I don’t regularly watch anything on APV so this specific action doesn’t really effect me -but- the uninhibited profit seeking by the Entertainment Industry is out of control. As a high income household we’ve silently absorbed the rate hikes and content splitting in order to keep enjoying content but the latest industry moves around account sharing and charging extra for basic stuff is getting to be too much. The former because I’ve got kids in College and I shouldn’t have to pay for extra"accounts, even with Student Discounts, so they can watch things and I definitely shouldn’t have to pay for simple add-ons like HD, Vision, and Atmos!
I’m lucky enough to be able to stand up a Media Server (Plex in my case) and am currently integrating that with “Arrr” services so I can hop off this carousel of rent-seeking insanity.
That’s not quite correct. It says it wasn’t real time because the guy was typing his questions, not speaking them.
However the responses from the AI were all correct. Maybe just not as fast. Maybe it took a few seconds to respond, but that is acceptable at this stage.
They wanted to show you how amazing it really is, and could be if it were hooked up to speech recognition and was able to resolve quicker. Which one day will be the case.
Yes, but the point their are trying to make is to gain the adblocking users, not lose them. They need more people to watch the ads, not less people to watch YT.
Compared to other sites, and their relative costs to run, and amount of ads. YouTube has been fairly ok. They have balanced the consumer friendly skip this video and sometimes short ads with the probably higher engagement metrics from them.
However YouTube the lite plan being discontinued right before this mostly means I’m going to move from Gmail to Zoho and wait for the ban.
The final YouTube lite plan didn’t include removing ads from music, which seems to suggest the reason why YouTube music is bundled and maybe even exists, is in part the music industry being shitty.
Do they really want the people who stayed on Facebook that drove out the initial wave of cool users to go to their new site and drove people away too?
I don’t really understand Facebook’s logic here. It’s widely known that throwing money at a social networking site doesn’t create sustainable growth, see Google Plus as an example.
Besides, it seems to me that Threads is just filled with blue checked celeb accounts nowadays and they (usually their social media person) barely ever post anything there, nevermind anything interesting or funny, and I don’t think people actually care for that at all.
engadget.com
Top