[woofcat]

So you want their free hosting, but don't want to pay for it either directly, or indirectly?

[mitthrowaway2]

YouTube spent about ten years convincing their users that videos will be offered with only unobtrusive banner ads or short, pre-video ads. Then once the network effects were safely locked in, they changed it to a protection racket where multiple loud, frequently offensive ads (including for scams!) will interrupt a one-minute video and new ads are triggered by so much as rewinding, but you can pay to not see them.

I'd much rather support a different platform, myself.

[zarzavat]

Who asked for Google to be the custodian of our culture? I don’t owe them rent just because they were so presumptuous to put themselves into that position.

There used to be a thriving variety of video hosting sites.

[goalonetwo]

That's exactly how I feel as well. I don't want them to be the default but here we are.

And I'm definitely not going to pay which would encourage/send the signal that this is what we want.

[digging]

For me, it's not the concept of paying. I'd gladly pay someone to host YouTube. I just don't think paying Google is a good thing.

[goalonetwo]

Yes. I'm fine with them dying and a better company taking over that I would then support.

[wintermutestwin]

If they weren't already stealing my data, I'd gladly pay them for ad-free. My data is worth far more to me and goog won't even offer me an option to not steal it because it is worth far more to them as well.

[jstanley]

Yes.