Zagorath @ Zagorath @aussie.zone

Formerly /u/Zagorath on the alien site.

---

查看更多

帖子

1,576

评论

8,853

加入于

2 yr. ago

管理

---

Juice Media are always great, but this is excellent even by their standards. The fact that they lead with the fact that banning kids is just a patch on the real problem (which is harmful algorithms) is just bang on. Also highlighting the many beneficial things social media can do, the fact that the ban introduces major privacy risks, and the incredibly untransparent way in which it was rushed through Parliament.

https://puzzmo.com/play/circuits/qgwzjz15tx/share

Felt pretty good today, apart from that one spot...

I don't actually know what the purple is.

I like science, tech, retro, gaming

You'll find a lot of that on Nebula. Though the "gaming" in particular is mostly limited to more video essays about gaming, analysis of gaming culture/game development, game design, etc. You're unlikely to find game tutorials, let's plays, etc. See channels like Extra Credits, People Make Games, and Razbuten for example. Or the gaming category. One thing I really like about Nebula as compared to Netflix-style "traditional" content streaming platforms is that you can browse their entire library without an account, exactly the same as you would with one.

VLDL

You'll find much less of that. Dropout might appeal to you though, if Viva does. Dropout is mostly improv comedy, often with a nerdy bent to it. "Um, Actually" is particularly good. I think there's probably some scripted content on Dropout too, more akin to Viva's stuff.

but prefer substance over screaming and outrage

You will definitely get this on Nebula. While some of their creators do use rather clickbaity titles and thumbnails, that's predominantly because they just use the same title & thumbnail that they have on YouTube, and the unfortunate reality is that that's necessary to get clicks to satisfy the YouTube algorithm. The actual content though is always more considered. It's one of the defining things about the platform, and it's part of why they're invite-only for creators.

The service is half the monthly price of Netflix

It's $60 annually for a naked sign-up, but $36 annually if you go through a creator's code. Any creator. There's literally no reason to ever pay the higher number. That's $3 per month, though at that price I find it easier to talk about the annual cost than monthly.

Plus, when they last increased prices in September 2024, they also guaranteed existing customers could keep their older prices. They didn't guarantee that will be true for future new signups on future price increases, but that seems likely.

Crossherd #275
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬛️
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩⬛️⬛️
Time: 1:05
crossherd.clevergoat.com 🐐

I got 2 really easily, but like you, struggled with 1.

https://puzzmo.com/play/circuits/7sq81j1y9r/share

Crossherd #274
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬛️
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬛️
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
⬛️⬛️🟩🟩🟩
Time: 0:25
🐐crossherd.clevergoat.com 🐐

she was narcissist wing

lol what? That couldn't be further from the truth. The biggest defining feature of her prime ministership was her she contrasted with the actual narcissist that was Kevin Rudd. Rudd initially got kicked out because his coworkers hated working with him. And his rather extreme failure to be open to negotiating (yunno, the *main part of politicians' job!) and the subsequent failure to pass his lacklustre excuse for climate law ended up providing the requisite excuse to roll him. Then Gillard comes along, does an amazing job of negotiating with the crossbench, and passes world-leading legislation on climate, along with passing more legislation overall than any other PM had to that point in living memory.

Her ties to America and its interests are a legitimate angle of criticism of her. But her personality certainly is not.

I'm being sincere here. I want to know what you're trying to say, but the way the previous comment was worded, it's impossible to work it out.

I'll be honest, if you've looked at their catalogue already and it didn't appeal to you, that's unlikely to change after a free trial. If you do end up signing up though, make sure to go through one of the creators' URLs. You get a much better price that way.

For me, when I first signed up for it 2 or 3 years ago, the thing that finally made me pull the trigger was Tom Scott's Money, the social game show that was, at the time, Nebula-exclusive. But there were probably 5 or 6 other channels I already regularly watched on YouTube too, like Wendover/HAI, Lindsay Ellis (who has since basically left YouTube and exclusively uses Nebula), and Patrick H Willems. And in the time since, they've added like 10 or more channels that I already watched on YouTube, such as Not Just Bikes, Angela Collier, TLDR News, Legal Eagle, and Tantacrul. It's also helped me rediscover creators I once watched but stopped for no particular reason, like Cult Tennis (which is fantastic even though I have no real interest in the sport of tennis otherwise) and Medlife Crisis; and new channels I first discovered thanks to Nebula, like CityNerd, Linus Boman, and ReligionForBreakfast; and channels I had seen once or twice on YouTube but never regularly watched, but Nebula made me realise are regularly putting out good stuff, like People Make Games (if you haven't seen it already, I assume their two videos about the Rockstar union busting are on YouTube and highly recommend those) and Razbuten.

I for one thing the merger is a great idea. Why shouldn't the company famous for cancelling shows after one season merge with the company famous for burying completed movies for a tax write-off?

We literally can't strawman it because you're not articulating what your argument is.

I think their biggest problem is lacking a free trial

They have a 3 day free trial by default. And members can also give out a limited number of "guest passes" which act as a 1 week free trial.

I suspect their closed model is because it’s very expensive to host that data, and they want to make sure that whoever they put up there is worth spending the money on

That's probably part of it. It's also a marketing tactic. They're positioning themselves as a premium service. They want customers to know that if something is on Nebula it's going to be good. Similar to the way Apple positions themselves as premium by not selling a $200 smartphone, or Mercedez-Benz, or Louis-Vuitton.

It's also about trust. One of the things they're trying to do with Nebula is to provide creators a space to safely discuss controversial topics without censorship. But with that, along with the fact that they have a coop-type structure, comes the need to be able to trust that the people uploading on their platform aren't gonna be Nazis.

I'm asking you what specific accusation you're levying. Stop being vague and avoidant.

Ok, I did. It said:

came to this thread exactly to make fun of this “fully-rounded labour exploiter”

So you're asserting that he exploited labour. Presumably in a way that is beyond the labour exploitation inherent in capitalism. Further up the page, in a different thread, you also said:

If some of these 35 visa dependent worked for more than 9 years, I am pretty sure he was there when they were exploited to work there. There’s no indication that these workers have less than a 5 year tenure.

Ok, so it sounds to me like you're asserting that he exploited them. How, exactly? Are you claiming the act of being employed on a foreign worker visa is itself exploitation? Because genuinely, unless the answer to that question is "yes", I cannot understand what the basis of your claim is. And I think that's probably the problem @CileTheSane@lemmy.ca is having, too.

Usually, these are closed out by paying the cash value at the end

Am I understanding this correctly?

I sign a contract with you saying "one year from today, if I decide to sell potatoes to you, you must buy them for $100". I pay you $10 as consideration for the contract. Next year, if the price of potatoes is $110, I simply decide not to exercise my right. You don't get potatoes, but you keep your $10.

If the price of potatoes is $90, then I buy potatoes for $90, and you buy them for $100. I broke even. Or more realistically, you send me $10 cash, no actual potatoes change hands.

If the price is $95, then I only lose $5, after you send me $5 back.

If the price is $80, then I made $10 in profit, after you send me $20.

And obviously, you might on-sell that contract, in which case you're up or down the difference between $10 and whatever you sold it for, and I go to them to sell my potatoes/get my cash back, if the price of potatoes ends up below $100.

Is that right? If so, I have two follow-up questions:

1. What advantage do shorts have over puts? Both have a maximum profit (I can't make more than $100 on those potatoes if I put. I can't make more than the current market price for potatoes if I short.), but one has infinite potential loss, and the other has limited loss.
2. How does this actually answer @explodicle@sh.itjust.works's question? The put still requires you to guess when it'll crash, doesn't it? If I predict potatoes' price will crash within the next year and it doesn't, I lose $10, even if it crashes 370 days from now, don't I? This contrasts with regular investing/speculating the price will rise, where if I buy potatoes today for $100, predicting it'll go to the moon over the next year, but in 365 days, if the price is now $90, I still have the choice to either cut my losses to $10, or keep on, expecting it'll rise again soon.

The advantage of the fediverse is how well it should be able to scale, thanks to its federated nature. A big part of the problem with YouTube is that its large scale but centralised nature means that they just throw AI at the moderation problem, and it is infamously terrible. Censoring important conversations and sensitive subjects, while letting through actual child abuse. And because it's centralised, users (both viewers and creators) don't have an easy option to turn somewhere else without losing the whole network effect.

It's compounded by the fact that the majority of monetisation on there is driven by advertising. Direct funding via a Patreon-like model (optional payment to receive some minor bonuses, primarily for supporting the creator), a Nebula-style model (subscription to access content), or a BATish model (forget most of the actual details of BAT, especially the crypto, but imagine a system—which could be voluntary or mandatory depending on the individual system, creator, or piece of content—in which users stick a bunch of money into a wallet, and it is automatically shared with the creators whose content they are viewing in some fair manner). Not having actual advertisements, combined with better, more local moderation decisions, would help stave off the biggest problems with YouTube.

The "making money" bit doesn't need to be imported, necessarily. It's not an end unto itself. But if we want a large amount of high-quality content, while society is capitalistic, then it does. Because high-quality content takes a lot of time to produce, and not many people can afford to do it as a hobby. The scenario you're describing means that who have the skills to do it could do it while making money on YouTube or Patreon, or they could do it for free on the fediverse while not making money (or making money in a more conventional job, creating the stuff that we love them for only in their spare time—limiting the quantity they can produce).

Honestly the best YouTube alternative at the moment is Nebula. The problem is that it's a closed system. You can't just make an account and start uploading, you have to be invited. So the range of content is fairly limited compared to YouTube. But unlike many other platforms, it is designed to be fairly general-purpose. There are some excellent individual creators' platforms, like Dropout, Viva+, Club TWiT, etc. But you only get a single creator/team's videos on those. Dropout is improv comedy. Viva+ is sketch comedy. Club TWiT is tech news. Whereas Nebula is more of a coop owned by tens of different creators with content including news, media analysis (including film, games, and music), politics, science, short films, game shows, and more. It's not federated, but it's independent and worker owned-ish.