doing scam or misinformation can also say that - ignore it. No. We like your content. While you may get more clicks etc at the moment - eventually you will lose subscribers. You could have made the title at least like - Intel tries hard to win against apple silicon - Almost there but not yet...
    - lostmsu 1mo ago
      [flagged]
      - bigyabai 1mo ago
        > and the only reason for being notable is that it is a lying piece of crap That's your takeaway from the outrage in this thread, but now you should actually watch a few videos to understand why this is a silly accusation. Jeff Geerling is not Digital Foundry. He's not Louis Rossmann. We do not rely on him or trust him to release Chips and Cheese-tier flawless benchmarks and datasets. He's not writing the Beej's Guide to Computer Architectures, he's an enthusiast that likes to ask basic questions like "how does a GPU perform on a Raspberry Pi?" and then answer it for his followers. If that constitutes "a lying piece of crap" to you, then I don't know what to tell you. "Clickbait" has always been a component of his content and it just seems like people are upset when it's clickbait that offends their own identity.

testing22321 1mo ago

> I had three YouTube titles, this one got about 2x the watch time as the other two, so I let YT pick it. I think you’re being mid leading here Jeff. You almost make it sound like YT actually came up with the title. For anyone that is not a YouTuber, Jeff wrote three different titles himself, then YouTube ran an A/B test and just kept the one that resulted in the most watch time. Jeff consciously chose to write a click bait title, he could equally have chosen not to.

wasfgwp 1mo ago
He also consciously chose to post it on Youtube, he could have chosen not to.

throwawayZvY7QV 1mo ago

[dead]

aurareturn 1mo ago

Just because this title did the best doesn't make it not misleading. If you are a serious reviewer, it wouldn't have been an option in the first place. You can make an even more outlandish title and get even more views. Doesn't make it right.

HeWhoLurksLate 1mo ago
since it's too much to paste in here, here's 10 recent tech review videos from each of the top 10 most viewed tech youtubers: https://pastebin.com/4PZe9iTf https://pastebin.com/4PZe9iTf Here's a few of them: - Humane AI Pin Review: The Worst Product I've Ever Reviewed - I Tested the World's Craziest Smartphone - Do NOT Buy These Fake Tech Products! - This Is Not a Normal Laptop... - Unboxing the $10,000 Mystery Tech Box - Don't Make This PC Building Mistake - This Desk Accessory Changes Everything - I Didn't Expect This Phone to Be This Good - I Bought a Mystery Tech Box from Amazon - Testing the Craziest Cheap Tech on Temu Jeff Geerling's videos have fine titles. Declaring that Jeff can't be a serious reviewer because he uses clickbait is kinda silly. Have you seen the state of journalism? Somehow the tabloids are frequently less clickbaity.
- joshspankit 1mo ago
  It also seems that YouTube is steering the ship: they could simply push content that’s straightforward and non-clickbait (and in fact: downgrade clickbait), but as Geoff says the clickbait got 2x the traffic. That’s not “the same amount of people were shown the video and 2x the people clicked in”. The algo is always skewing.
- testing22321 1mo ago
  Sounds like you’re trying to justify kicking dogs because everyone in the industry goes around kicking dogs. Say it ain’t so. Just because lots of people are doing something that sucks does not make it OK.
  - HeWhoLurksLate 1mo ago
    It's a hook. That's been a standard part of writing for like at least a hundred years. It's not kicking dogs. Or, if it is kicking dogs, society has been doing it for at least as long as publishable media has been a thing, probably longer with the likes of bards. This is ridiculous
    - testing22321 1mo ago
      I’m a writer, I write for a few magazines and have published three books. I write hooks all the time. A good hook does not have to be clickbait. In my experience, when a person struggles to come up with a good hook, they write clickbait.

Eufrat 1mo ago

You are trying to launder responsibility for a clickbait title to a computer program. Then you try to shift the topic to the public good you are providing. I don’t think it’s wrong to use clickbait, but come on, own up to it. You consciously chose to “let [YouTube] pick it.”

deleted 1mo ago
[deleted]
geerlingguy 1mo ago
I never said it wasn't clickbait. If you don't like it, either install DeArrow or subscribe to my blog, where I tone it down for the more technical audience. (Or block/ignore my content, no skin off my back!)
- whyagaindavid 1mo ago
  Overall you can always say - if you don't like it then ignore my content. Then... people doing scam or misinformation can also say that - ignore it. No. We like your content. While you may get more clicks etc at the moment - eventually you will lose subscribers. You could have made the title at least like - Intel tries hard to win against apple silicon - Almost there but not yet...
  - lostmsu 1mo ago
    [flagged]
    - bigyabai 1mo ago
      > and the only reason for being notable is that it is a lying piece of crap That's your takeaway from the outrage in this thread, but now you should actually watch a few videos to understand why this is a silly accusation. Jeff Geerling is not Digital Foundry. He's not Louis Rossmann. We do not rely on him or trust him to release Chips and Cheese-tier flawless benchmarks and datasets. He's not writing the Beej's Guide to Computer Architectures, he's an enthusiast that likes to ask basic questions like "how does a GPU perform on a Raspberry Pi?" and then answer it for his followers. If that constitutes "a lying piece of crap" to you, then I don't know what to tell you. "Clickbait" has always been a component of his content and it just seems like people are upset when it's clickbait that offends their own identity.