There are barely any alternatives, so yes, when I'm going to Google's or Meta's properties that's largely against my will. They literally make me, where "they" is a large and diverse group of entities.
To boycott Google I'd be forced to quit my job for example, as it literally forces me into Google's services.
Specifically YouTube has very little in the way of alternatives, but I get what you're saying — I just respectfully disagree with the coping method. Which is to say, on the gradient between "we should suck it up" and "we should Luigi Mangione the person responsible" I fall somewhere in the middle.
Everyone who put mandatory stuff on YouTube and only here. Two last examples I faced recently:
- Companies who put their product instruction manual exclusively on YouTube
- university curriculum who require you to watch contain that is on YouTube only.
Sure I'm free not to buy any manufactured products or not resume my studies, but it's like saying the Gulag was OK because people were free not to criticize Stalin.
the shorts are on the home page for doomscrolling. all the examples above will give you a playlist or will embed the videos in their pages. I don't see how shorts on the home page are a problem here? could you clarify please?
"going on YouTube" and complaining about shorts made it sound like you were going to the home page where shorts are shown as an option.
going on YouTube to watch a single video from a manual is a very different thing. I didn't move the goal post, I pointed out your motte and bailey position.
There no motte, and no bailey, I never talked about shorts in the first place (surprise, there are multiple users on this platform …) I just witnessed your bad faith argument about how people aren't forced to go on YouTube and proved it wrong.
The key problem isn't that YouTube has been degrading its user experience for a while, the problem is that we don't have anywhere else to go as YouTube is the most encroached monopoly in the tech scene (which is no small feat).
