youtube will become obsolete when the attention spans of the masses are whittled down to the point where they can only tolerate short form content
>>107838231We've already been there and pulled back from it. Pic related is what you used to see visiting the site without an account or any cookies a few years ago. Now it presents you with a blank page and prompts you to search for something to watch.
Isn't youtube already losing to tiktok because a tiktok is 5-30 seconds long with flashing lights and dancing? That's why there's youtube shorts.
>>107838307Oh we've moves past that youtube look
>>107838358YouTube is pushing shorts like a drug dealer and it's filled with AI slop made by thirdies.
>>107838231GO AWAY IM BAITIN
I paid 75$ for 50 action movies on vhs. None of them has mold. Looks awesome with my retrorhink CRT filters. I intend to stop the dopamine deathsrcroll that ruined my brain.
>>107838231As someone who was absolutely addicted to YouTube, that is to say had it 15 hours a day open in the background for decades, with a few post-pandemic years being particularly bad, I have to say that it doesn't feel to me like YouTube has much of a future. It's full of slop and everything worth listening to or watching has been exhausted in broad terms. Yes there's more content than one could consume in several lifetimes, but most of it is more of the same. YouTubr isn't going anywhere, the content is there to stay, but it will likely stagnate for a very long time.
now I finally understand pic relatednormies are cattle lmao terry was right
Welcome to Costco, I love you
>>107838364>yeji>chaewonwe have a kpop coomer here
Should use vidlii it's like old YouTube just needs more people using it. I'm probs gonna make an account on it and odysee I'll probs upload to YouTube as well but link then in.
>>107838364But if you go in fresh it doesn't assault you with garbage. And even after use it will still (mostly) pull from a recommendation algorithm that it thinks will keep you watching. If you don't click on crap it's a lot less likely to show you crap. Though how long that lasts is another question.
>>107838231>>107838307When did this algorithm shit take over, anyway? I've only ever used the subscriptions feed on youtube, and last time I had a twitter account (10+ years ago) it was common sense to just find people to follow and use the feed that actually shows every single one of their tweets sans replies.But now apparently people use the slop feed (in both) that SOMETIMES shows shit from people you're subscribed to if it finds it worth showing to you specifically. How did it get to this point?
