>The current state of Youtube

Good. Annotations are fucking annoying.

Who fucking cares.

Who gives a fuck

Good.
Exodus soon

>>59436900
Phonecucks WILL defend this

>>59436900
>They don't even work on mobile devices

This sentence is making me mad for so many reasons.

File: C5sVFOpXQAAOOZY.jpg (122KB, 720x1014px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 720x1014px

>>59436900
NO!
They should keep annotations.
AND add Nico Nico Douga-style comment marquee overlays.

>>59436997
The main reason being that you have autism. Retard.

>>59437045
If Niconico can get scrolling comments working on mobile there's absolutely no excuse for Youtube

>>59436900
It's not gonna be too much of an issue but
>They don't even work on mobile devices
Why do they word it like that? It's their fault in the first place for not making support.

File: 1488964174198.jpg (109KB, 1248x886px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1248x886px

Remember when people would place invisible annotations that would cover the entire video? So every time you would click inside the video it would redirect you to subscribe to them?
That was hell, also when they would just over the screen with them memes l.

>>59437056
I can't argue with that.

>>59436997
It's like they are talking about someone else's website.

>>59437087
To make it seem more like something negative / unneeded. Makes it easier to get rid of I guess

>>59436900
>We never fixed a thing so fuck you
Sounds about right.

>>59437087
nope, it's incompatible with HTLM5 playback.

File: sheeit.png (448KB, 717x438px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 717x438px

>>59437088
but nostalgia

File: x.jpg (19KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 400x400px

>>59436900
rip

>5 times better
where do they get these numbers from

>>59437204
Annotations work on HTML5 dumbass

Annotations are annoying af I'm glad they finally remove this shit

>>59437232
google analytics

>>59437232
The same place they got their nice and round "70% dropped usage" statistic from.

How are now illiterate lyric videos uploaders supposed to correct their mistakes?

>things don't work for mobile cancer
>so we will remove it

God damnit. If i had to pick one of 3 wishes from a genie, one would be for all smartphones in the world to spontaneously combust.

>>59436900
YESSSSSS!!!!

Bye bye fucking annoying annotations :DDDD

First they replaced the 5 stars rating with the like/dislike bullshit, then the unification under a single google account, then the idiotic spacing between the comments that lets you see 1/5 of them in the same space, now if someone puts up a video and they say something wrong or make an error they wont be able to easily correct it. It's like they are putting effort in making their platform a pain in the ass for creators and conscious users, while trying to make it more appealing to mindless phone users. I really wish there was an alternative

>>59437088
That was fixed already thanks to the disable annotations button

>>59437325
>It's like they are putting effort in making their platform a pain in the ass for creators and conscious users, while trying to make it more appealing to mindless phone users.
I agree. And the API is designed in a way, that if you'd want to bring some old feature back, it's like burning your credits (e.g. "All activity" that used to show your subscription's favs/likes).

>>59437325
Don't forget that they removed the like/dislike ratio that they used to show under thumbnails, so you need to click on a video to see what other people think about it.
Also, one of the recent mobile updates actually put the number of dislikes out of view, so you have to manually tap to see them.
All this is just so they can show more ads to more people

>>59437325
The only good new youtube update was removing google+ integration and making it so you could vote on and reply to comments posted before the google+ update.

>>59437396
Also downvotes on comments don't actually work

>>59437325
Like/dislike ratio is better than star rating.

>>59436900
Why this shit only gets worse!?

File: lepepes (37).png (98KB, 828x828px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 828x828px

>>59437088
>invisible annotations that would cover the entire video? So every time you would click inside the video it would redirect you to subscribe to them?

>>59436900
Thank fucking goodness.
I hope they delete all annotations sometime in the future as well.

>>59437537
Why in the world could that be better? In the past i was like "this was a nice video, i'll give it 4 stars" or "this video kinda sucks i'll give it 2 stars" or "this video is amazing, 5 stars!", now it's black or white, i'm forced to decide if i "like" it or not, like if my opinion was just """my opinion""", something that cannot contribute to build a reliable indicator of the quality of a video

>>59437666
Welcome to the (((future)))

>>59437666
Most people are retarded and would only vote 1 star or 5 stars. There's a place for number/star ratings, like sites where you post reviews of things, since you're actually supposed to put effort into that kind of thing. But on a youtube video, no one's gonna ponder the appropriate rating for a 5-second clip of some guy getting hit in the nuts that they're gonna forget about the next day.

>>59436900
Good. I install YT userscripts specifically to make sure the Annotations are always turned off in every video.

What autistic retard is complaining about this?

How is this a bad decision?
Did any of you idiots actually expect Google to port annotations to mobile devices? That shit has nothing to do on 5inch touchscreen devices. The YT app already cramps all video elements like the timeline, play/pause button, streaming settings etc. on that tiny display and now you want annoying text bubbles on that mini screen as well? Have fun accidentally pressing that shit was pausing or leaving fullscreen mode.

Please, use your fucking brain. You can't simply port a platform originally made for desktop traffic without any changes to mobile devices, and as companies hate having differences in functionality between different platforms for a single website/app and actually prefer consistence they're gonna have to dump a few ancient features here and there to make room for new shit that works on all screen sizes.

What was the point of annotations anyway? What can be done with them that can't be done with cards, that (i) button and the description?

Grow the fuck up and stop complaining about a company removing ancient, non constistent functionality from their products.

>>59437325
You forgot to mention the removal of subscription folders that used to let you group subscription and have separate pages. E.g. I had latest music, latest gaming and latest photography.

Removed because "only few people use it so fuck you".

I passed to using a (local) rss client to order subscriptions, and livestreamer to view. So fuck them, they've lost one user.

File: 1489290843294.jpg (14KB, 500x286px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 500x286px

>EAT THIS

I hope someone gets this

>>59438163
I wish I didn't.

>>59437755
>Most people are retarded and would only vote 1 star or 5 stars.
I don't think so. And even if it was the case, if you treat retards like normal people there's a chance they'll become less retarded, but if you treat retards like retards they will stay retarded forever.

>There's a place for number/star ratings, like sites where you post reviews of things, since you're actually supposed to put effort into that kind of thing. But on a youtube video, no one's gonna ponder the appropriate rating for a 5-second clip of some guy getting hit in the nuts that they're gonna forget about the next day.
You don't need to "put effort" or "ponder" to decide a number between 1 and 5, it's pretty immediate and i would have it ready by the end of every video i watch

File: 05.12.12- Bad Blood (22-02-1998).avi_snapshot_04.39_[2012.05.02_00.15.56].jpg (23KB, 720x400px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 720x400px

Good

most content creators abused annotations by either having them pop up constantly, using ones that obscured too much of the screen or having them cover the entire video with a re-direct link (fuck those people especially)

I made it a habit of disabling annotations before playing a single video and I'm glad they're going away, though I blame youtube just as much as the people that abused them, god forbid we had an 'auto-disable' option somewhere.

>>59438105
>$0.01 has been deposited into your Google Wallet

Annotations also don't work with mpv+ytdl, so I'm okay with this.

>>59436997
Holy shit I know. I feel as if it doesn't fit at all.

>>5943810
>Did any of you idiots actually expect Google to port annotations to mobile devices?
No, i would have expected them to replace annotations with something that has the same funcionality but works on mobile too.
That shit has nothing to do on 5inch touchscreen devices. The YT app already cramps all video elements like the timeline, play/pause button, streaming settings etc. on that tiny display and now you want annoying text bubbles on that mini screen as well? Have fun accidentally pressing that shit was pausing or leaving fullscreen mode.
If a device isn't suitable for something they shouldn't just cut features to make it in pair with other devices
>Please, use your fucking brain. You can't simply port a platform originally made for desktop traffic without any changes to mobile devices, and as companies hate having differences in functionality between different platforms for a single website/app and actually prefer consistence they're gonna have to dump a few ancient features here and there to make room for new shit that works on all screen sizes.
As i said above, porting isn't necessary, what is necessary is something else to do the same thing, something that youtube doesn't plan to implement.

>What was the point of annotations anyway? What can be done with them that can't be done with cards, that (i) button and the description?
Instead of writing this rambling rant you could have read the thread, so you would know.

>>59437666
Your 4 star rating is another man's 2 star rating.
Even if you enjoyed the video the same.
It's good from an autistic perspective in a perfect world without retards, but it just so happens we're a lot closer to the opposite of that, especially on youtube.

>>59438383
>something else to do the same thing

Yeah, they exactly provided that.
Cards, Clickable 'thumbnails' in videos, the (i) sidebar box thingy, polls.

What is missing??

>>59438221
I read your post in Scully's voice

>>59438463
>can't link to whatever site you want in a card, have to add a site to your account to do it (and it has to be approved by google)
>can't link to a certain timecode in your video with a card
>can't have a card that just displays text
Wow, thanks, this is totally the same thing as annotations!

>>59436997
I can't support this post enough. This x1000.
THAT'S YOUR FUCKING FAULT GOOGLE, WHAT THE FUCK SHIT REASON IS THAT?

They've taken one of the best sites on the internet and turned it into an absolute garbage shithole. They've made it really really hard to find good videos and the worst part is, it's more successful than ever. And I still use it.

Just fuck normies. Fuck people who care about a channel's subscriber count, fuck people who care about production value, fuck people who fall for clickbait, fuck custom thumbnails, fuck allcaps titles, fuck youtube red, fuck Google's shitty recommendations, fuck trending, fuck adverts, fuck paid content, fuck the default homepage, fuck the comment system, fuck google+, fuck the shit copyright system, just fuck youtube and google overall. What a huge steaming pile of fucking bullshit.

>>59438599
>it's more successful than ever.
google doesn't profit from youtube

>>59438610
of course it does

do you think they run the site out of goodwill?

>>59438463
Annotations were for corrections on wrong things or updates on things that have changed since the video was published.

>Cards, Clickable 'thumbnails' in videos, the (i) sidebar box thingy, polls.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6140493?co=GENIE.Platform%3DDesktop&hl=en

None of those can replace annotations

>>59438665
no, they literally lose money off it
http://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-still-doesnt-make-google-any-money-2015-2

>be me
>register a shitload of 3 letter username account back in the day
>can no longer log in with username
>don't remember any emails
>rip

>>59436900
>>59436909
Who cares? I've had annotations disabled for years. They are a no good annoyance.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/youtubes-annotations-no-m/fajnlldimiiipghabjgnbdidcnkghkgn

>>59438666
dude, annotations are horribly abused

>>59438861
They provided a handy swtich that lets you disable annotations all together if they get annoying
Also almost everything on the internet will get horribly abused, but it's not for that that we should get rid of everything

>>59438610
what the fuck? they aren't even milking retards for gold, they are literally murdering themselves just to make their site worse and appeal to dickheads.

I'm absolutely, 100% going to kill myself tomorrow.

>>59438731
>be me, 13 y/o in 2008
>make le ebin "game hacking" videos with evanescene background music
>forget about it
>remember I did this in like 2015
>can't remember any username or email address to delete the videos and rid myself of the shame

thankfully I don't use this username/alias anymore but jesus fuck the thought alone of this crap still being out there frightens me and is the reason why I don't share almost anything publicly anymore

>>59438181
The 2 and 4 ratings are useless. 1 is downvote, 5 is upvote, 3 is no vote. 2 is the same as 1, 4 is the same as 5.

>Likert scales may be subject to distortion from several causes. Respondents may:

>Avoid using extreme response categories (central tendency bias), especially out of a desire to avoid being perceived as having extremist views (an instance of social desirability bias). For questions early in a test, an expectation that questions about which one has stronger views may follow, such that on earlier questions one "leaves room" for stronger responses later in the test, which expectation creates bias that is especially pernicious in that its effects are not uniform throughout the test and cannot be corrected for through simple across-the-board normalization;

Oh no, now I can't be spammed!

>>59438221
>I made it a habit of disabling annotations before playing a single video
I watch all YouTube vidyas in mpv, so I haven't even had the problem.

>>59440063
To me (and to almost the rest of the world, i think) 1!=2 and 4!=5
>Likert scales
So you just pulled out of wikipedia the cons of the likert scale (which is pretty valid btw "It is the most widely used approach to scaling responses in survey research"), how is that relevant? Now i'm not a psychologist but i think that you can't compare voting a video on the internet with compiling a survey, since a survey has the specific purpose of gathering data (and you know it). Moreover, people on youtube tell each other to kill themselves, talk about how they would fuck X or Y girl or how they would exterminate black people, do you really think they would have any conditioning giving out a 1-5 vote, especially knowing that many others have already done and will do that, and that their vote is just one of the many?

>>59438163
Machima was cancer form the beginning

>>59436900
>annotations
Disabled those with Youtube+ because they were cancer, even forgot that they existed, good riddance.

>>59438466
I read your post in John Waters voice.

>>59438599
Bad day?

Why do they make it so difficult to browse "middle-aged" videoed? I miss pages, now you have to keep scrolling forever. Oldest videos and newest videos are fine, but anything in between? Fuck you.

all you guys hating on youtube here better be using dailymotion for everything that isnt only on youtube
if that is not the case please suck googles dick in silence and stop whining cus you are part of the problem

File: 1465337559839.jpg (6KB, 200x194px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 200x194px

>>59436900
Based.

>>59437739
This, even Netflix is removing star rating and going to the thumb up/down route because people gave Amy Schumer stand-up gig 1star

>>59437325
>First they replaced the 5 stars rating with the like/dislike bullshit
All of the rating systems that they've adopted are shit including the stars because it's not fucking clear at all what people support or oppose about videos. Are they pissed off at the content? Are they pissed off at the quality? Are they mixing the two together? What the fuck are they getting at? The comments are there, but they're typically a shitshow of irrelevant things. So the rating systems have had very little insight since they were first used.

It's plausible that they could split review and discussion into two distinct sections so that there's less bullshit about why something is thought of the way it is. Fuck, you could get real meta by including reviews for reviews (something slightly more than 'I support/oppose this whatever'). What would the downsides be?

>>59436900
Good change. Finally I won't have to manually disable annotation.

>>59437755
That could be resolved with a voting power.

If someone only gives 1 or 5 star rating, mark them as an idiot and don't make their votes count. Or make them count a lot less.

Might be more work, but then so was switching the entire platform from 5 star rating to thumbs up/down.

>>59438599
>romanticising youtube in the early 2000s

You are a monument to the fact that people will be nostalgic about anything.

>>59438730

I bet you think Star Wars hasn't made a profit yet too:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/09/how-hollywood-accounting-can-make-a-450-million-movie-unprofitable/245134/

>The actor who played Darth Vader still has not received residuals from the 1983 film "Return of the Jedi" because the movie, which ranks 15th in U.S. box office history, still has no technical profits to distribute.

>How can a movie that grossed $475 million on a $32 million budget not turn a profit? It comes down to Tinseltown accounting.

Don't trust any self-audited books, especially when the regulators are underfunded, have greased palms, and your honesty would force you to foot something like a 50 million dollar tax bill.

>>59436900
annotations, cards and end screen are all shit

>>59437353
> YouTube API a shit
Oh christ yeah. There's seriously no way to get a user's subscribed videos in a single hit, which is 80% of the reason anyone would use the fucking thing.

Fucking finally it goes away.

how is this good? they are just removing features from the site

>>59443464
Amen brother.

>>59436900
What about just disabling it by default instead of enabling it? I have seen some guitar videos where tabs were in annotations, I'm sure they will be happy.

>>59436900
Holy shit what they are doing

>They don't even work on mobile devices
Oh i don't know, instead of removing it... Maybe make them work on these devices? Like any other developer would?
It's such a shitty made sentence coming from YouTube as well.
t. Autistic getting mad at this mere sentence.

>ublock

youtube.com##.ytp-ce-element
youtube.com##.ytp-pause-overlay

>>59436900
Oh, they're turning them off and not making them into a pay-only marketing bullshit ad cancer.
Good riddance.
Not that I ever seen them anymore, thanks to da skript.

File: Disneyloo.png (151KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1000x1000px

>>59436900
>current state of Youtube

Oh great, now people won't be able to correct notable errors, create the ability to skip to/past sections within a video, or add important/useful things that happened or were found following the release of a video. I agree that annotations are abused by some (although I personally don't watch videos from such people), and could do with a few changes to reduce abuse, but outright removing them under the excuse of lazy developers not adding it to mobile and statistics that are irrelevant to the actual usefulness of them is just plain stupid.

>>59436900
I had them turned off on desktop for years now

>>59446370
> Oh great, now people won't be able to correct notable errors, create the ability to skip to/past sections within a video, or add important/useful things that happened or were found following the release of a video.
All of that can be fixed by Youtube video editor and video description.

>>59436900
good, annotations are cancer. the little "i" in the corner is what annotations should've been

>>59437086
they exclusively rely on a deprecated platform called "flash"

>>59446981
>All of that can be fixed by Youtube video editor and video description
No

>>59436900
Wait this a good change.

This is amazing. Finally.

I HATE annotations. They literally do nothing useful and ruin the experience. I always have to turn them off. At least it's not as bad as those full screen ones back in the day.

Now if only they can fix the shit site itself.

YOU WONT BELIEVE HOW THEY FIX YOUTUBE?!

DID I GET CANCER AND DIE?!!!

WOW TOP TEN THINGS YOU DIDNT KNOW ABOUT BEING A WEEB!!!!

WHY ARE ALL THE VIDEOS IN CAPS?!!!

ME GETTING EUTHANIZED LOL

>>59437666
Listen, Satan, it's a YouTube video. Not some professional movie you've just experienced. Okay? YouTube... Video... Get it?

Not only that, but the culture itself has to change. The entire community is fucking gay. It's people manipulating stupid children by pretending to care about them in order to profit. "Hey, bros, love you bros... Let's get this video to 50k likes." They don't care about you... They do it because it allows them to profit off of your seemingly insignificant click.

A star rating might help, but no one rates videos the right way. You know how difficult it would be to make a REAL 5 star video? This way it's just "Yeah, I guess I like this..." or "Eh, not really..." They don't want it to be serious. That's why they removed the red color from the dislike. They don't want it to be a huge impact.

>>59447706
>Listen, Satan, it's a YouTube video. Not some professional movie you've just experienced. Okay? YouTube... Video... Get it?
I feel like half of the people ITT just use youtube to watch "HOTTEST VINES OF 2016", "Epic Fails & Win Compilation" or "Best Russian Dashcam videos 2017!!!". Youtube is a mere PLATFORM, and posting a video on it doesn't automatically make it irrelevant trash as you seem to think. There's some good content, better than many """professional""" movies that come out today.

>Not only that, but the culture itself has to change. The entire community is fucking gay. It's people manipulating stupid children by pretending to care about them in order to profit. "Hey, bros, love you bros... Let's get this video to 50k likes." They don't care about you... They do it because it allows them to profit off of your seemingly insignificant click.
That's plain off topic, but i agree.

>A star rating might help, but no one rates videos the right way.
There isn't a "right way" to vote, it's not a mathematical equation that you have to solve, it's just your opinion

>You know how difficult it would be to make a REAL 5 star video? This way it's just "Yeah, I guess I like this..." or "Eh, not really..."
Yeah, i know, that's why when the 5 stars rating was around i used to give 5 starts very rarely. And to be honest i think that many others used to do so, infact when you clicked on a 5 stars video you could have been pretty sure that the video was good. Now they don't even show any rating in the preview, so it's a lottery

>They don't want it to be serious. That's why they removed the red color from the dislike. They don't want it to be a huge impact.
And do you think this is good? Do you think this will help change the "gay community" you complain about? Those are the signs of youtube slowly drifting towards a TV-like model, where users don't interact, and are just fed with whatever trash like brainless sheeps.

>>59436900
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNOWWKyCTzI

>>59436900

Cards can do their job and a lot more.

>>59437396
That shit is really not okay, when I see a videos with a lot of views then I click it and it has a huge dislike ratio because it's just some shitty clickbait is annoying as fuck

>mobile friendly
Normies ruined internet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmANDi1AcTs

>>59449924
see
>>59438666
>>59438530
>Annotations are deprecated goy, just move to our new system where you can only link to what WE allow

>>59439573
t. George Michael Bluth

>>59437318
Agreed, but YouTube annotations going away would have been another wish so that's good at least.

Cool, now they just need to fire whoever came up with annotations in the first place, and perhaps publicly shame them.

File: 17-230109.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>59436997
>They don't even work on mobile devices
But they do.

>>59452425
This. I agree.

>>59452431
That's end screen, not annotation.

>>59452536
I guess it became available earlier then.

>>59436900
>I am literally unable to keep up with the changing times
>muh nostaliga
>muh being frozen in time

File: youtube-comment-crazy.jpg (118KB, 640x385px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 640x385px

>>59436900
Annotations NEED to go. They've been annoyingly abused to the point where I am happy at this news.

Cards are tidier and far less annoying.

>>59452717
wow, how can anyone be nostalgic about what's in that picture

>>59436900
lmao

enjoy your new web where everyone panders to mobile shitheads.

That's pretty dumb. I thought annotations were a better way of linking to other videos than the cards plus they're an easy way to amend a video.

Shit like >>59452717 was common when annotations were first introduced but I haven't seen anything like that in a long time.

>>59443574
Google doesn't have a motive to make YouTube look bad to investors though. If they wanted to avoid taxes they could reduce their posted profits in ads, and move some of their ads profits to YouTube so it looks good for investors.

>>59437045
wwwwwwww

>>59448340
>There isn't a "right way" to vote, it's not a mathematical equation that you have to solve, it's just your opinion
There's clearly a wrong way to vote, if I vote 1 star on the things I like and 5 stars on shit. If there's at least one wrong way to vote, there will be people voting the wrong way. I see a video with a rating, it doesn't mean anything.

It's the same with product reviews. Unless a product as an average rating of 1 or 2 stars the rating doesn't mean anything. I go to all of the 1 or 2 star votes ("downvotes") and read their reviews to see if there's any common problem. Otherwise, things are good.

>>59452717
This image is old as hell as evidenced by the player UI. No one has seen shit like this in years, they're almost always used for quick corrections (which will now be impossible) or a less intrusive related video link.

>>59452431
I hate this shit though, I've seen it come up before the video actually ends and it blocks out stuff

>>59437318

Better wish is for all smartphones in the world to turn into equal mass lumps of solid helium. We've been running low, and frostbites are less likely to cause all the nukes being launched.

>youtube being bastardized for mobile devices

Nothing new there.

>>59438113
Are you still using that? Loved that feature

>>59437227
I always liked the YT thumbnails account more but yeah, that's gonna be rip on that.

>>59437408
Wait what?
I never connected my account with G+ but I still can't post or vote on any comments.

>>59437318
My Sony Xperia keeps doing that anyway. Build quality is kill; I think a software update fucked it or something. But personally, I wish it was impossible to make money from the Internet. That was how things used to be, and the only content creators were people who did it for passion, and that is now seen as the golden age of the Internet. Now, you have corporations soullessly farming le ebin maymays, and that is the true cancer that has killed online culture. There were normies 15 years ago too; they just didn't come here back then so nobody got triggered.

>>59436997
You can tell it was written by a woman.

File: 1438572076186.jpg (68KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 700x700px

tfw tried to find "10 hours of in the mountains" but its gone

How about they stop recommending videos INSIDE the video before it fucking ends.

>>59454026

Fucking this. I've stopped watching the last bit of videos because of this, just ctrl-w and move on.

>>59453294
Ok, you think that rating is useless and not significant, I just don't agree. Maybe it's the case for amazon reviews, but when a large amount of disinterested and practically unbribable people express themselves rating is pretty meaningful

>>59453793
the kirk song?

File: 1486254128108.jpg (197KB, 965x561px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 965x561px

>The current state of Youtube

>>59437045
>>59437086
God I hate using Nico Nico Douga so much. The only advantage NND has over YouTube is their special comment section, which isn't worth the rest of the headaches you get from using it.

I'm glad more nips are starting to upload their videos to Niconico and YouTube at the same time.

Good fuck annotations just a way to post click bait all over the video so you can't fucking see it

so you're saying we wont have any more of these masterpieces?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2wxXQrmCrk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvQFnK5FWZY

Removing annotations is great
Targeting mobile is cancer

>>59436956
For exodus to happen, a better alternative has to exist. If it happens, Google is going to give you a big fucking thank you, because youtube is not profitable for them.

what actually are annotations?
of course I've seen them, I just don't know what they look like

>>59455544
>Google is going to give you a big fucking thank you, because youtube is not profitable for them.
I doubt that's true. Even if Google isn't making money from it, YouTube is a huge asset for them in terms of community, content, and brand value (and all of your user data, of course).

>>59455640
They're the pop ups I turn off the second I play any video.

>>59455666
what if someone actually wants to do annotations (e.g. erratum), what'd they use?

>>59455684
They can go fuck themselves

>>59455684

They can hard encode the text into their video then.

>were removing feature
>>why?
>since we told people were gonna remove it, people aren't using the old feature. We didn't introduce support for the old feature on our mobile application because we're lazy. We now consider this a problem since they obviously provided value.
>>So what's the new system?
>it's weaker and less customizable in every way but allow us to analyse them better for marketing purposes
And YouTube video people just accept this.

Sure. There's some minor design issue with annotations and mobile but as a company you should have solved that.

None of this would bother me particularly much they gave cards some upside. But it's really just standardised annotations with a more constrained use case.

>>59455544
>YouTube isn't profitable
Ha. Yeah that's why they keep it around.

Google shuts down tons of stuff that actually doesn't serve them. YouTube isn't one of those things.

>>59455884
Well what if you dont wanna read the text?

>>59456084
https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/03/01/youtube-isnt-profitable-so-what-should-google-inc.aspx

http://fortune.com/2016/10/18/youtube-profits-ceo-susan-wojcicki/

>>59456167
>YouTube isn't profitable
That's a stupid interpretation as we've established though.
Why repeat yourself?

>>59456084
It's not uncommon for social media sites to stay up while not being profitable. Twitter also doesn't make profit: probably why they shut down Vine.

>>59436900
Finally.

File: ytanno.png (300KB, 850x506px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 850x506px

Who remembers those videos who let anyone watching annotate them? Then the whole screen would be covered with shit like pic related.

>>59436900
>can't figure out how to script annotations for phones so lets just fucking cancel them
>that unprofessional writing (don't even work)
>baseless statistics (at least times better)
>the city of google

>>59457422
*at least 5 times

>>59436900
Annotations are almost entirely used to push unrelated shit in your face, beg for likes etc. Cards are doing the same thing AND cover up the end of the fucking video, AND can't even be fucking turned off!

Get rid of fucking ALL of it, if you want to link something, put it in the description.

>>59457570
No get rid of descriptions too they are pointless nonsense if the people watching your videos are to dumb to Google something let them rot they hold no social value

>>59438599
...This. Although with the human species, wasted potential and burying ourselves in an iteratively self created hell is just par for the course. It's how it has always been, it is what we are. Irredeemable, detestable, ugly, trash.

I have disabled all annotations on default anyway, so that's hardly a problem

>>59438105
>Do you really expect one of the largest companies in the world to actually be in touch with their userbase and give a shit about anything other than the minority?
>Do you really expected one of the largest companies in the world to put in some work to optimize something?

off yourself

>>59436997
People tend to do things on their phones. Get the fuck over it already.

>>59436900
Wait how do I preserve this

https://youtu.be/29-q7YnyUmY

I need the annotations for the nostalgia.

>>59436900
Annotations are annoying as fuck

finally
.html5-video-content .video-annotations, .ytp-ce-element, .ytp-ce-shadow {display:none!important;}
will be obsolete

>>59453412
You should be able to now. I waited it through all of the integration bullshit and can comment prefectly now without having even more of google spyware tacked on.

>>59459113
by reading the OP image which clearly says that old annotations will stay.

>>59460291
>hiding shit instead of preventing them from loading
>not using
>>||www.youtube.com/annotations_invideo
>>||www.youtube.com/yts/jsbin/player-*/annotations_module.js
cmon anon...

Finally
The most annoying part of youtube gone

>>59461320
>using the in-browser player at all

>>59436900
Thanks God

>>59462538
I thought the most annoying part of YouTube was YouTube.

>>59440063
>3 is no vote
that depends on what the current rating of the video is, if it currently had 5 stars, anything other than 5 would lower the rating

>>59436909
This.

Ive never had them enabled.

>>59436900
but this is actually a good thing

>>59464812
>video has 2 stars
>i like it
>i would vote for the video to have 4 stars
>vote for 5 instead because it will make the average go higher
star distribution looks like this

5---------------------
4-
3---
3--
1-------------------------------

>>59436909
This, and I have to re-disable them every fucking video because I don't keep Jewtube cookies.

>>59436900
>justifying your removal of a good feature by pointing out that an alternative shitty feature will get you more views
monetization was a mistake

>>59438181
>if you treat retards like normal people there's a chance they'll become less retarded
Yeah that's never happened. Retards act like retards by definition.

Who cares haven't seen an annotation since I switched to youtube-dl + mpv years ago.

>>59455398
i miss the daily cad threads on /v/

>>59466921
>annotations
>good feature