starvation is complicated

the biggest problem is money. the money on youtube comes from ads. this is how shit has been done since forever, right? just the new version of tv. But ads are flaky. They require views, sometimes clicks. That is a really risky business model. And as people have pointed out, youtube has not really made money, probably since google bought it if it ever really made money.

your also less likely to want to do something for potentially nothing while your being starved

So, how do these new sites compare. Do they have the same set of ads. if so, how do you prevent a bunch of major ad companies from making a fuss over something and then pulling out. causing either the platform to respond, or creators to leave, unless that ad space can be filled.

but the move to bitchute also isint an incredibly huge risk, not as much of a risk as moving there and not staying on youtube at the same time. but time is also money

oh i agree, any alt tech company needs to be built not to deal with the same problems youtube has

but not all of youtubes problems are about ads

half of youtubes problems are about content control and presentation

fucking shit with subscriptions, fucking shit with how things are recommended, these are long term protections against problems with ad's i agree. but at the same time they also are about culling the platform into something simply better for them to make money dispite how that runs into large chucks of their audience

personally, i think more creators need to actually go out and get sponsorships directly. I know its iffy, but really, you need a company that says "we know exactly what you produce, and we agree." Then its no longer a risk of the platform turning on you that will cost you money. so then its just which one is easiest for my fans to see a new video i posted.

why would you ever need to implament a 2nd conformation to a subscription button (the bell) and then later implament a 3rd confermation to a subscription (the tab that opens up after the bell now) THEN start messing with the subscription feed

look it doesent matter what creators do now

they could be sponcered by the whitehouse. if youtube wants you dead, they are your god now

either that, or start having paid subscriptions. Which is what patreon almost is

well thats why i said then the platform is less problematic

doesn't matter if the video doesn't get views for a while, or when it gets views.

what sponcer would sponcer you over someone who has better growth? youtube is controling your economic mobility on their platform this is a killer

so if you go to bitchute, it doesn't matter how long it takes to rebuild your viewership because views are no longer your source of income basically

they will keep tightening the screws until they can actually cause people to lose subscribers and veiws simply due to their algorythmes alone

i mean, look at roosterteeth. They are a pretty big company now. They started doing online videos, for free, way before youtube.

but they did this with first free work, then paid subscriptions on their own site, then branching out to put themselves out there on various stuff.

then they sold merch, downloads, all kinds of things

(i mean, diversify is the best business practice)

it doesent matter where your advertisers come from, if you dont have enough veiws youll eventually stop getting ads. right now advertisers are being experimental because there is a need for it, that wont last

but so long as views == money, people are gonna have a hard time doing and kind of switch. because either its a full switch which may backfire because they get too little views for their remaining capital and need to shut the doors and find a new job, or they put in extra work for little to no returns until one of the alts takes off

@Arch-Fiend yes, but if you have a sponsor, then youtube or bitchute can't say you make no money on this video now

there will be a day when vikings doesent just had out sponcers to just anybody

this isint a solution, its patching a hole in a ship being bombarded by cannonfire

"views" isint a youtube origenal term, because it represents something fundumental to the concept of advertisment. it has existed in advertisment for centurys. and this whole creators finding their own sponsor thing will eventually have the issue of "veiws" come up

youtube will control veiws

when it controls veiws it controls your life on that platform unless you can sell something other than advertisment in ANY form

sponsers are a new advertisment that is all and its not exempt from this problem, it just has time before it optomises for it

the shit were seeing youtube implament right now is simply a slow form of shadow banning

even merch wont save you if youtube wont let anyone watch you to buy it

lets reiterate a problem. or parts of a problem:

1) alt websites get like no views. which means extra work, time taken away from making videos, for potential no return
2) youtube can control if you get money from ads
3) youtube can control how easy it is to find your video
4) having all your eggs in one basket is never a good idea
5) Revenue is a combination of views and ads
6) views is a combo of number of videos, and quality/content of the videos

miss any of the major points?

I had the idea a long time ago that would take power from youtube

you just need an aggregator

to replace their "subscription"

maybe a 7) alt websites will get more veiws when they have people others want to see there on their platform

there's no way to compete with youtube as a platform

but as they change the way people find videos