jfdbcv

8 ms·

1.
by jfdbcv 2y ago
You know they did that with video games too.. Should we do that here? https://apnews.com/article/gaming-business-children-00db669d...
2.
by jfdbcv 2y ago
Isn't this comment quite reductive? There are many reasons why there are two separate apps and not necessarily related to how addictive the algorithm is. The "source" you linked gives one such reason: > Like other social m
3.
by jfdbcv 2y ago
Personally I inject probes into my brain to measure the exact dopamine response every time I need to make a new purchase ...idk I think people just like premium phones, it's not that deep
4.
by jfdbcv 2y ago
> Secondly, I became convinced Trump had to be using some type of an advanced intuitive capacity, as, based on the information that would have been available to Trump at the time the decisions were made, I could not see any other way to
5.
by jfdbcv 2y ago
I think humans have a natural instinct to share what they find cool / interesting. Before this was mostly done through in person communicate, now this is primarily done through smart phones.
6.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
You realize that it will only be replaced with something MORE addicting? People won't exactly start reading newspapers when Tik Tok dies..
7.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
Define learn.
8.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
Equity data usually represents a big part of compensation and is basically impossible to value objectively as there are too many factors at play.
9.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
> Yes, because YouTube is changing their stance between when a large part of the data was uploaded and now. This is untrue. As there was significantly less users on Youtube early on, it's highly likely that most of their total conte
10.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
> YouTube is practically holding an incredible amount of knowledge and information hostage to feed Google’s insatiable desire for profits. Free storage of data uploaded by willing users = hosting the data hostage?
11.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
Huh?! You can sell your car, or take a loan against it. You can convert US dollars into your local currency. Your individual data is worthless. Data is only worth something in aggregate.
12.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
TikTok absolutely is a competitor. I'm not sure why it has to host long form content for it to be considered a competitor. If more people get their video entertainment from TikTok, then they watch YouTube less. Most blatantly, YouTube
13.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
TikTok. Also - just because it doesn't have the content that you, personally, watch, does not make it not a competitor.
14.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
> A huge amount of videos on YouTube are created for their own sake, with no expectation of going viral or making money off them. It's estimated that there are 1 billion YouTube videos, compared to 600k videos hosted by PeerTube. Th
15.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
tradeoff is harder access to liquidity -- would banks be willing to give as much credit without credibility?
16.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
Luckily, they can learn about it all for free, right here! https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/ap-macr...
17.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
Statements like these make it hard not to discount the whole article: > By their nature, fiat currencies are manipulatable. Like it's some kind of big revelation, when it's basic AP macroeconomics monetary policy.
18.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
In the US, not having a credit card is horrible financial advice. You're paying an additional 3% on all transactions, as that's the standard credit card processing fee. You're also failing to build up your credit score, which
19.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
Sorry, I realized I was wrong with my initial comment. It's actually a 4 party system: the content consumers + ad companies on one side, with the platform and content creators on the other. But yes, I think we are in agreement overall.
20.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
Patreon = video consumer pays Sponsers = another word for advertisers Nebula = consumer pays again (similar to yt premium) The only exceptions are merch and book sales, which only a small amount of big YouTubers have access to. Wouldn'
21.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
I do as well. I find the best way to do this is YT Premium.
22.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
> More than 90% of the content I watch on YouTube has been uploaded years ago, and was provided to YouTube FOR FREE by the "content creator". Unfortunately, I don't think this is a normal usecase. The common default usecas
23.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
> Now it’s all about profiteering. Unfortunately, the people who make content need to eat too. Demonization only exists because YouTube is beholden to advertisers. If most people subscribed, it wouldn't be a problem.
24.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
The lengths people will go to avoid paying content creators is pretty crazy.
25.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
I don't think Patreon is an effective solution. People only have a limited Patreon budget and I'm sure it skews towards large YouTubers and is pretty winner take all. There's a three way ecosystem: the content creator, Google
26.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
No, it's an extremely valid point. Government antitrust policy has been heavily shaped by Robert Bork's "The Antitrust Paradox" which proposes that antitrust law should only focus on consumer welfare rather than market s
27.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
The purpose of a 2x salary is to be able to achieve financial independence at a much earlier age and getting the freedom to retire anywhere you want in the world.
28.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
The long arm of EU overregulation and legislation extends throughout the region, though. (See: GDPR)
29.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
Isn't this overly simplistic and reductionist? You're ignoring that many of the large American tech companies provide cloud platforms, which certainly fits the bill of "providing tools to manufacture stuff"
30.
by jfdbcv 3y ago
Needless pedanticism.

More ›