My despondent brain auto-translated that to: "My livelihood depends on Youtube"
Touching up videos is bad but it is hardly material to break out the pitchforks compared to some of the political manoeuvres YouTube has been involved in.
Even if you produce interesting videos, you still must MB to get the likes, to stay relevant to the algorithm, to capture a bigger share of the limited resource that is human attention.
The creators are fighting each other for land, our eyeballs are the crops, meanwhile the landlord takes most of the profits.
Say what you want about Microsoft, but if I have a problem with something I've pretty much always ended up getting support for that problem. I think Google's lack of response adds to their "mystique".
But it also creates superstitions since creators don't really understand the firm rules to follow.
Regardless, it is one of the most dystopian things about modern society - the lack of accountability for their decisions.
Lots of very hateful, negative content too. It didn’t take me long to find the video “why this new artist sucks.” Another find, what I assume is an overblown small quibble turned into clickbait videos, was “this record label is trying to SILENCE me.” Maybe, somehow, these two things are related.
If you're referring to his video I'm Sorry...This New Artist Completely Sucks[1], then it's a video about a fully AI generated "artist" he made using various AI tools.
So it's not hateful against anyone. Though the title is a bit clickbait-y, I'll give you that.
But serious discussion demands the truth: It is fiction, in the style of a twitter thread.
It's almost as if there's a mindless robot submitting the claims to YouTube. Perish the thought! (-:
It's worth stating, though, that the vast majority of youtube's problems are the fault of copyright law and massive media publishers. Google could care less if you wanted to upload full camrips of 2025's biggest blockbusters, but the powers-that-be demand Google is able to take it down immediately. This is why 15 seconds of a song playing in the background gets your video demonitized.
As a viewer I certainly hate that crap and wish Google didn't intentionally make it this way.
That's why I think it's funny that they claim they will now be "using AI" to determine if someone is an adult and able to watch certain youtube videos. Google already knows how old you are. It doesn't need a new technique to figure out that you're 11 years old or 39 years old. They're literally just pretending to not know this information.
That's about AI, not very polarizing at the level it's currently at.
> Another find, what I assume is an overblown small quibble turned into clickbait videos, was “this record label is trying to SILENCE me.”
That might be overblown, but it doesn't sound polarizing at all. OP was saying he always has the most polarizing opinions.
If that last one is the vid I'm thinking of, the same record company has sent him hundreds of copyright strikes and he has to have a lawyer constantly fighting them for fair use. He does some stuff verging on listen-along reaction videos, but the strikes he talks about there are when he is interviewing the artists who made the songs and they play short snippits of them for reference while talking about the history of making them, thought process behind the songwriting, etc.
I think it's not just automated content ID stuff where it claims the monetization, but the same firm for that label going after him over and over where 3 strikes removes his channel. The title or thumbnail might be overblown, probably the firm just earns a commission and he's dealing with a corporate machine that is scatter shotting against big videos with lots of views that have any of their sound rather than targetting him to silence something they don't want to get out, but I don't think the video was very polarizing.