Odysee, a decentralised YouTube alternative focused on free speech, is officially ending the serving of ads on the platform, starting today. The post:

"Dear friends of Odysee, Starting today, we’re removing all ads. We don’t need ads to make money as a platform and we are confident in the development of our own new monetisation programs that will help creators earn a living and at the same time keep Odysee alive. Ultimately, sacrificing the overall user experience to make a few bucks isn’t worth it to us and nor is it even sustainable for a platform that wishes to make something truly open and creatively free.

As we take this decision, one thing is certain to us, media platforms (even ones that market themselves as ‘free-speech’) typically devolve into advertising companies and end up becoming beholden to their paymasters. It’s been that way for centuries and is never going to change.

As we see YouTube become more aggressive with their ad deployment and ‘Free Speech’ platforms try to build their own ad businesses it’s apparent to us that we’re building a model for Odysee that will keep it sustainable not only financially, but in its ability to provide an incorruptible user experience.

Our approach may be considered niche or unconventional, that’s fine by us. Odysee will be used by the world on terms that are agreeable to its users, and we know our users don’t like ads.

Best, Founder & Creator, Chief Executive Officer. Julian Chandra"

  • nevemsenki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    116
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    Most such attempts fail when not enough people subscribe to paying tiers. Good luck to them nevertheless, I hope they succeed.

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      4 months ago

      Good luck to them nevertheless, I hope they succeed.

      Personally, I hope the platform that welcomes Nazis crashes and burns.

      • x00z@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        35
        ·
        4 months ago

        Freedom goes both ways. I hate nazis, but it’s better to have their bullshit out in the open to be criticized, than have them group up on shady underground places that would only make it worse.

          • x00z@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            21
            ·
            4 months ago

            The opposite is “the illusion of safety because of moderated platforms”. One might think a platform that removes fake news would only have real news, but that’s obviously not the case and creates an even worse landscape.

            • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              33
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              4 months ago

              Just because moderating platforms to eliminate Nazis only drives them to build their own spaces doesn’t make deplatforming them the wrong move. I prefer them existing in the fringes rather than being accepted into the mainstream.

              Tolerance for Nazis is only possible if you are ignorant of history, or if you are actively evil. “Stupid or Evil?” Isn’t a great place to exist, but I have to conclude one way or the other every time I run into this “why don’t we just hear the Nazis out?” narrative…

              We know enough about Nazis already to tell them to go fuck themselves before they even open their mouths. Giving them a voice is an act of violence.

              • x00z@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                15
                ·
                4 months ago

                You’re doing the same as what others are trying to do to any open platform. You’re claiming that me trying to defend absolute freedom of speech is the same as me asking why we don’t hear them out. And as long as you believe that is the same, I’d rather not waste time discussing this.

                Absolute freedom of speech goes both ways, indefinitely. If a platform is too heavily moderated and hides stuff like this, not only does it create the illusion that it does not exist, it also sets a precedent for abuse by the platform owners. The biggest example at the moment is how Musk uses X to suppress arguments that don’t fit his narrative.

                Filter bubbles are a very new concept and are much worse than coming across people spreading hatred and being able to tell them to suck it.

                • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  claiming that me trying to defend absolute freedom of speech is the same as me asking why we don’t hear them out.

                  On privately operated online social spaces, that’s exactly what you’re asking.

                  Absolute freedom of speech goes both ways, indefinitely.

                  That’s why free speech absolutism is a stupid idea that doesn’t make sense.

                  The biggest example at the moment is how Musk uses X to suppress arguments that don’t fit his narrative.

                  You think the biggest threat to free speech is Elon Musk moderating Twitter like an idiot? You and I are clearly not worried about the same things in regards to suppression of speech…

                  • x00z@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    You think the biggest threat to free speech is Elon Musk moderating Twitter like an idiot?

                    No, I said it’s the biggest example.

        • 1984@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          I agree with you but so few people think so today. They think censorship is the answer because if they don’t see it, they feel better and can forget it exists.

    • DreitonLullaby@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      If anyone does want to support them, even by a small amount, and don’t have much money, I personally recommend subscribing for a month or two to the Premium+ subsciption, which is only $2.99/month. It’s all I can afford atm personally, so that’s what I’m going to be doing. They deserve support just for this action alone.

      • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t understand how that’s much different than YouTube. If you pay for YouTube then you don’t get ads either.

        • Melt@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          The difference is your favorite channel won’t be destroyed by a corporate abusing copyright strike, they won’t have to self-censor themselves from saying fuck or shit. A platform making money from ads means every content creator on that platform is a slave to the advertisers

          • mindlight@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            My favorite channel wouldn’t have millions of subscribers and a somewhat steady recurring income because of this.

            It’s a classic catch 22: Without viewers, no content creators. Without content creators, no viewers.

            I think it’s great that they try to get rid of what makes YouTube suck but I don’t see that content creators are leaving YouTube anywhere soon.

            • DreitonLullaby@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              They don’t need to leave YouTube at all. That’s because Odysee provides a YouTube sync feature, that syncs every upload from YouTube with the Odysee channel. They can set the sync and never touch Odysee again if they want to. Plus, if we collectively ask our favourite YouTubers to join Odysee, and actually make them realise that Odysee exists, more of them will eventually join. Once more have joined, it will be easier to convince even more YouTubers to join again. The cycle continues, and Odysee grows.

              • mindlight@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                I’m sorry to be the guy that tried to ruin your party, but “if we collectively…”… How many people are you talking about?

                100, 1000, 10000, 100000 ?

                This is business. We’re talking about someone’s livelihood. Peace on earth is nice but it doesn’t guarantee food on your table.

                Syncing is an alternative as long as it doesn’t mean that a view pays less on Odyssee than on YouTube. If it does, then the creator would not gain anything, just kidding income.

                What is your selling argument for a YouTube creator with 100000 views on average to move to Odyssee?

                • DreitonLullaby@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I’m sorry to be the guy that tried to ruin your party, but “if we collectively…”… How many people are you talking about?

                  100, 1000, 10000, 100000 ?

                  As many people as are willing to do it. If you’re not; that’s fine; I’m not telling anyone they have to; it’s just an encouragement.

                  Syncing is an alternative as long as it doesn’t mean that a view pays less on Odyssee than on YouTube. If it does, then the creator would not gain anything, just kidding income.

                  Syncing is up to the YouTuber, it’s not hard to do, and requires no channel management after initially set up. They may not have a reason, depending on who they are, but it’s better to get some people on board with it than none.

                  What is your selling argument for a YouTube creator with 100000 views on average to move to Odyssee?

                  There is no “selling” point other than that it’s easy to set up and may earn them some extra cash, even if it’s not much in comparison to their YouTube pay. Other than that, there’s the fact that YouTube false copyright claims videos all the time, and if the YouTuber can’t get their video back up, their viewers can still at least view it through Odysee where the synced video did not get removed. If the channel is automatically taken down by false copyright issues, as has happened before, the video’s aren’t suddenly lost forever. Not all YouTubers keep a backup of all their videos on their own drives, and if their channel is taken down completely, “bye bye content”. I’m not trying to say that these reasons are much for most YouTubers, but with dozens of millions of YouTubers out there making good money, there are bound to be at least hundreds of thousands of them who would sync with Odysee if they knew about it.

        • DreitonLullaby@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          The point of the post is that Odysee no longer has ads. I’m not trying to say you needed the subscription to remove ads. That’s how it was previously, until today. Free users don’t see ads anymore.

          The difference between YouTube Premium and Odysee Premium is mainly in it’s reason for existing. YouTube Premium exists for the sole purpose of providing features that used to be free, with some extra things that most people don’t givea hoot about and never use; and, you know… to make themselves richer. It exists so that people buy it for the value it specifically brings them.

          So essentially; people buy YouTube premium for the features, while people buy Odysee Premium to support the growth of the platform, help fund the platform, and support free speech. The extra features they get are just a little bonus as thanks. Not only that, but the features Odysee provides are “Early-Access” features, which means that most, if not all of those features will become available for free users eventually. At that point, I’m not sure what Odysee Premium will provide if all the features become free; they’ll have to figure something else out to give it more incentive. But as it currently stands, Odysee Premium is more like a donation than a service; which gives you extra features as thanks.

          • WldFyre@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            You’re reading obnoxious levels of goodwill into the actions of a company that doesn’t deserve it. This is just the video platform equivalent of “critical support to Russia.”

        • 1984@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Profits for big tech is never enough, and they will raise prices and introduce more ads forever. This is because in modern economy, having a quarter where the profits don’t grow is punished severely on the stock market.