this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
204 points (98.1% liked)
Technology
83789 readers
2230 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Okay, fine, I am ready to come out of the closet: I've been a YouTube Premium subscriber for two years. Lynch me if you like. I thought it hypocritical to crucify YouTube and have a Spotify or Netflix or Hulu subscription, and I found the cost acceptable.
Three price increases and a worsening of service later, I cancelled my subscription as soon as I received the email about a price increase.
Incidentally, I think that's the thing to do: you get a price increase, there is no tangible benefit to the increase, you immediately drop the service. None of that "Whatchagonnado?" stuff. The only thing these services react to is an instant drop of revenue. You can live for a month without Spotify (or YouTube Premium), they can't live for a quarter without subscribers.
We always have to remember that the short-term focus of modern capitalism is their weakness: a stupid mistake, a sudden drop in revenue, and the CEOs are flying out the window faster than Putin's generals.
People don’t know how to vote with wallet anymore.
It’s the reason these services get away with nickel and diming. Look at food delivery. For whatever reason people keep using it even though the fees add up to more than the meal itself. Let alone the markup the restaurant does to cover the costs.
Uber Eats motto should be “For when you want to pay $80 for a $5 meal”
Same thing with like Starbucks. People paying $17 for burnt coffee that needs 45 cups of milk and sugar to salvage.
The services will never change because consumers are lazy. It’s easy to just give their money away. People mock the “stop buying avocado toast” saying. But I think they just misunderstood it. I think the deeper meaning of it was meant to convey to vote with your wallet. You can buy avocados and bread at the grocery store and make an avocado toast yourself for under $1. But instead people go and buy it at a fancy pop-up and pay $18 plus tip for some mustachioed hipster with an artisan apron to make it for them.
/rant
The problem is, YouTube has no real competition. No one has the same thing they do. And the same applies to a lot of things today.
Another issue is, subscription services can just raise the price and then start charging people more without those people doing anything, or possibly even noticing, which differs from individual purchases where you had to make a judgement about the price each time. Now, people have to make an actively cancel in order to not agree to new prices (or EULA changes for that matter). It should really be the other way around, so that if a service raises their price, people have to actively agree to the new price in order for the service to keep charging them.
Can't speak for Uber Eats or Starbucks though.
That is not true!
The services get more expensive and the quality goes down.
And yet consumers will still use the services; this was my point. They are too lazy to stop using the service and just go buy food in person. So even if the quality goes down and the prices go up, they will simply pay to continue being lazy and get food delivered.
My boss claims it has "no effect" to choose where to spend your money.
I remind him, voting with our wallets is literally the only mechanism Capitalism provides for consumer ethics.
It's Prisoner's dilemma. When we think 5m people are going to take the action either way, we don't think our singular efforts matter. But as there are 5m of us taking the action, there are 5m singular efforts that DO matter. If people just don't give up on the idea.
Says the guy who still has an Amazon account :/
I mean, I still have an Amazon account. I even used it, less than two weeks ago. But that was the first time I actually used it to buy anything for nearly a decade.
People shouldn't hold themselves too strictly to any sort of puritanism. Avoid the worst options as much as you can, but when it becomes infeasible for you, make an exception. That's much better than just always going with the bad option.
In some cases it doesn't have an effect. Some things are just so big and have so many revenue streams that avoiding the products means removing approximately 4 cents from their revenue stream per person. Millions of people would have to do it all at the same time and that is difficult to organize and maintain.
This doesn't mean that you shouldn't stick to your guns and not support things you have objections to. Something something integrity is doing the right thing when no one is looking something something.
I think the key here is to get used to react immediately, because the immediate reaction causes a reversal of the action. We don't have to live with the increased cost and decreased service forever, because an immediate negative reaction means the service is restored to what it was before, with any luck. So everybody skips a downgrade or price increase at the same time, and until CEOs figure out the trick, it's bye bye enshittification.
AAA gaming has in fact been suffering its customers voting with their wallets from what I understand.
So there is hope for the greater, more ignorant population at large.
Revanced. Or YouTube with an ad blocker. While supporting creators by directly buying albums/merch.
But I don't think it hypocritical, necessarily. People can inherently only care about so much. For a long time I stopped shopping at Coles and went to Woolworths instead, because I was pissed more at Coles than at Woolworths over a couple of specific things. Then more recently Woolworths did even more to piss me off, so now I mostly shop at Aldi. At no point in this was it not accurate to say that both Coles and Woolworths are horrible duopolists that screw over their suppliers. But one had at least not been so blatant about its gross hypercapitalism bullshit by marketing the idea of brand loyalty and consumerism explicitly to children. So while both were always bad, one seemed the slightly less bad option. Until it didn't.
Why not just drop Spotify instead since YouTube music is included in premium
That was a nobrainer for me at least.
That's how it all started for me: I had Netflix and Spotify from ages before, and then Netflix did their, "ads or double the price" thing and Spotify gave me more and more corporate music instead of what I wanted, so I dropped them both and switched to YouTube Premium for both music and video content.
Bro youre a capitalist drone stop writing as if you have anything to teach anybody else about anything and go pay for the next subscription you see