Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Success, is when your work produces a bunch of value for you and your employees, financially uplifting an entire group of people.
I’m sorry but I personally can’t see how selling your business so that a bunch of people who are already rich can use it to make even more, is a good thing in the long run.
It’s one of the practices that is keeping the already rich on top, and more often than not leads to the business adopting the same opressive profit focus as everyone else.
No-one looking to buy up or invest in companies is doing so for the good of the product or employees. They might claim they are, but ultimately, the whole point of investing, is getting a return. And once that priority is introduced, the people and the content will never again be first.
Sure. It just depends on which lens you view it through. You’re obviously looking through a very anti-capitalist lens that puts employees and community in center. That’s fine. It’s probably hard to see the “success” in that. Some other people might view it the ultra-capitalist, “traditional American way” - making the dream, looking out for number one and someone cashing out after years of hard work is exactly the measure of success they’re looking for.
I’m not saying your view is wrong. In fact, I’m well on your side of it.
But I can’t say he made a wrong call. He’s an individual and I don’t know him. I’ve enjoyed his videos, but he doesn’t owe me anything. It’s his company, his channel, his call.
He sold out. Probably made a shit ton of cash and is laughing all the way to the bank. Good for him. I wish him the best.
But as I said in my first post, I am constantly amazed how advertising money runs the Internet. And THAT, my anti-capitalist friend, is something that I really, really HATE.
I can’t see how you can get that far ahead without screwing over someone else, or leaving someone you should have brought along behind.
But as I said in my first post, I am constantly amazed how advertising money runs the Internet. And THAT, my anti-capitalist friend, is something that I really, really HATE.
And I hate when those in positions to resist it, become part of the problem instead.
I can’t see how you can get that far ahead without screwing over someone else, or leaving someone you should have brought along behind.
Like I said, I don’t know him so I really don’t know the circumstances and I don’t know the details of his deal - but he, or his investors have employed 40 people to work with the channel. I’d assume they are all salaried and some of them seem to be straight from school - so apart from capital exhange (which, as I pointed out, is ideological differenre)I don’t really see the abuse like you do. But again, I don’t know the circumstances.
And I hate when those in positions to resist it, become part of the problem instead.
So this is more of the key for me, or more interesting talking point anyway. Being on YouTube is part of the problem, because YouTube is monopolistic surveilance platform driven by advertising money. But many science communicators choose YouTube over, say community owned Nebula, because of business reasons (CGP Gray and Kurzgesagt were part of the founding members, but left in favor of YouTube). And the amount of people who choose fedi alternatives PeerTube are not even comparable - without robust ad-networks fueling creators, there doesn’t seem to be very many alternative options.
Three years ago, yeah. That what the ”he should enjoy his success” part meant.
And he goes through all of this in the video.
Success, is when your work produces a bunch of value for you and your employees, financially uplifting an entire group of people.
I’m sorry but I personally can’t see how selling your business so that a bunch of people who are already rich can use it to make even more, is a good thing in the long run.
It’s one of the practices that is keeping the already rich on top, and more often than not leads to the business adopting the same opressive profit focus as everyone else.
No-one looking to buy up or invest in companies is doing so for the good of the product or employees. They might claim they are, but ultimately, the whole point of investing, is getting a return. And once that priority is introduced, the people and the content will never again be first.
Sure. It just depends on which lens you view it through. You’re obviously looking through a very anti-capitalist lens that puts employees and community in center. That’s fine. It’s probably hard to see the “success” in that. Some other people might view it the ultra-capitalist, “traditional American way” - making the dream, looking out for number one and someone cashing out after years of hard work is exactly the measure of success they’re looking for.
I’m not saying your view is wrong. In fact, I’m well on your side of it.
But I can’t say he made a wrong call. He’s an individual and I don’t know him. I’ve enjoyed his videos, but he doesn’t owe me anything. It’s his company, his channel, his call.
He sold out. Probably made a shit ton of cash and is laughing all the way to the bank. Good for him. I wish him the best.
But as I said in my first post, I am constantly amazed how advertising money runs the Internet. And THAT, my anti-capitalist friend, is something that I really, really HATE.
I can’t.
I can’t see how you can get that far ahead without screwing over someone else, or leaving someone you should have brought along behind.
And I hate when those in positions to resist it, become part of the problem instead.
Like I said, I don’t know him so I really don’t know the circumstances and I don’t know the details of his deal - but he, or his investors have employed 40 people to work with the channel. I’d assume they are all salaried and some of them seem to be straight from school - so apart from capital exhange (which, as I pointed out, is ideological differenre)I don’t really see the abuse like you do. But again, I don’t know the circumstances.
So this is more of the key for me, or more interesting talking point anyway. Being on YouTube is part of the problem, because YouTube is monopolistic surveilance platform driven by advertising money. But many science communicators choose YouTube over, say community owned Nebula, because of business reasons (CGP Gray and Kurzgesagt were part of the founding members, but left in favor of YouTube). And the amount of people who choose fedi alternatives PeerTube are not even comparable - without robust ad-networks fueling creators, there doesn’t seem to be very many alternative options.
That’s a problem.