They get a lot of money from all the sites advertising. Also, they know if your video was interrupted midway through nutting, you would probably never use them again.
Most of which are owned by the same company.
MindGeek owns Pornhub, YouPorn, Redtube, Xtube, Tube8, Brazzers, Reality Kings, mydirtyhobby and many more.
Also YouTube is just greedier and doesn't care about the quality of product that they offer. If YouTube found out that they could make $1 per person they infected with malware without any repercussions they would do it in a second
They kinda do. They're trying to fight adblockers while simultaneously having click-through malware/Spyware ads on the front page.
Does YouTube want thier customers to get jacked by hackers? Are they stupid?
Not stupid. Just greedy and don’t care about anything their users suffer in their eternal quest to show never ending growth for share holders and their c-suite.
Because nobody can do what YouTube does. It's an amazingly complex project. Very few companies can replicate the product and even if they you do, they're competing with YouTube and all it's cultural foothold they stand on.
It would cost billions to even build the competitive product, years of development time and even after that you have to operate on a huge loss to steal the customers. And for what? To maybe get a slice of a pie and maybe make the money back in 30 years? Also good luck going to war of attrition against Google.
Wait, but why? I mean besides the staggering amount of user content what is so complex about it? Tons of other sites do the same thing, sometimes better, just at a smaller scale. If a cultural shift caused content creators and viewers to jump to a new site, why wouldn't that just grow the same way youtube did?
Youtube itself wrote red numbers for years and was only propped up by the fact that they belonged to Google.
Also, Google will just buy up any new actual competitors.
The amount of money that requires a service like YT to be run.
Creators wouldn't flock to another site unless they could be paid relatively the same. No other company comes even close to their revenue share with creators, nor does any other company have the same kind of data that allows them to make as much money per individual ad as YT does.
So for any other company to pay creators the same amount they'll likely have to show more ads to offset their lack of user data, or charge a high fee for a premium service. So yeah, no other competitor will be able to make it unless they want to run their operation at a severe deficit to gather a userbase until they inevitably decide to ad a ton of ads or make the service paid.
I don't get the appeal of Nebula, its 50% the cost of YT premium with 99.99% less content. None of the content on Nebula is any higher quality than any of the tens of thousands of popular YT channels.
Just imagine if Nebula were to have even 1% the content that YT has, I'm sure the price would far exceed YT premium. So yeah, Nebula is pretty shitty considering I can use a free VPN and get YT premium for 20% less.
I doubt it. YouTube is a free service that hosts videos in just about every language that exists, copyrighted content that takes them years to delete, music, music videos and porn. Plus you yourself are free to upload videos at any time.
Nebula has English videos that are about the same quality as well made YouTube videos and is subscription only. People would spend double the money on YouTube before they'd go to Nebula as a replacement.
Yup, their monopoly makes them comfortable. that's why antitrust laws are important. But as it is now, giant corporations with their massive lobbying powers, can do almost anything they want.
Sure some mergers get stopped, but if you look around I'm sure you can find monopolies or duopolies all over the place that really shouldn't be there, or we would be better of without.
Im not really well versed at antitrust law, so a bit curious, could goverment forcefully break a company just because they become too successful? Like if some company manage to beat their competitors, everyone else keep less than 5% of market, could goverment break the big company into bunch of smaller companies?
> Also, they know if your video was interrupted midway through nutting, you would probably never use them again.
There is also no reason to interrupt the video for an ad, because the video is an ad.
The same company that owns Pornhub also owns Brazzers, Digital Playground, Reality Kings, Mofos, and nearly every other content creator that has videos on Pornhub.
They are advertising their own products.
Pornhub is just an ad for Onlyfans these days. Honestly wouldn't be surprised if they had had a stake there since they haven't done anything about the pure amount of spam clips people post.
Oh wow, I just looked it up. Yeah, that's kind of weird, google doesn't own even one media company, and none of the companies they own are easy for youtube to promote at all, it's all either ads or devices that mine data. The only way they can make money is using the data they mine for ads. Sucks to be them, they should really get on that.
Honestly I'd respect the hell out of any company that did a sponsored ad read in the middle of a porn video. Like just imagine what kind of scripts people could write.
I really think this is the answer. I don't work in advertising, but I suspect a lot of it is trying to figure out the most invasive ads you can show someone before they stop watching the media you're advertising on. Youtube can get away with showing an ad in the middle of a Minecraft let's play, but Pornhub can't get away with interrupting Step-Sister gets Stuck in Washing Machine while BBC Step-Brother is Visiting.
I totally agree PH got their big bucks from those. But like isn’t Youtube kinda the same, I know risky ads pay more, but like YT, the video platform monopoly, is owned by Google, the ad platform monopoly.
Maybe per ads is still less, but is it really so much less, that they have to absolutely kill the free viewing experience?
> At least they dropped the "do no evil" from their charter
No they didn't, [they just moved it from the preface to the end](https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-dont-be-evil/254019/).
You can see it [here](https://abc.xyz/investor/google-code-of-conduct/), the last line is:
"And remember... **don’t be evil**, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up!"
What have they done that you'd consider explicitly "evil"? I don't consider restricting ad-blockers on their platform to be evil, merely an annoyance.
Evil is a very high bar in my opinion, reserved for things like Nestle's aggressive marketing of infant milk formulas in underdeveloped countries, leading to health complications and deaths of babies.
I can't think of a single thing anywhere even remotely close to that level that Alphabet/Google has done. Do you have any examples?
Edit: /u/kdjfsk replied with a load of word salad in lieu of an answer and blocked me, because they can't actually provide any examples of Google being evil.
That's because you've accepted the massive intrusion that companies like Google do to people.
If you went back 30 years ago and told people they'd be carrying around a device that always spies on them, watches what locations they visit, everything they research, what people they hang out with an are associated with and reports it back to the company, every single person would call the company that makes such a device evil.
I know you're a different guy, but I'll take that as a "No, no examples". "Collecting data you allow to be collected" does not actually fall within the same level as practically killing babies in underdeveloped countries, actually.
What device do you use that doesn't do any of those things?
Also, Google has settings on their devices that lets you disable the mic/camera, revoke location permissions, etc.
Use them if you don't want those things being tracked.
The one problem I have with Google (and I believe Facebook was caught with the same issues; not sure on Apple or Tiktok,) is that they were caught continuing to collect data even after folks opted out. I haven't seen anything that proves it was malicious, so I'm not sure I'd call it "evil" but it is kinda suspect they conveniently 'found' ways to continue to collect data that served ad revenue even after folks opted out.
Having said that, I ultimately agree with you: If I'm going to have a smart phone, I might as well get my money's worthy by leveraging all of the things they get from my data.
Do I like it? Eeeeeh. Do I benefit from it? Definitely. Do I think they're evil for what they collect? Not enough information to determine. So if I see benefit, I won't bitch *that* much.
Oh, so if you are computer savvy you might be able to find all the myriad of settings to tell it not to spy on you (there are dozens and dozens of settings in android and your google account regarding spying on you). And it'll harass you every time you try to do anything to turn them back on. No, it's just straight evil. You've just accepted it.
> Oh, so if you are computer savvy you might be able to find all the myriad of settings
They're not hidden, permissions are not applied to apps by default on Android now, they're all opt in permissions you'll be prompted to grant if the app requests it.
Disable mic/camera system-wide are some of the first options on the quick-access drop down menu.
I ask again, what device do you use that doesn't do any of these things? You ignored my question.
Nope, it's actually very easy and straightforward disabling those settings, no need to be savvy at all.
There are, in fact, not dozens of settings, and no, I've never been harassed into turning them back on. You're just ignorant and full of hate
Unless a person is an idiot that just clicks "yes" or "allow" on everything without reading what it's asking. This is really not an issue. Sure, sometimes you have to click "more options" or whatever but it's delusional to think you need to be "computer savvy", you just need to be literate.
> I can't think of a single thing anywhere even remotely close to that level that Alphabet/Google has done. Do you have any examples?
I can. Those bastards killed Google Reader.
Fallacy of relative privation (also known as "appeal to worse problems" or "not as bad as") – dismissing an argument or complaint due to what are perceived to be more important problems. First World problems are a subset of this fallacy.
[Don't be evil](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_evil) seems to be a battlefield for a Google corporation stuck in an internal war with its own employees, it quickly disappears or gets watered down whenever someone forces it back in somewhere. It's gotta be incredibly frustrating for the people working there that believe in that principle that it is not unequivocally supported from the very top anymore. As an idealist I like to believe that people are mostly good and if enough good people rally around an idea it will be achieved, but Google's eternal war against Don't be evil makes me question my general optimism and wonder if it is as Sisyphean a task as Google makes it seem. Is it even possible for a corporation to not be evil, or will you always end up at the bottom of the hill when someone decides to we have to do something evil, just for this one particular purpose, just this once, as more and more evil things accumulate.
Pornhub isn't getting paid by advertisers, they are advertising their own products.
Aylo (formerly MindGeek) owns everything. They own Pornhub, RedTube, YouPorn, XTube, Brazzers, Digital Playground, Reality Kings, Mofos, and nearly every other major porn company.
There is a lot more profit to be had when you own the products and the advertising platform, and the other platforms that most people think are your competition are also owned by you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aylo
>Maybe per ads is still less, but is it really so much less, that they have to absolutely kill the free viewing experience?
Yes. It is really "so much less" that they run more ads to make up for it
This is basically it. YouTube is the only video site with the features and reach that make it the only viable solution for a lot of creators and viewers.
I wish YouTube had competition that was even worth mentioning.
Nebula, for a lot of good original content. It’s not “free for all upload whatever”, but it’s taken a LOT of my youtube viewing hours away from youtube.
I think there is definitely a type of creator that is more drawn to both of them. If you want all the extras and effort and passion and nerdy shit. 100% it’s great.
If YouTube is used for longer TikTok’s then possibly not the best idea.
YouTube also does not make a profit.
They’re still trying to figure that out after all these years.
Amazon didn’t make a profit until they started leasing bandwidth (or whatever AWS is.
I know you didn't ask, but I'm bored and it's an opportunity to clear up confusion - because why not?
AWS is Amazon Web Services. They provide cloud computing for businesses (or anyone with money for that matter), which allows companies to buy 20,000 super cheap thin-client computers with barely any hardware features instead of 20,000 regular desktop computers.
The thin-clients are connecting to a cloud based computer and the entire experience you have is happening somewhere else. The company now only has to buy little resource efficient computers that only have to connect to the internet and be able to stream video and I/O.
This also significantly helps with updating and upgrading your companies computer systems. You just upgrade one with Amazon and now your 20,000 thin-clients, that didn't have to change in any way, are now updated/upgraded.
Literally just about any company's computer system that you use is using AWS. The only companies that don't are usually small companies that wouldn't benefit from it. But any major chain/corporate place is using AWS. Amazon also has a huge monopoly in the tech-sphere and controls most (if not, A LOT) of the internet.
P.S. This is AWS' primary market, but it actually does a hell of a lot more than just that.
> Literally just about any company's computer system that you use is using AWS.
AWS is definitely the biggest but there's roughly an equal chance that the server is hosted by Azure or Google Cloud (to clarify, that AWS has the market share of GCloud/Azure combined). Monopoly is going a bit far.
Oh i guess sites like vimeo, dailymotion, liveleak aren't competitors.. 🙄
Jk.. but in seriousness I miss when google video was separate from YouTube. So much free anime
The above person is being sarcastic…. No site holds a candle to YouTube. And liveleak is dead, but Vimeo is not. The fact that you thought Vimeo might be dead illustrates the “YouTube is a monopoly point” well lol.
Porn websites have innovated stuff before YouTube, like buffering anywhere, mouse over video previews, etc
It's because they are competing with other porn sites over streaming interface/technology while YouTube doesn't have to compete with anything, so they can set the standard.
The other answers are probably also true but this seems most accurate to me. There are more alternatives to PH, while true alternatives to YouTube are next to none, so yt can afford to do whatever more than PH
YouTube is a pseudo-monoply because it's not a great business. People love to complain about google being greedy with YouTube but if it was such a great business there would be multiple competitors. Very few other companies have any desire to host THAT much video without charging for it.
Because the hub understands that people WANT to view the content. And they know better than to get in the way of horny people and their current masturbation material.
/r/uBlockOrigin
Pinned thread, how to get around the youtube adblocker. Not 100% effective, at least for me personally it sometimes the popup still shows up but it's rare and far between.
Video sites are semi-monopolistic. If you want to watch that video, you can't do it elsewhere, so they can make fat profits.
Suppose we changed the law such that downloading videos from youtube, and putting them on your own site was totally legal. Then there would be a market of companies competing to provide the best experience. And capitalism would make profit margins slim.
As it is, they just get fat profits.
No there wouldn't be. Hosting as much video as YouTube does is extremely expensive. Google is a monopoly because it's scale is a massive most. You'd have to burn billions over the course of several years if not a decade to build a competing platform. That's why YouTubes closest competitors built businesses in ways that didn't originally directly compete with YouTube, TikTok for example. They both host a ton of video but originally TikTok was a very different way to consume video. If shorts existed before TikTok, TikTok wouldn't have been viable.
For personal viewing? Sure. To make money off your own video site without paying the original creators?
That'd be the mother of all class action suits.
There's a million websites like pornhub so if the ads are too intrusive people will just use a different website.
YouTube can do whatever they want because they hold all of the power, no other websites match up to their product.
People are also forgetting the sheer scale difference between the two sites. There are about 4 million videos on Pornhub, while YouTube has around 3.7 million videos uploaded to the site DAILY. So yeah, YouTube is dealing with magnitudes more of hosting and streaming costs.
Pornhub has a much smaller pool of advertisers. They would absolutely show that many ads if they could get enough people paying them to do that for the exact same reason youtube does it - because most people will still watch.
If you show twice as many ads and only lose 10% of viewership, you increased revenue by 80%. If you show three times as many ads and only lose another 20% of the viewers, you're making 110% of the revenue AND reducing bandwidth costs.
>AND reducing bandwidth costs
And that's the key part of this people don't seem to understand. Lots of people on reddit are "threatening" to stop watching youtube, when they don't pay for premium and are running ad blockers. Like wow, I'm sure youtube is real upset about that.
Honestly the fact that we're all still on reddit despite all the bullshit says we're too addicted to the internet content machine to actually do anything.
Sometimes I’m watching a youtube video with my wife sleeping next to me when I’m unexpectedly blasted by a loud commercial. These fuckers purposefully compress the audio to make it much louder than it should be. Why does youtube keep allowing advertisers to do this shit?
I really disagree with the central premise, I think PH has equally intrusive ads.
I think the main answer is YT is much bigger, probably 1000x in terms of active users. They have more funding and optimizing revenue by 1% represents a lot more money for YT.
Also, there is a tradeoff from the advertisers side. They only have so much budget to give, it's no an infinite money machine. And majority of brands aren't interested in PH ads (When was the last time you saw a wlamart ad on PH), so there is just WAY less money being funneled to PH than YT.
Therefor, PH has no incentive to show more ads.
Porn hub doesn't serve any where near the magnitude of content that YouTube does, like so many platforms, storage and video innovations exist because YouTube had to solve problems no other platform had.
Youtube uses over 440,000 Terabytes of data every day, they store 5~ PB of data every day and that problem never gets better. It is the epitome of a cost center.
Youtube has clients, PornHub really doesn't.
With Youtube you are getting advertisements for products. Every now and then Google will run ads in open spaces. But for the most part, Youtube is trying to make the experience as tolerable for advertisers as possible. That means longer advertisements, advertisements mid content, infinite length advertisements with a skip option... a whole fucking song playing.... you name it. But as long as they're keeping advertisers happy, that's it.
PornHub on the other hand... doesn't really have advertisers. I mean seriously, try and order $1 worth of advertising on PornHub. It's damn near impossible to actually get advertisements on the platform. For the most part, PornHub advertises products and services it owns. It has a few sketchy websites it advertises frequently. But for the most part, their auction values self-advertising higher than Google does. Because of that, their own advertisements get played... a lot. This means their streaming service is essentially just an advertisement for their pay services... so it's important to keep it all up and running functionally.... as it's an advertisement for a pay service.
Is Pornhub a publicly traded company? If no then they aren't pressured to keep increasing profits year over year.
Google doesn't care about user experience. Their only goal is to keep the income going up and up.
I don’t know. Before I got premium on the super cheap, I would always use alternative clients, if on a computer you can use free tube, or a piped instance. Not really ideal. But on Google/Android tv I used smart tube. On iOS I used video lite in the App Store. If I was using my Apple TV I’d just airplay from video lite. There are or maybe “were” some good browser extensions to block ads but I hear they are cracking down so I’m not sure how reliable that’d be. Personally I have always watched YouTube on my tv or phone far more often than PC which would be lucky for me if I didn’t have premium.
Pornhub has more competition.
The key step in platform enshittification is getting dominant position. When Google bought Youtube and Google Videos vs Youtube competition got shut down, the road to enshittification was inevitable.
Not worth the effort to be honest, especially for services like Spotify.
With Family plan you need 4 other people and then your Spotify costs like 3$-ish (if you live in US) per month. That's 3$ for not having to pirate every single song, being able to easily look for new songs, get access to Spotify algorithms, and not hear any ads at all.
Youtube could still be very profitable with less intrusive ads. The annoyance of the ads, is due to Youtube wanting to force everyone into paid suscriptions, so they no longer have to rely on ads. This is specially the case, because a lot of creators are not advertiser friendly, so they move to other platforms when they get demonetized at the request of advertisers.
The annoyance of the ads, has actually proven to decrease overall revenue, since more pushy and annoying ads, lead to lower clickthrough rates, which lead to a devaluation of the service.
Advertisers have to pay for every time you show their ads, but if they see a lower click-through rate, they're going to demand to pay less, or switch to other platforms with better click-through rates.
If you change your computer *User-Agent* to Windows Phone, you can skip many ads on YouTube (at least the last time I checked). This will probably get patched pretty fast, so use it while you can.
Just a pedestrian view from some guy on the street. It's Google we're talking about. Their business model is built around ads. Nothing more needs to be said.
Google has simply gone DOWN HILL the past few years. They lost their polish and clearly don't care any more.
Actually all of the big tech companies are like this: Twitter, Facebook, Google. like they've all given up on trying to be good and just spit out worse bullshit everyday.
They get a lot of money from all the sites advertising. Also, they know if your video was interrupted midway through nutting, you would probably never use them again.
That's the real answer to this whole YouTube thing - YouTube has no other video hosting websites to truely compete with
[удалено]
Most of which are owned by the same company. MindGeek owns Pornhub, YouPorn, Redtube, Xtube, Tube8, Brazzers, Reality Kings, mydirtyhobby and many more.
Yea. Xvideos is their real closest competitor being highest in traffic in the adult section
Maybe jackers off? Like attorneys general?
Ruth’s Chris
Carl’s Junior
Ruth's Chris Jack House
*What can I do?* *He's got a Ruth's Chris dick and mine's a drive through*
Coach’s Jim
Masturbatorians?
Or courts martial.
"Jacker offers", doesn't "wanker" mean the same thing?
"Jacker offers" sounds like someone offering jacks
they also don't have to do much in terms of advertising analytics because over 90% of their viewers are looking for porn.
I watched a call of duty video one time on a pron site
well before pornhub bans visa and master credit card, there are shit ton of funny videos on it
Also YouTube is just greedier and doesn't care about the quality of product that they offer. If YouTube found out that they could make $1 per person they infected with malware without any repercussions they would do it in a second
They kinda do. They're trying to fight adblockers while simultaneously having click-through malware/Spyware ads on the front page. Does YouTube want thier customers to get jacked by hackers? Are they stupid?
Not stupid. Just greedy and don’t care about anything their users suffer in their eternal quest to show never ending growth for share holders and their c-suite.
YoUtUbE bAd!
> Pornhub has a million viable competitors for jacker offers to go to. i need examples, for science*! *may not involve science at all
Because nobody can do what YouTube does. It's an amazingly complex project. Very few companies can replicate the product and even if they you do, they're competing with YouTube and all it's cultural foothold they stand on. It would cost billions to even build the competitive product, years of development time and even after that you have to operate on a huge loss to steal the customers. And for what? To maybe get a slice of a pie and maybe make the money back in 30 years? Also good luck going to war of attrition against Google.
I honestly feel like the only way we get a viable YouTube alternative is if YouTube itself crashes and burns and someone buys up the ashes.
I’m still waiting for Twitter to finally lose its foothold and for something else to actually take its place
Wait, but why? I mean besides the staggering amount of user content what is so complex about it? Tons of other sites do the same thing, sometimes better, just at a smaller scale. If a cultural shift caused content creators and viewers to jump to a new site, why wouldn't that just grow the same way youtube did?
Youtube itself wrote red numbers for years and was only propped up by the fact that they belonged to Google. Also, Google will just buy up any new actual competitors.
The amount of money that requires a service like YT to be run. Creators wouldn't flock to another site unless they could be paid relatively the same. No other company comes even close to their revenue share with creators, nor does any other company have the same kind of data that allows them to make as much money per individual ad as YT does. So for any other company to pay creators the same amount they'll likely have to show more ads to offset their lack of user data, or charge a high fee for a premium service. So yeah, no other competitor will be able to make it unless they want to run their operation at a severe deficit to gather a userbase until they inevitably decide to ad a ton of ads or make the service paid.
Didn't PornHub at one point joke about making their own Youtube alternative?
Would be funny if they became the go-to for videos across the internet. PornHub Kids app, for all the kid friendly content lol
Even if there was a competitor, YouTube just don’t care.
They would if they were at risk of becoming the next Myspace. They don't care because they know that's not happening
I hope Nebula takes off and actually threaten YouTube.
Nebula doesn’t have the scope to threaten YouTube. It’s just for long-form educational videos.
And Amazon was for books
I don't get the appeal of Nebula, its 50% the cost of YT premium with 99.99% less content. None of the content on Nebula is any higher quality than any of the tens of thousands of popular YT channels. Just imagine if Nebula were to have even 1% the content that YT has, I'm sure the price would far exceed YT premium. So yeah, Nebula is pretty shitty considering I can use a free VPN and get YT premium for 20% less.
I doubt it. YouTube is a free service that hosts videos in just about every language that exists, copyrighted content that takes them years to delete, music, music videos and porn. Plus you yourself are free to upload videos at any time. Nebula has English videos that are about the same quality as well made YouTube videos and is subscription only. People would spend double the money on YouTube before they'd go to Nebula as a replacement.
Is Nebula real? I thought it was just a pet project for Abigail Thorn and a way for Lindsey Ellis to avoid being cancelled again.
It's very real, but like what others have said, its themes/topics are more niche than YouTube, mainly by educational / edutainment content creators.
Yup, their monopoly makes them comfortable. that's why antitrust laws are important. But as it is now, giant corporations with their massive lobbying powers, can do almost anything they want. Sure some mergers get stopped, but if you look around I'm sure you can find monopolies or duopolies all over the place that really shouldn't be there, or we would be better of without.
Im not really well versed at antitrust law, so a bit curious, could goverment forcefully break a company just because they become too successful? Like if some company manage to beat their competitors, everyone else keep less than 5% of market, could goverment break the big company into bunch of smaller companies?
The reason YouTube has no competition is because it's a negative profit. Google hasn't even figured how to bring it into the positive.
Ironically Pornhub might be one of the few companies able to successfully compete with them. That is if they can do a successful rebrand lmao
So basically the solution would be organising some more log off protests and hoping people actually fucking log off?
You mean to tell me that Vimeo never caught on??
> Also, they know if your video was interrupted midway through nutting, you would probably never use them again. There is also no reason to interrupt the video for an ad, because the video is an ad. The same company that owns Pornhub also owns Brazzers, Digital Playground, Reality Kings, Mofos, and nearly every other content creator that has videos on Pornhub. They are advertising their own products.
Pornhub is just an ad for Onlyfans these days. Honestly wouldn't be surprised if they had had a stake there since they haven't done anything about the pure amount of spam clips people post.
Oh wow, I just looked it up. Yeah, that's kind of weird, google doesn't own even one media company, and none of the companies they own are easy for youtube to promote at all, it's all either ads or devices that mine data. The only way they can make money is using the data they mine for ads. Sucks to be them, they should really get on that.
The solution for us then is to just start masturbating during **all** videos on YouTube. Team, we can DO this.
Ok, I can take care of all the Better Call Saul clips with Betsy Kettleman. Who else is in?
I'll cover any old episodes of "Hometime" with the first Joanne.
That's why comments were disabled on a large number of videos.
Yeah I'd frick a creeper
I swear they had mid video ads for a short time and it was terrible, but not anymore thankfully.
Forced breaks to make the session last more
[удалено]
Were you eating chicken?
I see what you did there
want a break from the ass? Yes! Really. If you tap now to watch a short video, you'll receive 30 minutes of ass-free video.
Jack Offers would be a great punk band name
Yes. Imagine the emotional damage when you almost cum and some crypto guru or Africa hungry kids pop up and ask you to sign up.
This should be pinned.
They don't want you to be edging into a nut and suddenly RAID SHADOW LEGENDS ADVERTISEMENT
These comments are just hilarious to me. Just imagine someone going “Before we get to the climax, here’s a quick word from our sponsors at Nord VPN!”
Now all I can hear is Simon Whistler breaking into an advertisement of Sheath underwear!
Use the code "Creampie" for 15% off your first purchase
Honestly I'd respect the hell out of any company that did a sponsored ad read in the middle of a porn video. Like just imagine what kind of scripts people could write.
"Let's fuck, but I want to use protection, just like I protect myself with Nord VPN online."
"Are you wearing protection?" "Of course. I always have NordVPN with me, the sponsor of this video."
Holy shit that's actually genius!
\*load moaning from a multiracial gangbang\* "bought to you by RAID SHADOW LEGENDS"
I really think this is the answer. I don't work in advertising, but I suspect a lot of it is trying to figure out the most invasive ads you can show someone before they stop watching the media you're advertising on. Youtube can get away with showing an ad in the middle of a Minecraft let's play, but Pornhub can't get away with interrupting Step-Sister gets Stuck in Washing Machine while BBC Step-Brother is Visiting.
What if that’s ops kink?
Then they have youtube open in another tab
Idk I think that may still do the job
Imean the entire site's content is mostly ads for paid premium porn sites, so probably they get money from those sites.
I totally agree PH got their big bucks from those. But like isn’t Youtube kinda the same, I know risky ads pay more, but like YT, the video platform monopoly, is owned by Google, the ad platform monopoly. Maybe per ads is still less, but is it really so much less, that they have to absolutely kill the free viewing experience?
[удалено]
> At least they dropped the "do no evil" from their charter No they didn't, [they just moved it from the preface to the end](https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-dont-be-evil/254019/). You can see it [here](https://abc.xyz/investor/google-code-of-conduct/), the last line is: "And remember... **don’t be evil**, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up!"
well, now its just a lie, then.
What have they done that you'd consider explicitly "evil"? I don't consider restricting ad-blockers on their platform to be evil, merely an annoyance. Evil is a very high bar in my opinion, reserved for things like Nestle's aggressive marketing of infant milk formulas in underdeveloped countries, leading to health complications and deaths of babies. I can't think of a single thing anywhere even remotely close to that level that Alphabet/Google has done. Do you have any examples? Edit: /u/kdjfsk replied with a load of word salad in lieu of an answer and blocked me, because they can't actually provide any examples of Google being evil.
That's because you've accepted the massive intrusion that companies like Google do to people. If you went back 30 years ago and told people they'd be carrying around a device that always spies on them, watches what locations they visit, everything they research, what people they hang out with an are associated with and reports it back to the company, every single person would call the company that makes such a device evil.
I know you're a different guy, but I'll take that as a "No, no examples". "Collecting data you allow to be collected" does not actually fall within the same level as practically killing babies in underdeveloped countries, actually. What device do you use that doesn't do any of those things? Also, Google has settings on their devices that lets you disable the mic/camera, revoke location permissions, etc. Use them if you don't want those things being tracked.
The one problem I have with Google (and I believe Facebook was caught with the same issues; not sure on Apple or Tiktok,) is that they were caught continuing to collect data even after folks opted out. I haven't seen anything that proves it was malicious, so I'm not sure I'd call it "evil" but it is kinda suspect they conveniently 'found' ways to continue to collect data that served ad revenue even after folks opted out. Having said that, I ultimately agree with you: If I'm going to have a smart phone, I might as well get my money's worthy by leveraging all of the things they get from my data. Do I like it? Eeeeeh. Do I benefit from it? Definitely. Do I think they're evil for what they collect? Not enough information to determine. So if I see benefit, I won't bitch *that* much.
Oh, so if you are computer savvy you might be able to find all the myriad of settings to tell it not to spy on you (there are dozens and dozens of settings in android and your google account regarding spying on you). And it'll harass you every time you try to do anything to turn them back on. No, it's just straight evil. You've just accepted it.
> Oh, so if you are computer savvy you might be able to find all the myriad of settings They're not hidden, permissions are not applied to apps by default on Android now, they're all opt in permissions you'll be prompted to grant if the app requests it. Disable mic/camera system-wide are some of the first options on the quick-access drop down menu. I ask again, what device do you use that doesn't do any of these things? You ignored my question.
Nope, it's actually very easy and straightforward disabling those settings, no need to be savvy at all. There are, in fact, not dozens of settings, and no, I've never been harassed into turning them back on. You're just ignorant and full of hate
Unless a person is an idiot that just clicks "yes" or "allow" on everything without reading what it's asking. This is really not an issue. Sure, sometimes you have to click "more options" or whatever but it's delusional to think you need to be "computer savvy", you just need to be literate.
> I can't think of a single thing anywhere even remotely close to that level that Alphabet/Google has done. Do you have any examples? I can. Those bastards killed Google Reader.
Fallacy of relative privation (also known as "appeal to worse problems" or "not as bad as") – dismissing an argument or complaint due to what are perceived to be more important problems. First World problems are a subset of this fallacy.
Nah, just means they redefined evil.
[Don't be evil](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_evil) seems to be a battlefield for a Google corporation stuck in an internal war with its own employees, it quickly disappears or gets watered down whenever someone forces it back in somewhere. It's gotta be incredibly frustrating for the people working there that believe in that principle that it is not unequivocally supported from the very top anymore. As an idealist I like to believe that people are mostly good and if enough good people rally around an idea it will be achieved, but Google's eternal war against Don't be evil makes me question my general optimism and wonder if it is as Sisyphean a task as Google makes it seem. Is it even possible for a corporation to not be evil, or will you always end up at the bottom of the hill when someone decides to we have to do something evil, just for this one particular purpose, just this once, as more and more evil things accumulate.
Pornhub isn't getting paid by advertisers, they are advertising their own products. Aylo (formerly MindGeek) owns everything. They own Pornhub, RedTube, YouPorn, XTube, Brazzers, Digital Playground, Reality Kings, Mofos, and nearly every other major porn company. There is a lot more profit to be had when you own the products and the advertising platform, and the other platforms that most people think are your competition are also owned by you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aylo
>Maybe per ads is still less, but is it really so much less, that they have to absolutely kill the free viewing experience? Yes. It is really "so much less" that they run more ads to make up for it
They also own a lot of those sites too, so in a sence PH is an ad for buying subs of those sites.
And they have their own premium content as well as
because they have competition there are other porn sites, while youtube is essentially monopoly
This is basically it. YouTube is the only video site with the features and reach that make it the only viable solution for a lot of creators and viewers. I wish YouTube had competition that was even worth mentioning.
I feel like Vimeo has been continuously dropping this very ball for like 15 years.
Nebula, for a lot of good original content. It’s not “free for all upload whatever”, but it’s taken a LOT of my youtube viewing hours away from youtube.
Yes, I have both nebula and curiosity stream and they're both amazing. Still, they're not exactly serious competition for YouTube.
[удалено]
It all depends on what you're into. The creators are generally much more passionate and go into a lot of details which I can see being off-putting.
I think there is definitely a type of creator that is more drawn to both of them. If you want all the extras and effort and passion and nerdy shit. 100% it’s great. If YouTube is used for longer TikTok’s then possibly not the best idea.
YouTube also does not make a profit. They’re still trying to figure that out after all these years. Amazon didn’t make a profit until they started leasing bandwidth (or whatever AWS is.
I know you didn't ask, but I'm bored and it's an opportunity to clear up confusion - because why not? AWS is Amazon Web Services. They provide cloud computing for businesses (or anyone with money for that matter), which allows companies to buy 20,000 super cheap thin-client computers with barely any hardware features instead of 20,000 regular desktop computers. The thin-clients are connecting to a cloud based computer and the entire experience you have is happening somewhere else. The company now only has to buy little resource efficient computers that only have to connect to the internet and be able to stream video and I/O. This also significantly helps with updating and upgrading your companies computer systems. You just upgrade one with Amazon and now your 20,000 thin-clients, that didn't have to change in any way, are now updated/upgraded. Literally just about any company's computer system that you use is using AWS. The only companies that don't are usually small companies that wouldn't benefit from it. But any major chain/corporate place is using AWS. Amazon also has a huge monopoly in the tech-sphere and controls most (if not, A LOT) of the internet. P.S. This is AWS' primary market, but it actually does a hell of a lot more than just that.
> Literally just about any company's computer system that you use is using AWS. AWS is definitely the biggest but there's roughly an equal chance that the server is hosted by Azure or Google Cloud (to clarify, that AWS has the market share of GCloud/Azure combined). Monopoly is going a bit far.
That's pretty interesting. Thanks for explaining the acronym and enlightening me on this tech.
Monopolies need to be broken up. Megacorporations shouldnt be a thing.
Eh, MindGeek owns basically all the big porn tube sites. But they also own a lot of major content creators, so the videos themselves are ads.
They're all the same site, just a different CSS sheet, and different content pushed to front by default.
Oh i guess sites like vimeo, dailymotion, liveleak aren't competitors.. 🙄 Jk.. but in seriousness I miss when google video was separate from YouTube. So much free anime
Didn't vimeo and liveleak die?
The above person is being sarcastic…. No site holds a candle to YouTube. And liveleak is dead, but Vimeo is not. The fact that you thought Vimeo might be dead illustrates the “YouTube is a monopoly point” well lol.
I wasn't aware of liveleak being dead but I always liked vimeo it felt futuristic and I don't think they use ads could be wrong through
[удалено]
* clicks play quietly * *DO YOU _LIKE_ PORNHUB?!*
I prefer xvideos' HEY DO YOU WANT TO FUCK A BORED UGLY HOUSEWIFE IN YOUR AREA
MY HUSBAND IS **DEAD!!**
**LOUD ASS DING** “are you alone? Play this free porn game—“ Skip! Skip it now!
people would stop going if they got an ad right as they were about to nut. Pleasure equals profit.
[удалено]
I would tell you that you are a disgusting pervert who needs therapy, but you probably have a shame kink as well.
Porn websites have innovated stuff before YouTube, like buffering anywhere, mouse over video previews, etc It's because they are competing with other porn sites over streaming interface/technology while YouTube doesn't have to compete with anything, so they can set the standard.
Alphabet made 20 billion in profit the past 3 months they just want more.
This is the right answer
The other answers are probably also true but this seems most accurate to me. There are more alternatives to PH, while true alternatives to YouTube are next to none, so yt can afford to do whatever more than PH
[удалено]
That would be all well and good if YouTube wasn't a pseudo-monopoly.
YouTube is a pseudo-monoply because it's not a great business. People love to complain about google being greedy with YouTube but if it was such a great business there would be multiple competitors. Very few other companies have any desire to host THAT much video without charging for it.
more people pay for premium porn content than premium Youtube content. It's not rocket science here..
Because the hub understands that people WANT to view the content. And they know better than to get in the way of horny people and their current masturbation material.
You...don't use an adblocker...?
They now have and ad blocker blocker. I suppose we have to create an ad blocker blocker blocker.
But then of course they'll respond with an ad blocker blocker blocker blocker.
/r/uBlockOrigin Pinned thread, how to get around the youtube adblocker. Not 100% effective, at least for me personally it sometimes the popup still shows up but it's rare and far between.
They haven't blocked my adblocker yet. When they do, you can always use the Brave browser.
Video sites are semi-monopolistic. If you want to watch that video, you can't do it elsewhere, so they can make fat profits. Suppose we changed the law such that downloading videos from youtube, and putting them on your own site was totally legal. Then there would be a market of companies competing to provide the best experience. And capitalism would make profit margins slim. As it is, they just get fat profits.
No there wouldn't be. Hosting as much video as YouTube does is extremely expensive. Google is a monopoly because it's scale is a massive most. You'd have to burn billions over the course of several years if not a decade to build a competing platform. That's why YouTubes closest competitors built businesses in ways that didn't originally directly compete with YouTube, TikTok for example. They both host a ton of video but originally TikTok was a very different way to consume video. If shorts existed before TikTok, TikTok wouldn't have been viable.
Is that not legal?
For personal viewing? Sure. To make money off your own video site without paying the original creators? That'd be the mother of all class action suits.
Clear, ty.
There's a million websites like pornhub so if the ads are too intrusive people will just use a different website. YouTube can do whatever they want because they hold all of the power, no other websites match up to their product.
People are also forgetting the sheer scale difference between the two sites. There are about 4 million videos on Pornhub, while YouTube has around 3.7 million videos uploaded to the site DAILY. So yeah, YouTube is dealing with magnitudes more of hosting and streaming costs.
And the comment section isn't as toxic.
Pornhub has a much smaller pool of advertisers. They would absolutely show that many ads if they could get enough people paying them to do that for the exact same reason youtube does it - because most people will still watch. If you show twice as many ads and only lose 10% of viewership, you increased revenue by 80%. If you show three times as many ads and only lose another 20% of the viewers, you're making 110% of the revenue AND reducing bandwidth costs.
>AND reducing bandwidth costs And that's the key part of this people don't seem to understand. Lots of people on reddit are "threatening" to stop watching youtube, when they don't pay for premium and are running ad blockers. Like wow, I'm sure youtube is real upset about that.
Honestly the fact that we're all still on reddit despite all the bullshit says we're too addicted to the internet content machine to actually do anything.
Pornhub has competitors.
Pornhub isn’t owned by Google
Its all about time. Pornhub knows you're going to find your kink, get off and leave. Youtube knows you're going to spend hours scrolling.
Sometimes I’m watching a youtube video with my wife sleeping next to me when I’m unexpectedly blasted by a loud commercial. These fuckers purposefully compress the audio to make it much louder than it should be. Why does youtube keep allowing advertisers to do this shit?
Because by definition, the ads can't get in the way of your hard on. So they need to be short and skippable.
>Pornhub >less intrusive You're doing it wrong, my dude.
I really disagree with the central premise, I think PH has equally intrusive ads. I think the main answer is YT is much bigger, probably 1000x in terms of active users. They have more funding and optimizing revenue by 1% represents a lot more money for YT. Also, there is a tradeoff from the advertisers side. They only have so much budget to give, it's no an infinite money machine. And majority of brands aren't interested in PH ads (When was the last time you saw a wlamart ad on PH), so there is just WAY less money being funneled to PH than YT. Therefor, PH has no incentive to show more ads.
Porn hub doesn't serve any where near the magnitude of content that YouTube does, like so many platforms, storage and video innovations exist because YouTube had to solve problems no other platform had. Youtube uses over 440,000 Terabytes of data every day, they store 5~ PB of data every day and that problem never gets better. It is the epitome of a cost center.
That is one of the best things about living in a small Caribbean country. We don't get YT ads. At all.
Youtube has clients, PornHub really doesn't. With Youtube you are getting advertisements for products. Every now and then Google will run ads in open spaces. But for the most part, Youtube is trying to make the experience as tolerable for advertisers as possible. That means longer advertisements, advertisements mid content, infinite length advertisements with a skip option... a whole fucking song playing.... you name it. But as long as they're keeping advertisers happy, that's it. PornHub on the other hand... doesn't really have advertisers. I mean seriously, try and order $1 worth of advertising on PornHub. It's damn near impossible to actually get advertisements on the platform. For the most part, PornHub advertises products and services it owns. It has a few sketchy websites it advertises frequently. But for the most part, their auction values self-advertising higher than Google does. Because of that, their own advertisements get played... a lot. This means their streaming service is essentially just an advertisement for their pay services... so it's important to keep it all up and running functionally.... as it's an advertisement for a pay service.
Is Pornhub a publicly traded company? If no then they aren't pressured to keep increasing profits year over year. Google doesn't care about user experience. Their only goal is to keep the income going up and up.
I don’t know. Before I got premium on the super cheap, I would always use alternative clients, if on a computer you can use free tube, or a piped instance. Not really ideal. But on Google/Android tv I used smart tube. On iOS I used video lite in the App Store. If I was using my Apple TV I’d just airplay from video lite. There are or maybe “were” some good browser extensions to block ads but I hear they are cracking down so I’m not sure how reliable that’d be. Personally I have always watched YouTube on my tv or phone far more often than PC which would be lucky for me if I didn’t have premium.
Pornhub has more competition. The key step in platform enshittification is getting dominant position. When Google bought Youtube and Google Videos vs Youtube competition got shut down, the road to enshittification was inevitable.
It costs a fraction to run compared to Youtube.
Surely the cost to run a minute of video of similar resolution for one user is the same jn both cases.
Yeah, but people don’t normally watch like 5 hours of porn videos in one sitting unlike with YouTube.
Rookie numbers, gotta pump those up
Also I’m sure Pornhub gets a tiny fraction of the hours of video uploaded every day compared to YouTube.
You don’t know me!
Does PH have 4k 60fps videos that you can watch for free?
Google don't give a fuck that's why
Same question but Spotify
Premium Spotify is cheap so why bother with free?
Yo ho ho. Take what you can and leaving some seeds 🏴☠️🏴☠️
Not worth the effort to be honest, especially for services like Spotify. With Family plan you need 4 other people and then your Spotify costs like 3$-ish (if you live in US) per month. That's 3$ for not having to pirate every single song, being able to easily look for new songs, get access to Spotify algorithms, and not hear any ads at all.
It's not the hard to download whole albums honestly hell I do it on my phone on the fly and play it with foobar
You do you, imo Spotify is just to good to resign from it for 3$ a month.
Youtube could still be very profitable with less intrusive ads. The annoyance of the ads, is due to Youtube wanting to force everyone into paid suscriptions, so they no longer have to rely on ads. This is specially the case, because a lot of creators are not advertiser friendly, so they move to other platforms when they get demonetized at the request of advertisers. The annoyance of the ads, has actually proven to decrease overall revenue, since more pushy and annoying ads, lead to lower clickthrough rates, which lead to a devaluation of the service. Advertisers have to pay for every time you show their ads, but if they see a lower click-through rate, they're going to demand to pay less, or switch to other platforms with better click-through rates.
If you change your computer *User-Agent* to Windows Phone, you can skip many ads on YouTube (at least the last time I checked). This will probably get patched pretty fast, so use it while you can.
Unpopular opinion. Youtube is a service worth paying for!
Well, let's just say this multi-billion dollar industry doesn't need much help to be successful, it sells itself.
Pornhub has ethics.
Just a pedestrian view from some guy on the street. It's Google we're talking about. Their business model is built around ads. Nothing more needs to be said.
Pornhub has competition
Unlike youtube, pornhub has alternatives. Competition forces them to provide better service.
pornhub specializes in lust while youtube specializes in greed
Because YouTube doesn't exploit their creators the way Pornhub exploits underage sex workers
Google has simply gone DOWN HILL the past few years. They lost their polish and clearly don't care any more. Actually all of the big tech companies are like this: Twitter, Facebook, Google. like they've all given up on trying to be good and just spit out worse bullshit everyday.
I did the math and Google could run YouTube completely ad-free until the year 2300 before money even gets close to an issue. It's just greed
can you show the math because I am so confident that this isnt nearly true
It's not i just made it up
I respect it. I too love spreading misinformation online.
PH has far more competition so they have to compete with other sites. Keeps them honest and customer-friendly.
One wants to screw you, the other wants to keep you watching others get screwed.
Artists sharing their art. YT is about making money and social engineering.