That’s a fair point, improving the subscription feed would be in their best interest for the people who use it, even if that number is low.

The problems with that feed which he touched on in the video are pretty significant. If you subscribe to channels that put out lots of content and ones that rarely do, it becomes much harder to use.

One thing he didn’t mention is also that it’s not conducive to discovering and gradually catching up on the back catalogue of a new channel, which is something the home feed excels at.

I’m sure YouTube prefers you use the home feed and has no plans to improve subscriptions, and there are real issues with it, so it’ll probably continue to decline.

You’re standpilling my argument.

Anyway I’ll drop it and move on but the thread is about critiquing our society by way of movie references, which is on topic for what I’m saying and kinda proves my point.

You’re reaching deep into your grab bag of labels. Am I gaslighting you now?

I commented my opinion on the original post and then I employed sarcasm when you accused me of gatekeeping.

My reaction to this thread being all about movie references was to wish we didn’t think about our society only in those terms and I shared it.

actually I wasn’t able to delete OP’s post after all

It’d be pretty dope if we discussed society and politics using political theory and philosophy instead of different kinds of media

The cars that replaced horses were several iterations in, early “automobile” devices included steam powered carriages that moved slower than walking.

A technology may start with limited usage while still having lots of potential.

Technologies are always useless until they’re not.

Agreed. I’ve been following the technology of neural networks and generative AI since before LLMs were the new hotness and it’s fascinating and powerful stuff.

My qualms with what’s happening now are more about how we organize our economy and society. Rushing them to market, aggressively trying to cull workers, etc. are critiques of capitalism not AI. In a different world we would all be excited about the prospect of having to work less and reap the benefits of AI, but we wouldn’t be reopening coal plants and leaving people to starve on the street.

Early cars weren’t a threat to streetcars and trains and urban planning but modern cars have reshaped every North American city. You can criticize the inefficiency, poor quality, energy waste, etc. of the technology today while also pointing out the dangers of tomorrow.

are those competing?

It’s being rushed to market and is still very inefficient, but part of the reason it’s being rushed to market is because companies are getting ahead of themselves about the opportunity to fire human employees.

We can agree on that, certainly. The line between mental self-preservation and complicity in a harmful system can be thin, but you’re generally right.

Not universally, and not always. Even in the Western tradition there were free self governing cities.

I don’t have the time and energy to elaborate and have the inevitable subsequent debate, but it’s defeatist and unhelpful to say that hierarchy and oppression have always defined human existence. We need to demand more.

Since you’re thinking about these things, you might also want to think about why individuals should be able to dictate what happens in the economy at all? Billionaires can’t exist without owning large swaths of the economy, and by owning large swaths of the economy they directly and dictatorially control a major part of the lives of thousands of people. More than Lords of old.

Why shouldn’t the economy be democratized? Why shouldn’t workers decide what to work on, and how to organize their work? Why shouldn’t the economy be cooperative instead of competitive, do we need winners and losers? Why can’t we just share our techniques and resources? Wouldn’t we all be better off?

what a damaged human being

I am doubting myself now after not being able to quickly find a verified source but I’ve worked with lots of smart TVs and seem to recall Samsung or LG models using this simulated effect. It would have had to have been simulated since there was no signal coming in, and I recall the pattern being noticably pseudo random.

As for why: I have no idea! Maybe just for user familiarity reasons, since a lot of people grew up with that kind of analog feedback that the antenna wasn’t getting a signal.

Take what I said with a grain of salt, though, since like I said I wasn’t able to quickly verify it. It’s a vivid but ambiguous memory, though, since I also thought it was strange

Depending on the TV it’s likely simulated noise at this point

Fair enough, I felt it important to clarify (and check) so these developers and Team 17 aren’t unfairly punished by the general state of the industry.

It doesn’t seem like you need to worry here.

It’s a coop game and what they’re describing sounds more like “progression” than microtransactions. Unlocking new things is a core gameplay mechanic going back to before the Internet. Did I miss where it implies anything about microtransactions or pay to win (again: coop game)

focus on profits rather than human well-being, period, is destroying the world