this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
457 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37699 readers
228 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
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
I don't understand. Is this supposed to be an incentive to turn on watch history?
Right? At last I have a way to let my kid use YouTube for school and stuff without the algorithm trying to seize control of her brain.
I don't have my watch history off. I use it a lot to remember videos I was watching. It honestly ended up doing a lot for me and I'd rather get recommended content I might enjoy. Just like how Lemmy recommends content to me like how this post ended up at the top of my front page.
I totally get that. For most people, watch history and relevant recommendations are indeed useful tools.
But if, for some reasons, you want to switch off these tools, the price to pay was a home page full of flashy clickbait miniatures. This terrible home page could have been an incentive to switch history on.
Now, it's just a minimalistic google-ish search page. It's an unexpected improvement when they could have done much worse, like a home page autoplaying ad videos, for example.
Maybe google here is attempting to appeal to both types of people? Why should they truly care if people have watch history off? The end of the day, you are still watching videos on YouTube and that's what they want.