Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The content is not worth paying for because it's been designed from the ground up to sell ads.

Some of it is, but the vast bulk of it clearly was not. You knew that of course.

I'd strongly consider paying for YT if it were an independent company. But as a part of Google - fuck no.



> I'd strongly consider paying for YT if it were an independent company

YT wouldn't be YT if it was an independent company. Lack of competition in the field is a proof


YouTube was bought by Google after it was already massively popular.


YouTube was just 18 months old when Google bought it and it had just started to fend off very costly copyright claims. It was popular, but 2006 popular.


YouTube was also unprofitable at the time. With out google backing youtube it may have gone the way of Napster.


By this logic, Netflix shouldn't be Netflix (or in its current market position) either.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: