What is Digg?118 Comments
- RichPowers, on 10/12/2007, -2/+59Great, that leaves YouTube with what? Annoying Lonelygirl clones? Teenage angst videos set to emo music? You can find most of the quality creative works on the author's website(s), usually in higher quality...
Methinks that Google was stupid to buy YouTube. We all knew the media companies would close in and pull the content we all love watching - hiPpymIck, on 10/12/2007, -4/+36i wonder if youtube will turn out to have been famous for 15 minutes
- SpeedyG, on 10/12/2007, -0/+30Boy, they don't get it, do they?
The "people doing stupid things to themselves" video sites are a dime a dozen. Nobody really cares about that stuff, because it's everywhere.
And sites like Myspace are loaded with ShakyCam videos people make of themselves. Those kinds of videos will still be made, and still be uploaded to the internet for the S&G's of their friends.
The appeal of Youtube was that if something interesting happened on TV, you KNEW that it was going to be on Youtube the next morning. Nope, can't have free publicity and buzz for a currently-airing TV show. People don't channel surf anymore: they have on-screen guides and DVRs, they're not going to stumble on a show anymore... but let's kill a chance for that to happen! Oh, and let's take down the videos of stuff that hasn't been repeated on TV since the original airing or released on DVD, nor will be.
If I can find anything on the internet on Google, why can't I do the same thing with video on Youtube? And if I can't, how can I be sure that Google isn't doing the same thing to their search results? - chewbaka, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29In my opinion, it's already been "losing popularity."
Tried search for "colbert show" or "south park" lately? All the clips are gone; and that was really the only reason I was on it before. One can only watch so many bookers/lonelygirl/mentos videos before wondering wtf am I wasting my time with this for. - one1plus1one, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27Isn't Youtube easily replaceable?
This always happens to the cool sites -- but then there are new ones to take their place.
(And the new ones are often better).
ie: first there was Napster, then there was... Limewire... then there was bittorrent... then there was... and the cycle goes on... When will the media companies learn?
I guess maybe the media companies could win in the end, when they file a lawsuit against me in the year 2029 because an MRI scan of my brain turned up fragments of old songs in my memories (and technically that means my brain is storing an illegal copy of their song within my neurons). - ZoTheGorilla, on 10/12/2007, -8/+30This is exactly what I said after Youtube turned that guy in for submitting copyrighted material and I got Dugg.
Face it, Youtube ... is the modern day Napster... It was cool, but it will not but the same place anymore.
I can't find anymore Reno 911 clips!!
FYI ... I have the DVD - Eeqmcsq, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22Didn't the same thing happen to the original Napster? Napster started filtering songs by file name, users started getting annoyed, users left for other sites like Audiogalaxy.
- leoedin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20Surely these companies see that fragments of TV shows - a single joke or whatever - cannot damage them? If anything, it helps stir up a fanbase. Sure, full length TV shows are bad, but youtube doesn't have any of them on it anymore anyway.
- MrSunshine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17...and then Audiogalaxy died as well.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15youtube gets huge off pirated *****
google buys youtube and filters it
youtube shrinks to a pea
pirated ***** remains stronger then ever - jubilee123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12you can hardly get anything posted on google video.. sons of bitches. quit filtering the goddamn internet. if people want to see cisco adler's ridiculously weird balls, they're going to see them. if they want to watch "oops I crapped my pants" for the 400th time, they're going to. they might make it harder, but they're not doing anything but pissing their "customers" off.
- Jarasmen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9That, my friend, is a poem. Truly artsy and heart-moving.
- ipodman715, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Dude, you seriously need to be BANNED
- NeoRicen, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Well I know I only use YouTube for copyrighted material, very much doubt I'll visit YouTube much in the future once (not if) the massive filtering starts happening.
- tonton2012, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Google is leading the new internet bubble. The only reason its stock price is high is because of hype and Wall Street wants to keep that illusion up just long enough for them to cash in on another bubble.
- swazooe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8meh im still gonna prefer www.pornotube.com :)
- blueigloo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I do miss AudioGalaxy
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"The only reason its stock price is high is because of hype and Wall Street wants to keep that illusion up just long enough for them to cash in on another bubble."
Or because Google has issued so few stocks and many people want in on Google's business, the stock price as stayed incredibly high. At issue: whether not to split the stock (and possibly hurt more investors), or to allow the stock price to stay incredibly high and do everything possible with the money they're raking in.
Google's obviously chosen the latter. This YouTube flub isn't going to hurt Google in the long run, but it definitely damages YouTube. Google should have never purchased the blackhole that is YouTube, but at the same time, in doing so, it's helping shore up its relations with both Wall Street and other companies by attempting to work out intellectual property issues instead of simply ignoring them for popularity reasons; YouTube could never do this on its own, nor can any of these other companies attempting to compete with YouTube. They simply do not own the rights to distribute the media, and can be shut down at any time for unlimited damages (see Napster).
Change is always going to be better than ignorance. - phatfish, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6The only way it will work is like Bittorrent or other P2P solutions; ie. the content is not hosted in one centralized location that can be taken down. If the PirateBay or some other large Bittorrent site that get lots of traffic were to were to make a simple web interface for short clips (same as YouTube hosts now) that could be streamed in a browser over the BT protocol with a flash based player it would be unstoppable.
The user uploading could seed the .flv, and being Bittorrent it would scale as the clips popularity went up. The only issue is keeping up seeds as the popularity drops. But really i dont think thats too big of an issue. Either some nice people keep seeding the videos they watch with their 100meg connections, or -- for shows that are available on DVD -- you just search out a DVD rip of what you missed, also on Bittorrent.
Theres only so long these short clips will be relevant, and for current affairs -- which seems to make up most of the news, sports, daily show clips etc. -- a clip being easily available for a couple of weeks seems reasonable.
The content creators love to have control, and locking out YouTube or other well designed video services by refusing to participate in any sort of sharing of advert revenues means they lose out altogether, and the service goes underground where they have zero control over anything. It just ends up fragmented like the mp3 scene became after Napster was taken out. - KenOh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Worse yet, Eeqmcsq, Youtube isn't a client unlike Napster. It's just a website.
Sure, there's an amount of momentum that's generated by having so many people using it, but all other sites have to do to gain that is get people to link to them. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The tighter you clench your fist, the more will slip through your fingers. The internet thinks of censorship as damage and routes around it.
- alteratti, on 10/12/2007, -13/+18just another prediction about youtube's "future popularity decline".
again.
get over it man, it ani't goin downhill no matter what.
everyone knows that. - mikeabundo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Let the big media companies kill their own viral marketing.
Soon, they'll be *paying* YouTube for distribution. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6As a person on youtube who actually creates content, (and not throw up Anime or whatever lame news story of the moment) I'm somewhat pleased to hear this. I don't know if they'll implement soon enough(Hell they constantly have errors.) but when they do this this will be great for those who take the time to make original content no matter if its scripted or unscripted.
YouTube was orginally created for that purpose and not for copyrighted things. Honestly if you are going to take the time to watch TV shows, at least download the shows in HDTV quality on bittorrent and not rely on watching a show in 4 parts in only 320x240 resolution. - johnnyrocket, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Let's see, what made YouTube popular?
I copyrighted clip from NBC Universal...
What will make YouTube irrelevant?
Those same forces taking that material down. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Any time big biz get their hands on these online social networks, its time to sell your stock.
Buh-Bye mySpace
Buh-Bye YouTube - dbr_onix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Isn't Youtube easily replaceable?"
Yes, but currently, it seems to have the most content, and is the nicest to use - Particularly the search, compared to say, DailyMotion (I can never find anything on DailyMotion without using a search engine like Googles, which is slightly odd..).
Random example, searching for "Acid Bath" (A fairly obscure "sludge metal/doom metal band" band) on DailyMotion returns a single video (Live video of the band), Youtube's search for the same term returns 175 videos, all bar about 3 on the first page are either live videos or fan videos.
Sure, if Youtube starts screwing things up and deleting lots of content, people will start to use other sites (DailyMotion/MetaCafe etc), but currently Youtube is the most widely used (Wandering though the floor at college, if anyones watching videos online, it's nearly always Youtube their one. If you ask my parents about an online video site, they'll name Youtube..), but currently, Youtube is the "best".
If Youtube starts removing copyright videos (TV shows, music videos, etc) I'd be surprised if people didn't start flocking to some other site - Sure, TV shows may not be the only thing people view on Youtube, but people are far more likely to go to the site to watch [TV show name], then see an icon for an interesting looking video someone made, click it and start prodding around there.
Copywritten videos are a decent way of getting people onto the site in the first place, without them, there's a lot less reason to go to the site in the first place (Most Youtube links people send me are either music videos, or TV show clips, from those I'm far more likely to click on some random video that looks interesting, rather than go to the site specifically looking for.. well.. nothing).. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If you have your bittorrent setup for RSS downloading, it wouldn't take you much time.
- trythis111, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2some people are saying this is going thatvideosite.com is going to be the next big one. a musician friend of mine is in process of moving his stuff from youtube there. better features or something.
- jswaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2sticking with the youtube business model would have kept it growing at the staggering rate it was growing it pre-google.
- tonton2012, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Those deep pockets you refer to are propped by investors who will soon find out that Google is just a branded internet bubble 2.0. There's absolutely no reason why Google's stock price is better than Yahoo who has a bigger user base.
- Apreche, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This news isn't really so bad. Since before YouTube has existed Bittorrent has been the source for copyrighted videos. I never understood the people who watched TV shows on YouTube broken into 3 parts in low resolution. Just get an Xvid from bittorrent people. YouTube is the place I go to watch people hurt themselves, people sing badly, people demonstrate magic tricks, and well, people. The only times I watch copyrighted stuff on YouTube is when it's some sort of clever remix of copyrighted music and video. If they start taking that stuff away, I know we're going to hear from Lessig about it.
- videoCT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I suspect that YouTube increases viewers of network shows. For example, let's say you search for cartton on YouTube, and the most viewed results are from Family Guy. Let's say that you have never seen Family Guy, maybe you live on a Farm or whatever. Well you loved the clips, so you convince dad to get a dish, and you are now watching Family Guy and other shows, and ingesting commercials. So those illegal Family Guy clips have increased revenue for a satellite provider, and thrown another set of eyeballs in front of Fox. Without Fox spending another penny. Well, Fox would rather have fewer viewers I guess.
- geekitechture, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You are wrong. YouTube implemented content filters after Google bought them to stave off lawsuits over copyright infringement that will inevitably arise if they don't remove that material.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I like livevideo. Sometimes its a bit dominated by aspiring actors and actresses from LA, but the site works!
- itsbecca, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Ehhh I don't think this is the end of Youtube. Especially with companies getting smart and releasing their content themselves. It will continue to be a huge social website and will continue to progress down the path of getting more legal content from the big contenders. Besides using it to watch shows/movies/music videos 2nd hand was always crap because of the video quality.
Also, Youtube is "easily replaceable", but think marketing here. It's a name, it's a brand EVERYONE knows. Google makes mistakes, but I don't think they're dumb enough to make one that is so expensive. - MrDarkSim, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I'm sure cops want videos they put up asking for help to catch violent criminals taken down due to copyright issues.
- offspring06, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They paid billions for Youtube and now they are killing its biggest draw which is copyrighted material. I don't go to Youtube to watch idiots acting like idiots.
- totalsuper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I sense the presence of a "Star Wars" fan. ^_^
- Travelsonic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Uh dude, only problem with your statement is your stuff, yunless you license it differently, IS copyrighted.
YOU are uploading YOUR copyrighted works of which YOU created on Youtube.
Everybody keeps on getting this wrong, which really does people who wish to understand copyright laws a disservice. Uploading copyrighted works is only not ok if you don't have permission, otherwise uploading our own works would be for the MOST part be illegal. - marinist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What big media groups take off YouTube, they're not providing an alternate means to view their content.
YouTube was a great centralized marketing channel, but these companies don't grasp the value of digital mediums to their interests.
If they were a bit more astute, they would put shows on YouTube and control the content, interspersed with commercials.
Google could provide various .flv skins so that viewers could click from commercials while watching various programs.
Big media charges earns money from advertising, and viewers get to watch their content; everyone wins. - worbd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3YouTube is already censoring content like mad.
I'm sure some of you saw this story:
http://www.digg.com/offbeat_news/Digg_and_YouTube_Powering_Atheism_2_0
Well, lately YouTube has been censoring Atheists like mad. Nick Gisburne was permanently banned, and Muslims have organized a group to flag videos criticizing Islam as "Hate Speech". Lots of Atheist videos have started disappearing, and people are being banned for no apparent reason.
Check this one out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youtube_atheists
And here is one of the groups the Muslims use to organize abuse report attacks to remove videos and get people banned:
http://youtube.com/group/unitedmuslims - tybris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Why the hell that buy that monster in the first place? All that IQ doesn't seem to make them very smart. How many complete screw-ups have they made by now? China. YouTube. Google Books. Google News. A flood of useless services...
- spectre_25gt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Google is possibly hurting itself in this move. By filtering this content, they're giving in to the ridiculous notion that they're responsible for the content a website publishes. Now this could be brought up later when someone wants them to filter out other content.
WTF were you thinking, Google? - strat0tele, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2dot com bubble 2.0
- 5hop4orce, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If you meant cops asking for help to catch violent criminals, that's what you should have written.
- kaniz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ok, so people start moving to sights that dont filter. But, as the users start to move to those sites, and content starts to move to those sites -copyright holders start to move to those sites.
However, I don't really get why copyright holders are in such a fuss over YouTube, if anything - it gets me to watch the 'real thing' on TV/rental/whatever after watching a funny clip / out-take / mash-up of it on YouTube. I think the LONGEST thing I've watched on YouTube was about 8 mins long. The video quality is simply too bad to be bothered watching an entire episode / movie on there.
If I watch a funny / cool clip from a TV show on YouTube from something I've never watched before, it'll give me that much more incentive to linger on that station when channel surfing.
Or, if I saw something funny on TV that I want to share with my friends, I may see if someone has already posted it on YouTube, then link that to my friends, who in turn - may end up watching the TV show on TV later on as a result.
YouTube can also be a great marketing/viral-marketing tool. Instead of feeding ads passively to users on TV (of which most will ignore, flip the stations, etc), they can have a captive audience of MILLIONS who actually seek out the material to watch, share with friends, etc -- missing out on that is just retarded. - Fox318, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm leaving youtube as soon as the software hits as well. Google, great job bending over.
- FCDrifter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1YouTube has been on the decline right before Google purchased it. There isn't anymore videos worth watching that are not copywrited.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 112 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is