diff --git a/images/2021-04-23 01_13_29-Is atomic wallet fully open source_ _ atomicwallet ? Mozilla Firefox.png b/images/2021-04-23 01_13_29-Is atomic wallet fully open source_ _ atomicwallet ? Mozilla Firefox.png
new file mode 100755
index 0000000..b59099a
Binary files /dev/null and b/images/2021-04-23 01_13_29-Is atomic wallet fully open source_ _ atomicwallet ? Mozilla Firefox.png differ
diff --git a/images/stackoverflow gatekeeps young upstart.png b/images/stackoverflow gatekeeps young upstart.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..04655bd
Binary files /dev/null and b/images/stackoverflow gatekeeps young upstart.png differ
diff --git a/src/script.md b/src/script.md
index be25f2d..444edff 100644
--- a/src/script.md
+++ b/src/script.md
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ I know, arguing "Censorship is Bad, Actually" is an uphill battle, for some reas
 I know lots of people just add "reddit" to every google search they run to hopefully get actual people talking to each other - but I think people forget, 
 [//TODO: i swear there's like, n-word audit or something?]
 reddit has a proud history of fun and/or useful bots. 
-[that photo of atomic wallet]
+[https://www.reddit.com/r/atomicwallet/comments/apeyp8/is_atomic_wallet_fully_open_source/]
 The value of getting conversation from reddit is that when someone says something stupid, someone else can tell them they're stupid. 
 Is atomic wallet open source? some braindead marketron says:
 [alt] yes :) it *uses* open source *components*!
diff --git a/videos/20221210 - Monetization will ruin the internet (again) - [-EKF9P8EDS0].en.vtt b/videos/20221210 - Monetization will ruin the internet (again) - [-EKF9P8EDS0].en.vtt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a37b48b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/videos/20221210 - Monetization will ruin the internet (again) - [-EKF9P8EDS0].en.vtt	
@@ -0,0 +1,3900 @@
+WEBVTT
+Kind: captions
+Language: en
+
+00:00:01.080 --> 00:00:04.350
+Despite the length and effort of this video,
+this is not an attempt at creating a magnum
+
+00:00:04.350 --> 00:00:08.840
+opus. Far from it, it is a cathartic mess
+designed to cap off my first year of Youtube
+
+00:00:08.840 --> 00:00:14.460
+while also indirectly and incompletely chronicling
+my experience with platforms, attention economies,
+
+00:00:14.460 --> 00:00:20.260
+and the desire to be recognized in my works.
+It is, largely, an effort of practical explanation
+
+00:00:20.260 --> 00:00:25.519
+mired in anecdote, to which I provide a smaller
+companion, more expressly telling My Youtube
+
+00:00:25.519 --> 00:00:29.330
+Story and sharing my feelings on the state
+of things.
+
+00:00:29.330 --> 00:00:34.399
+This will be a journey, from a made-up website
+to places monetizing creativity to a ridiculous
+
+00:00:34.399 --> 00:00:38.680
+cryptocurrency project, into the past- and
+a glance to the future.
+
+00:00:38.680 --> 00:00:41.940
+It is, despite this, still an essay with a
+thesis:
+
+00:00:41.940 --> 00:00:46.739
+The monetization of creativity, though a means
+of nominally empowering creators, will forever
+
+00:00:46.739 --> 00:00:51.260
+be intrinsically hostile to creativity, so
+long as it is an incentive to
+
+00:00:51.260 --> 00:00:52.260
+Produce.
+
+00:00:52.260 --> 00:00:57.010
+We’ll be discussing the twofold path of
+monetization: one, the advertisers who are
+
+00:00:57.010 --> 00:01:02.960
+drawn in, and two, the payout for content
+creation and how creation becomes…production.
+
+00:01:02.960 --> 00:01:06.700
+Some sites have one, some sites have both—
+though it’s rare to see the payout without
+
+00:01:06.700 --> 00:01:12.460
+ads, we do have one example. The focus will,
+at first, largely be on that latter part–
+
+00:01:12.460 --> 00:01:16.260
+payout– demonstrated through a few models
+of how sites have implemented payout and the
+
+00:01:16.260 --> 00:01:18.600
+subsequent cultural ripple.
+
+00:01:18.600 --> 00:01:22.759
+Sites or apps changing their layout and design
+approach can massively impact culture and
+
+00:01:22.759 --> 00:01:27.689
+we just kind of accept that. Think of Instagram
+and the change from being a place where people
+
+00:01:27.689 --> 00:01:31.960
+once only posted wordless photos to how it’s…basically
+tiktok now.
+
+00:01:31.960 --> 00:01:36.200
+Generally, apps have expanded functionality,
+or indeed, chased the market of other successful
+
+00:01:36.200 --> 00:01:41.690
+apps by adding features meant to turn their
+platform into an alternative– again, instagram
+
+00:01:41.690 --> 00:01:46.409
+(and youtube) trying to be tiktok.
+But there’s a lingering question of if people
+
+00:01:46.409 --> 00:01:52.009
+would even *want* to use instagram or youtube
+to…do a tiktok, if creators weren’t directly
+
+00:01:52.009 --> 00:01:56.829
+incentivized to create there. For a bit on
+how those incentives work, there’s a video
+
+00:01:56.829 --> 00:02:02.020
+by Swell Entertainment which I’ll link below.
+Indeed, incentives will be a lingering theme
+
+00:02:02.020 --> 00:02:03.119
+of this video.
+
+00:02:03.119 --> 00:02:08.300
+Generally, the point is that things…change,
+and one of the biggest sources of change is,
+
+00:02:08.300 --> 00:02:11.380
+inevitably, monetization and the culture it
+brings.
+
+00:02:11.380 --> 00:02:16.290
+How about we used a made-up example to chart
+the general trajectory of online content spaces…
+
+00:02:17.290 --> 00:02:19.290
+For fun, let’s just make up a site.
+
+00:02:19.290 --> 00:02:21.879
+We’ll call it… Embler. [apologies if there’s
+already a cheap tech startup called this]
+
+00:02:21.879 --> 00:02:26.739
+Embler is a picture hosting social media site.
+On Embler, people are able to post almost
+
+00:02:26.739 --> 00:02:31.069
+whatever they want provided it doesn’t break
+laws. The site was originally intended as
+
+00:02:31.069 --> 00:02:36.069
+a place to post stunning vistas or cottagecore
+home vibes (fe backgrounds). Sure, some users
+
+00:02:36.069 --> 00:02:40.849
+would post an image of some text but it didn’t
+change the vibe much and was usually some
+
+00:02:40.849 --> 00:02:44.510
+live laugh love type junk.
+Eventually comments were enabled and a bit
+
+00:02:44.510 --> 00:02:50.129
+of conversation started in the comment sections,
+treating them like threads, sometimes irrespective
+
+00:02:50.129 --> 00:02:51.849
+of the actual pic.
+
+00:02:51.849 --> 00:02:57.020
+After update 1.7, called Binding internally,
+the site featured text posts without the image
+
+00:02:57.020 --> 00:02:58.020
+element.
+
+00:02:58.020 --> 00:03:01.830
+Shortly after, this became the dominant way
+users interacted with the platform, going
+
+00:03:01.830 --> 00:03:08.020
+from an image posting board to sort of an…
+Ur-Forum, and people took to it well enough.
+
+00:03:08.020 --> 00:03:13.099
+Eventually this change allowed for more interactivity
+between users and a degree of…personality
+
+00:03:13.099 --> 00:03:15.239
+to come out from the formerly wordless space.
+
+00:03:15.239 --> 00:03:19.830
+With that, people start amassing followers
+around their personalities and commentary
+
+00:03:19.830 --> 00:03:25.129
+more than just how nice their DSLR photos
+looked. Sure, some people mourned the vibe
+
+00:03:25.129 --> 00:03:29.220
+change (Camus) but generally people liked
+having a place to post more of themselves,
+
+00:03:29.220 --> 00:03:33.129
+even if it is angery poetry (Camus mask).
+People are largely posting for the sake of
+
+00:03:33.129 --> 00:03:37.360
+sharing their feelings or communicating with
+friends, but some people have started to find
+
+00:03:37.360 --> 00:03:43.040
+reward in being recognized in an online space,
+and really dive into the idea of growing followerbases.
+
+00:03:43.040 --> 00:03:48.489
+Now by this point, there have been ads on
+the site for a while, but it’s not intrusive.
+
+00:03:48.489 --> 00:03:51.000
+Or, no more intrusive than on other sites.
+
+00:03:51.000 --> 00:03:55.209
+Eventually, the site gets big and profitable
+enough that– to encourage growth of the
+
+00:03:55.209 --> 00:04:00.900
+platform and “give back”-- Embler starts
+a program to pay their largest contributors.
+
+00:04:00.900 --> 00:04:05.680
+The change is…subtle, at first. People just
+post what they always did, and indeed they
+
+00:04:05.680 --> 00:04:10.560
+don’t meet the threshold for pay anyway.
+But big accounts can now make it “their
+
+00:04:10.560 --> 00:04:15.299
+job” without having to worry about outside
+sponsors which were…tolerated at most by
+
+00:04:15.299 --> 00:04:19.410
+the site administration.
+The fact that people *can* make it their job
+
+00:04:19.410 --> 00:04:25.130
+becomes aspirational, even.That said, not
+everyone on the platform jumps at the opportunity
+
+00:04:25.130 --> 00:04:29.680
+to earn, and the dichotomy of posters and
+lurkers is still there. There will always
+
+00:04:29.680 --> 00:04:33.639
+be lurkers (lowen?).
+But eventually the tone of content shifts.
+
+00:04:33.639 --> 00:04:36.570
+People are now posting things with calls to
+action baked in.
+
+00:04:36.570 --> 00:04:41.060
+Advertisers have made it clear that a nebulous
+range of content is unwanted, even when it
+
+00:04:41.060 --> 00:04:45.960
+doesn’t break site rules.
+An entire subculture once only full of aspirant
+
+00:04:45.960 --> 00:04:50.500
+14 year olds, develops around the question
+of “how to get big”.
+
+00:04:50.500 --> 00:04:54.820
+Content is made with the express purpose of
+pretending to hold a definitive answer, the
+
+00:04:54.820 --> 00:04:59.850
+only true answer, to that question.
+In the end, creativity becomes a job option.
+
+00:04:59.850 --> 00:05:04.440
+For some, it’s incredibly lucrative, for
+others, supplemental advertising is part of
+
+00:05:04.440 --> 00:05:10.139
+their content, and for some there’s external
+platforms to help. These factors tether content
+
+00:05:10.139 --> 00:05:14.300
+to routine, and so begins the phenomena of
+monthly content waves.
+
+00:05:14.300 --> 00:05:19.350
+With the advent of Embler becoming a “job”
+comes a marked shift in quality of content,
+
+00:05:19.350 --> 00:05:23.230
+and with a shift in quality comes a shift
+in expectations.
+
+00:05:23.230 --> 00:05:25.880
+Casual amateurism becomes near derided.
+
+00:05:25.880 --> 00:05:29.960
+Some big posters are even allowed to bend
+rules, so long as advertisers don’t personally
+
+00:05:29.960 --> 00:05:34.630
+step in or, as the case often becomes, get
+goaded into stepping in.
+
+00:05:34.630 --> 00:05:39.220
+It becomes clear that some people start flooding
+the site with content that, by just barely
+
+00:05:39.220 --> 00:05:44.240
+skirting the line of several rules but breaking
+none of them, are producing cash grab content,
+
+00:05:44.240 --> 00:05:48.570
+farming engagement, things like that. It starts
+to become a problem to the point of affecting
+
+00:05:48.570 --> 00:05:52.889
+the site ecosystem.
+The way the site filters content starts changing
+
+00:05:52.889 --> 00:05:57.660
+under the apparent idea of providing a better
+user experience, but to safeguard from bad
+
+00:05:57.660 --> 00:06:01.620
+actors, the mechanisms of the site are kept
+intentionally obtuse to such a degree that
+
+00:06:01.620 --> 00:06:07.090
+no one person, neither working on the site,
+working for the site, or posting on the site,
+
+00:06:07.090 --> 00:06:11.800
+could explain how it works.
+This goes smoothly until eventually some users
+
+00:06:11.800 --> 00:06:15.960
+start ironically worshiping the mechanism
+that filters posts. As with all ironic things
+
+00:06:15.960 --> 00:06:20.090
+on the internet, given a digital generation,
+i.e. the length of one full rotation of an
+
+00:06:20.090 --> 00:06:24.990
+American High School student body, around
+4 years, the irony is lost on the new site
+
+00:06:24.990 --> 00:06:29.840
+members, and they begin worshiping in earnest.
+This turns out to be the way to summon a dead
+
+00:06:29.840 --> 00:06:35.520
+god named Gargalon or something who proceeds
+to vanish as suddenly as he arrived, signaling
+
+00:06:35.520 --> 00:06:37.400
+the End of Days.
+
+00:06:37.400 --> 00:06:40.380
+Wait what was the metaphor again?
+
+00:06:40.380 --> 00:06:41.950
+Okay let’s go with a different approach.
+
+00:06:41.950 --> 00:06:45.880
+I’m just gonna go through some sites I have
+personal experience with and less focus on
+
+00:06:45.880 --> 00:06:52.180
+how they transformed across years, so much
+as how their culture is informed by the monetization.
+
+00:06:52.180 --> 00:06:54.300
+Less before-and-after, more… case studies.
+
+00:06:55.600 --> 00:07:00.520
+There’s this site called Medium. It’s
+basically youtube for sapiosexuals. It’s
+
+00:07:00.520 --> 00:07:07.210
+like “oh I don’t watch tv I read” for
+the internet. Like a blog. It’s a blog.
+
+00:07:07.210 --> 00:07:11.490
+Okay, being less facetious, it’s a platform
+founded by one of the co-founders of Twitter
+
+00:07:11.490 --> 00:07:16.849
+Evan Williams–originally intended to be
+longer twitter. I suppose, at that time, the
+
+00:07:16.849 --> 00:07:21.169
+name was conceived to be a declaration of
+post length.The design has since pivoted to
+
+00:07:21.169 --> 00:07:23.890
+Williams’ other area of expertise, blogging.
+
+00:07:23.890 --> 00:07:28.580
+It is now a place for blogs and air quotes
+“journalism” without having to make a
+
+00:07:28.580 --> 00:07:32.330
+website or understand wordpress. It’s a
+hosting platform.
+
+00:07:32.330 --> 00:07:35.979
+By the nature of how blogs have been monetized
+for almost their whole existence, it’s a
+
+00:07:35.979 --> 00:07:41.010
+little hard to say whether the monetization
+of Medium is an innovation or tradition, really,
+
+00:07:41.010 --> 00:07:46.050
+but there’s a bit of what I’ll call hybridization
+going on. The appeal, and how the site markets
+
+00:07:46.050 --> 00:07:50.270
+itself, is as a place where one can earn from
+sharing their thoughts.
+
+00:07:50.270 --> 00:07:51.830
+This is how its structured:
+
+00:07:51.830 --> 00:07:55.440
+Medium has a whole host of categories and
+a tag system for designating how articles
+
+00:07:55.440 --> 00:08:00.690
+get sorted by “genre” so far, nothing
+special. Now there are two types of articles:
+
+00:08:00.690 --> 00:08:04.240
+normal and premium, with premium denoting
+a paywall.
+
+00:08:04.240 --> 00:08:08.409
+If one pays for premium membership they can
+get past this individually selected paywall
+
+00:08:08.409 --> 00:08:13.800
+as many times as they want. Without membership,
+you get to pass the wall five times a month.
+
+00:08:13.800 --> 00:08:18.509
+Three enmeshed things make Medium interesting
+for our purpose: the ad-free nature, the way
+
+00:08:18.509 --> 00:08:21.830
+people pay in, and the way people get paid.
+
+00:08:21.830 --> 00:08:25.400
+But first things first, why does Medium exist?
+
+00:08:25.400 --> 00:08:29.310
+The history isn’t very long and I won’t
+go in that deep. Essentially Williams tried
+
+00:08:29.310 --> 00:08:33.890
+to make the first idea and it didn’t go
+super well, because “twitter but more words”
+
+00:08:33.890 --> 00:08:38.740
+just means a feed of facebook rants. From
+there a pivot was made to article style posts,
+
+00:08:38.740 --> 00:08:43.729
+ostensibly reinventing the blog space, and
+then proudly standing by that reinvention,
+
+00:08:43.729 --> 00:08:49.260
+with an intended mission to save blogging
+from oncoming irrelevance. After that, monetization
+
+00:08:49.260 --> 00:08:53.760
+for creators in the form of the paywall came
+up in around 2017, pivoting the content to
+
+00:08:53.760 --> 00:08:59.020
+a sort of… each man his own New York Times
+op-ed writer, dogshit takes optional.
+
+00:08:59.020 --> 00:09:04.870
+What needs to be considered is that Medium
+exists to pay people. Let me put it this way.
+
+00:09:04.870 --> 00:09:10.620
+Writers existed before Medium. Youtubers didn’t
+exist before Youtube. Yes, people made videos
+
+00:09:10.620 --> 00:09:15.450
+prior to youtube, but first and foremost the
+point of youtube originally was ease of hosting,
+
+00:09:15.450 --> 00:09:19.870
+which led to a new type of platform.
+In part, Medium has that angle too: it is
+
+00:09:19.870 --> 00:09:24.630
+a platform for articles, no need to learn
+how to use Wordpress or make your own website,
+
+00:09:24.630 --> 00:09:29.230
+SPEAKING OF MAKING YOUR OWN WEBSITE, nobody
+sponsors me. but I bet you thought of someone,
+
+00:09:29.230 --> 00:09:33.540
+because you’re on youtube and I said “making
+your own website.” Kinda scary isn’t it.
+
+00:09:33.540 --> 00:09:37.089
+The new generation of corporate jingles being
+etched in your brain.
+
+00:09:37.089 --> 00:09:41.500
+Uhh. I hope several people didn’t just click
+away trying to find where the ad ends, cause
+
+00:09:41.500 --> 00:09:44.200
+there isn’t one…
+Medium’s main value and primary goal is
+
+00:09:44.200 --> 00:09:48.910
+in being a place where writers can monetize
+their content. It is, in effect, democratizing
+
+00:09:48.910 --> 00:09:54.330
+not access to writing, but access to deploying
+a paywall. That paywall is the hybrid element,
+
+00:09:54.330 --> 00:09:58.779
+taking blogs and merging them with a tactic
+borrowed from traditional media outlets, themselves
+
+00:09:58.779 --> 00:10:01.390
+archaically positioned on the modern internet.
+
+00:10:01.390 --> 00:10:04.800
+With that in mind, let’s talk about paying
+in, and paying out.
+
+00:10:04.800 --> 00:10:10.329
+Hmm. Okay well the old link to how payout
+works and the site premise is gone, and the
+
+00:10:10.329 --> 00:10:14.779
+new one just says “A portion of your membership
+will directly support the writers and thinkers
+
+00:10:14.779 --> 00:10:20.190
+you read the most” with no elaboration.
+From my memory this is how it worked…at
+
+00:10:20.190 --> 00:10:25.630
+least at some point: For a monthly or upfront
+fee, users get to circumvent the paywall.
+
+00:10:25.630 --> 00:10:30.050
+A portion of the money collected from said
+fee is put into a creator fund, kind of like
+
+00:10:30.050 --> 00:10:34.829
+how shorts work on youtube, if you’re familiar.
+Then, the pay is portioned out each month
+
+00:10:34.829 --> 00:10:40.290
+according to not views, not visits, but how
+many likes, called kudos, an article gets
+
+00:10:40.290 --> 00:10:44.670
+*from paying members*
+In effect, this means the free-to-read visitors
+
+00:10:44.670 --> 00:10:50.620
+using up one of their 5 freebies cannot contribute
+to payout in any manner beyond the psychological.
+
+00:10:50.620 --> 00:10:55.320
+The way it was explained, again to my memory,
+was that paying members were essentially assigning
+
+00:10:55.320 --> 00:11:00.250
+a portion of their pay-in to an article for
+every kudos they gave it. It must be noted
+
+00:11:00.250 --> 00:11:04.720
+here that readers can give up to 50 kudos
+to a single article. There is no finite pool
+
+00:11:04.720 --> 00:11:08.860
+of kudos to give out in a month. They’re
+not like casino chips with a static value.
+
+00:11:08.860 --> 00:11:13.639
+The worth of a kudos is relative to the amount
+of them divvied out. This allows for some
+
+00:11:13.639 --> 00:11:18.180
+manner of granular-satisfaction spending.
+In theory, if I have a membership and I give
+
+00:11:18.180 --> 00:11:23.930
+one article a single kudo and no other articles
+any, that article’s writer will get my whole
+
+00:11:23.930 --> 00:11:28.980
+prize share. If I give one article 50 and
+another 50, they’re both splitting it evenly.
+
+00:11:28.980 --> 00:11:33.420
+If I give 20 articles 50 kudos, the split
+is, again, even.
+
+00:11:33.420 --> 00:11:38.380
+My suspicion is that many medium subscribers
+are medium contributors. In one sense, this
+
+00:11:38.380 --> 00:11:43.120
+makes perfect sense, people who are on the
+platform will consume on platform. It’s
+
+00:11:43.120 --> 00:11:48.389
+a generalized hobby space in the way Youtube
+is, but with a narrower reach. As such, the
+
+00:11:48.389 --> 00:11:53.209
+platform is inhabited proportionally, by a
+larger host of consumers who are themselves
+
+00:11:53.209 --> 00:11:54.670
+creators.
+
+00:11:54.670 --> 00:11:58.839
+If my suspicion is right, it would go pretty
+far towards explaining the nature of content
+
+00:11:58.839 --> 00:11:59.839
+on the platform:
+
+00:11:59.839 --> 00:12:04.230
+A culture exists on the site of writing articles–
+of course behind the paywall– geared solely
+
+00:12:04.230 --> 00:12:09.260
+to be advice on how to “make it” on the
+platform. As we’ll see later, this is not
+
+00:12:09.260 --> 00:12:14.570
+an uncommon dynamic. The more generalized
+content has its own similar vibe.
+
+00:12:14.570 --> 00:12:18.899
+In theory, the content of the site could have
+taken on any shape, but instead there’s
+
+00:12:18.899 --> 00:12:24.120
+a looming productivity cult.
+It may just be my experience, subscribed as
+
+00:12:24.120 --> 00:12:29.170
+I was to the tags of “writing” and “freelancing”
+among the others that were “non-work interests”,
+
+00:12:29.170 --> 00:12:33.751
+but the majority of articles put in front
+of me were paywalled guides to success. Going
+
+00:12:33.751 --> 00:12:37.959
+on the site incognito, the suggestions are
+still productivity geared.
+
+00:12:37.959 --> 00:12:42.269
+Here’s another question: when does one decide
+to put up the wall?
+
+00:12:42.269 --> 00:12:45.800
+When people have something important to say,
+there’s arguments in either direction for
+
+00:12:45.800 --> 00:12:50.600
+if they ought paywall it. Shouldn’t people
+earn for their time and effort? Say my story
+
+00:12:50.600 --> 00:12:55.199
+about an important issue everyone should know
+about goes viral, shouldn’t I get something
+
+00:12:55.199 --> 00:13:01.010
+for my trouble? And besides, the paywall has
+five free uses a month, it’s not *really*
+
+00:13:01.010 --> 00:13:03.420
+blocking anyone from seeing my critical information…right?
+
+00:13:03.420 --> 00:13:08.040
+There’s a lot to be said, and indeed likely
+a lot of ink spilled about the effects of
+
+00:13:08.040 --> 00:13:12.769
+digital journalism colliding with a need to
+keep the lights on, or profit. For an example
+
+00:13:12.769 --> 00:13:16.779
+of this, I merely cite the way some articles
+with information pertinent to things like
+
+00:13:16.779 --> 00:13:22.580
+elections or the global pandemic were paywalled
+by big journalism sites. But is that not fair?
+
+00:13:22.580 --> 00:13:27.770
+Was creating the article not labor? How else
+do we cover the cost of producing the article,
+
+00:13:27.770 --> 00:13:32.720
+of doing the research, of hosting the information?
+Well, as some of you might already be aware,
+
+00:13:32.720 --> 00:13:36.860
+that argument has some holes, biggest of which
+being that running a for-profit newspaper,
+
+00:13:36.860 --> 00:13:41.980
+or even running one at-loss is not always
+altruistic.
+
+00:13:41.980 --> 00:13:47.520
+Medium at certain points has paid famous people
+to post on their platform, behind the paywall,
+
+00:13:47.520 --> 00:13:49.410
+another tactic that will return.
+
+00:13:49.410 --> 00:13:55.050
+The core reason to be on Medium *is* that
+possible paywall, that angle of payout, and
+
+00:13:55.050 --> 00:14:00.430
+it’s no more altruistic of Medium to “create
+the opportunity” than anything the Gig economy
+
+00:14:00.430 --> 00:14:01.430
+promises.
+
+00:14:01.430 --> 00:14:06.250
+As far as the cultural impact goes, note that
+there is genuine content on Medium, but there’s
+
+00:14:06.250 --> 00:14:12.180
+also the scars of incentivizing a particular
+culture, of clickbait headlines, of churning
+
+00:14:12.180 --> 00:14:17.940
+out content, of feigned empowerment. The paywall
+isn’t a “pay people what their worth!”
+
+00:14:17.940 --> 00:14:21.140
+initiative, it’s an earnings scheme.
+
+00:14:21.140 --> 00:14:26.810
+But what if there was a much worse monetization
+scheme for writing articles? I mean, sure
+
+00:14:26.810 --> 00:14:31.170
+it’s a bit hard to imagine, but like…
+what if we combined two radically awful ideas,
+
+00:14:31.170 --> 00:14:36.190
+like say the unusable Fandom wikis but for
+regular wikipedia content and cryptocurrency
+
+00:14:36.190 --> 00:14:39.610
+Web 3.0 decentralization fantasies.
+
+00:14:39.610 --> 00:14:43.670
+Well we don’t need to imagine, cause it
+was real and I was personally involved.
+
+00:14:44.769 --> 00:14:50.620
+I simply cannot begin to tell you how excited
+I am to have an excuse to share this story.
+
+00:14:50.620 --> 00:14:55.430
+Okay so back in like 2017 I was working in
+a bar and a coworker of mine who was a relatively
+
+00:14:55.430 --> 00:15:00.399
+early adopter of Cryptocurrency—he’d been
+at it for years and, again this was 2017–
+
+00:15:00.399 --> 00:15:06.279
+told me about this new platform that was doing
+a writing contest with a cash payout. Kinda.
+
+00:15:06.279 --> 00:15:12.080
+The platform was planned to be, and explained
+to me as “decentralized wikipedia” which…we’ll
+
+00:15:12.080 --> 00:15:16.910
+come back to shortly. The contest was to write
+the first wiki articles for the platform and
+
+00:15:16.910 --> 00:15:21.820
+the top three articles got a prize, paid in
+Ethereum, a then mid-sized competitor to Bitcoin
+
+00:15:21.820 --> 00:15:25.320
+but not as entrenched in the crypto space
+as it is now.
+
+00:15:25.320 --> 00:15:29.079
+For the curious this isn’t about to become
+a cryptocurrency rant, though I probably do
+
+00:15:29.079 --> 00:15:33.889
+have one in me. It is, however, important
+to understand the culture this site was designed
+
+00:15:33.889 --> 00:15:38.600
+in and around. I’m not gonna go too deep
+into that here, and while I would suggest
+
+00:15:38.600 --> 00:15:43.130
+Dan Olson’s Line Goes Up to get a sense
+of it all, the videos is hours long and you’d
+
+00:15:43.130 --> 00:15:46.829
+forget to come back here. Also chances are
+you’ve already seen it.
+
+00:15:46.829 --> 00:15:51.709
+My friend was very “in” on the idea of
+the platform, called Lunyr, and planned to
+
+00:15:51.709 --> 00:15:56.600
+buy the token— which mind you is like buying
+stock in a company, particularly an initial
+
+00:15:56.600 --> 00:16:02.170
+public offering– not like buying a digital
+currency in this case. He fully believed in
+
+00:16:02.170 --> 00:16:08.589
+this company and their plan. I was…skeptical,
+but I mean, maybe there was something to it,
+
+00:16:08.589 --> 00:16:12.350
+so I sent something in and was part of the
+community for a little while.
+
+00:16:12.350 --> 00:16:16.661
+So what was the plan?
+Well, the short version is, as I said, a decentralized
+
+00:16:16.661 --> 00:16:21.620
+wikipedia. But, wikipedia famously doesn’t
+make money unless it’s doing that fun little
+
+00:16:21.620 --> 00:16:27.399
+guilt trip donation drive at the top. Lunyr
+wanted to have ads. In fact, that was a selling
+
+00:16:27.399 --> 00:16:31.920
+point, because Lunyr itself and investors
+weren’t the only ones poised to make money.
+
+00:16:31.920 --> 00:16:36.940
+They wanted to offer an aggressive meritocratic
+earning opportunity with their platform. Articles
+
+00:16:36.940 --> 00:16:41.060
+would get ad revenue for clicks. And, I know
+I’ve implied this already, (or outright
+
+00:16:41.060 --> 00:16:46.079
+said it) but these articles are meant to be
+wikipedia style articles, not recipe blogs
+
+00:16:46.079 --> 00:16:51.200
+or news articles or whatever. But the idea
+is also to write an article that rakes in
+
+00:16:51.200 --> 00:16:52.610
+views. Hmm.
+
+00:16:52.610 --> 00:16:56.410
+So the goal becomes writing the best article,
+winning the marketplace of ideas, and getting
+
+00:16:56.410 --> 00:17:00.579
+the most views. There’s a lot wrong with
+how this model shakes out and I’m sure some
+
+00:17:00.579 --> 00:17:06.089
+of it feels immediately apparent. For one,
+topics. Writing the article on some obscure
+
+00:17:06.089 --> 00:17:10.900
+Irish poet from the 18th century might be
+a non-competitive space, but it’s also not
+
+00:17:10.900 --> 00:17:15.050
+likely to get many clicks, the incentive to
+write about things that aren’t already common
+
+00:17:15.050 --> 00:17:19.280
+knowledge isn’t really there. And as for
+making sure articles are written well and
+
+00:17:19.280 --> 00:17:23.589
+not just made up unsourced nonsense, well,
+we’ll get more into it later, but for now
+
+00:17:23.589 --> 00:17:29.380
+just know that there were intended to be self-deputized
+subject experts who vetted things.
+
+00:17:29.380 --> 00:17:33.799
+The incentive to write these things at all
+is dependent on pay. That’s the short version.
+
+00:17:33.799 --> 00:17:38.640
+The monetary incentive made this immediately
+an untenable trainwreck.
+
+00:17:38.640 --> 00:17:41.940
+And people… uhh
+Didn’t seem to get what the whole site was
+
+00:17:41.940 --> 00:17:43.710
+even meant to be.
+
+00:17:43.710 --> 00:17:47.679
+This really is at least half-tangential but
+it’s too funny to not mention.
+
+00:17:47.679 --> 00:17:53.809
+Wiki-style articles. That’s the intent,
+yeah. Easy to understand, even if the “decentralized”
+
+00:17:53.809 --> 00:17:58.291
+lingo flies over your head, even if the connection
+to the blockchain stuff makes no sense, the
+
+00:17:58.291 --> 00:18:01.270
+“wikipedia” part should still click.
+
+00:18:01.270 --> 00:18:05.020
+The submissions they got, however, and I know
+this from seeing what articles came up on
+
+00:18:05.020 --> 00:18:10.990
+day one, were more like… bad Medium posts.
+One I saw and distinctly remember was “Why
+
+00:18:10.990 --> 00:18:16.419
+do women date jerks?” which, after “review”
+was requested to be reformatted to sound more
+
+00:18:16.419 --> 00:18:21.250
+like an academic article and renamed itself
+to “the jerkboy theory”...
+
+00:18:21.250 --> 00:18:24.670
+Continuing that trend, lots of the content
+on the site was what you might expect from
+
+00:18:24.670 --> 00:18:29.850
+the culture of the crypto community, even
+as far back as 2017. So while that one article
+
+00:18:29.850 --> 00:18:35.060
+was basically a retooled rant about how “women
+only date assholes”, it was hardly alone.
+
+00:18:35.060 --> 00:18:39.540
+There was another filled with Pick up artist
+dating tips. And another one I saw was about
+
+00:18:39.540 --> 00:18:44.190
+“FEMALE SEXUAL HYPERGAMY”
+Almost all the articles I saw were either
+
+00:18:44.190 --> 00:18:49.470
+slightly veiled redpill interests or literally
+about the crypto community itself, like articles
+
+00:18:49.470 --> 00:18:54.800
+about Etherium or coins or whatever.
+This is no longer tangential, because it played
+
+00:18:54.800 --> 00:18:59.830
+a hefty part in the site’s downfall as well.
+The site wanted to replace wikipedia and terrible
+
+00:18:59.830 --> 00:19:04.080
+business model aside, it presumed it could
+farm out all the content generation to users,
+
+00:19:04.080 --> 00:19:08.430
+and that somehow this would produce a rounded
+and totalizing pool of information.
+
+00:19:08.430 --> 00:19:13.510
+Based on the incentives, on paper, they thought
+users would rush to stake writing The Winston
+
+00:19:13.510 --> 00:19:17.510
+Churchill article, and that, presumably once
+the big known topics were covered, people
+
+00:19:17.510 --> 00:19:22.000
+would go for more obscure ones, trying to
+claim more and more “real estate” so to
+
+00:19:22.000 --> 00:19:24.490
+speak.
+My clever idea in all this was that it would
+
+00:19:24.490 --> 00:19:29.750
+be very smart to twist articles one writes
+to always have an undue amount of hyperlinks
+
+00:19:29.750 --> 00:19:32.059
+to other articles you made.
+
+00:19:32.059 --> 00:19:38.280
+So, say you wrote the article on WW1, a HUGE
+topic. Not only would this be a popular search,
+
+00:19:38.280 --> 00:19:43.240
+but it would also provide branches to *tons*
+of other topics. So what if you just also
+
+00:19:43.240 --> 00:19:47.750
+happened to corner all those topics too, rushing
+to fill in every possible hyperlink with an
+
+00:19:47.750 --> 00:19:51.880
+article that you made?
+That’s going to shape content. And moderation
+
+00:19:51.880 --> 00:19:56.760
+was unlikely to target an article for including
+superfluous hyperlinks… because….
+
+00:19:56.760 --> 00:19:59.400
+Well let’s talk about moderation.
+
+00:19:59.400 --> 00:20:03.419
+Moderation was also expected to be farmed
+out. Or more accurately, it was meant to be
+
+00:20:03.419 --> 00:20:08.500
+self-evident, done by the community, and in
+the community’s own interests to moderate.
+
+00:20:08.500 --> 00:20:14.361
+Like… some kind of hyper-individuallist
+community effort? I dunno, in truth this whole
+
+00:20:14.361 --> 00:20:18.590
+thing feels like a case study in how ancap
+communities cannot function.
+
+00:20:18.590 --> 00:20:23.040
+In terms of moderating for quality there was
+only one approach and it had a simply massive
+
+00:20:23.040 --> 00:20:26.880
+blindspot.
+The quality of articles would be self-correcting
+
+00:20:26.880 --> 00:20:31.600
+because the best articles would win in the
+marketplace of ideas and get the clicks they
+
+00:20:31.600 --> 00:20:32.600
+deserve.
+
+00:20:32.600 --> 00:20:34.790
+Okay actually there’s like four blindspots
+there…
+
+00:20:34.790 --> 00:20:39.410
+Let’s run through that one again. “The
+Quality of articles would be self correcting
+
+00:20:39.410 --> 00:20:44.420
+because the best articles would win in the
+marketplace of ideas and get the clicks they
+
+00:20:44.420 --> 00:20:48.420
+deserve.”
+Okay, uhh, problem one. I’m not on wikipedia
+
+00:20:48.420 --> 00:20:53.190
+sorting articles by number of citations or
+how compelling the writing is, I’m there
+
+00:20:53.190 --> 00:20:57.280
+trying to learn what the fuck this band everyone
+keeps mentioning is all about.
+
+00:20:57.280 --> 00:21:02.980
+Two is that they hoped to incentivize touching
+up bad articles by “splitting revenue”
+
+00:21:02.980 --> 00:21:09.059
+from an article based on edits. Now fundamental
+to this, on some level is the blockchain element
+
+00:21:09.059 --> 00:21:12.770
+of it…or allegedly that was part of it.
+Because in theory there weren’t supposed
+
+00:21:12.770 --> 00:21:18.220
+to be edits. Stuff was etched in stone. But
+in practice they actually DID do edits to
+
+00:21:18.220 --> 00:21:23.140
+pages. I guess their idea was that users would
+write wholly distinct new better versions
+
+00:21:23.140 --> 00:21:28.919
+of other articles and replace the old one…
+acting as market competition, but for info
+
+00:21:28.919 --> 00:21:30.840
+on what clouds are.
+
+00:21:30.840 --> 00:21:35.150
+But that was highly impractical, so it just
+opened up to editing like we saw with the
+
+00:21:35.150 --> 00:21:39.320
+Jerkboy theory one. Sure, the old versions
+were somewhere on the blockchain, but that
+
+00:21:39.320 --> 00:21:44.500
+seems to solve a non-problem. Wikipedia doesn’t
+have famous instances of whole articles vanishing
+
+00:21:44.500 --> 00:21:48.760
+to censorship. Solving this non-problem just
+invented another one.
+
+00:21:48.760 --> 00:21:53.470
+Open seasons was declared on articles for
+producing needless edits and then having to
+
+00:21:53.470 --> 00:21:57.490
+somehow calculate shares of an article’s
+ownership. If I write the Winston Churchill
+
+00:21:57.490 --> 00:22:02.390
+article and it looks like this and someone
+comes by and adds to it making it look like
+
+00:22:02.390 --> 00:22:08.490
+this, do I still get a share? Keen eyed viewers
+might notice that I’ve literally copy pasted
+
+00:22:08.490 --> 00:22:13.220
+wikipedia here, and no, that wasn’t just
+to avoid writing a whole fake winston churchill
+
+00:22:13.220 --> 00:22:17.980
+article, it’s because this was ANOTHER LITERAL
+PROBLEM OF THE SITE.
+
+00:22:17.980 --> 00:22:21.990
+Three. People were copypasting things from
+wikipedia. The site runners said they didn’t
+
+00:22:21.990 --> 00:22:26.679
+like this very much, because they had to pretend
+to be better than wikipedia so obviously they
+
+00:22:26.679 --> 00:22:32.110
+would curate only the most smart boy, powerful,
+intellectual, and thorough userbase. This
+
+00:22:32.110 --> 00:22:36.299
+meant that, far less than the charge of plagiarism,
+the concern was that Lunyr’s information
+
+00:22:36.299 --> 00:22:42.419
+ought to be different somehow. I mean, that’s
+in the conceit. Decentralized Wikipedia didn’t
+
+00:22:42.419 --> 00:22:46.900
+just mean like… wiki on the blockchain.
+If anything, the blockchain obsession and
+
+00:22:46.900 --> 00:22:51.669
+the practical site function were wholly divorced.
+It meant something to the effect of “Wikipedia
+
+00:22:51.669 --> 00:22:56.510
+without meddling from “insert bad thing”
+I’d call this Wikipedia for paranoid libertarians,
+
+00:22:56.510 --> 00:23:00.659
+but Jimmy Wales, the founder of wikipedia
+is already a self-professed libertarian, so
+
+00:23:00.659 --> 00:23:04.659
+I don’t think there was some fear of his
+“secret totalizing control” or “political
+
+00:23:04.659 --> 00:23:08.490
+bias” as motivation for founding Lunyr as
+a competitor.
+
+00:23:08.490 --> 00:23:12.490
+Now, sidestepping the myriad of problems that
+presents in terms of authorial intent and
+
+00:23:12.490 --> 00:23:17.750
+historical accuracy and biases and all that,
+it’s still a fundamentally absurd issue
+
+00:23:17.750 --> 00:23:22.140
+to have. They presumed their userbase would
+act in good faith…which you should never
+
+00:23:22.140 --> 00:23:23.560
+do on the internet.
+
+00:23:23.560 --> 00:23:27.760
+They presumed that the users would prioritize
+the viability of the site and incredibly long
+
+00:23:27.760 --> 00:23:33.570
+term vision, a deeply long term investment,
+instead of embracing the core tenant of crypto–
+
+00:23:33.570 --> 00:23:38.020
+fast money. The site runners were so blind
+to this reality of their userbase that they
+
+00:23:38.020 --> 00:23:43.460
+were genuinely *mad* that the quality of articles
+was as shamelessly low as it was. Eventually,
+
+00:23:43.460 --> 00:23:48.510
+once the wikipedia copy-paste issue was “handled”
+by being made against the rules, people started
+
+00:23:48.510 --> 00:23:52.710
+just doing that with articles not in English,
+because literally nobody on their skeleton
+
+00:23:52.710 --> 00:23:56.200
+crew staff of 3 dudes living in LA knew another
+language.
+
+00:23:56.200 --> 00:24:01.080
+All this may have you wondering, okay but
+what were the actual mechanisms of content
+
+00:24:01.080 --> 00:24:05.179
+review? What does leaving it to the people/market
+mean?
+
+00:24:05.179 --> 00:24:09.350
+The way things passed inspection was that
+someone just looked at it, verified it, and
+
+00:24:09.350 --> 00:24:14.750
+got a cut of the future proceeds of the article
+for being its “quality reviewer.” Now
+
+00:24:14.750 --> 00:24:19.480
+uhhhhhhhhhh. The level of faith in the community
+on display here makes the “communism only
+
+00:24:19.480 --> 00:24:25.340
+works in an ideal world” thing right wingers
+say look like the utmost projection. The creators
+
+00:24:25.340 --> 00:24:30.250
+of the site left moderation to the community,
+with a monetary incentive for sheer volume
+
+00:24:30.250 --> 00:24:34.840
+of articles okayed, somehow presuming that
+people would take the task seriously instead
+
+00:24:34.840 --> 00:24:40.080
+of, AT BEST clearing articles for the sake
+of getting in on an easy revenue stream, or
+
+00:24:40.080 --> 00:24:45.210
+at worst and most easily manipulable– forming
+off-site groups that just circularly approve
+
+00:24:45.210 --> 00:24:47.890
+each other’s stuff no matter how dogshit
+it is.
+
+00:24:47.890 --> 00:24:50.130
+And so we circle back to language.
+
+00:24:50.130 --> 00:24:55.460
+Four. Translation. Translations were supposed
+to also structure their payout as a pyramid
+
+00:24:55.460 --> 00:24:59.740
+scheme. The French article on the decline
+of a woman’s value as she got older would
+
+00:24:59.740 --> 00:25:04.500
+have to pay a share of its earnings back to
+the original English one. In turn, of course,
+
+00:25:04.500 --> 00:25:09.059
+this led to people taking the actual articles
+that were up, and trying to “stake” foreign
+
+00:25:09.059 --> 00:25:12.210
+language versions by running them through
+google translate.
+
+00:25:12.210 --> 00:25:15.720
+Who cares if it’s bad? People won’t know
+that before they click on it, and it’s not
+
+00:25:15.720 --> 00:25:19.799
+like entertaining content where people share
+it around if it’s good.
+
+00:25:19.799 --> 00:25:24.070
+Cumulatively, we end up in a situation where
+there’s not really recourse to fix that
+
+00:25:24.070 --> 00:25:31.039
+or do quality control. Say I technically wrote
+the first article on Alex Jones in Tagalog
+
+00:25:31.039 --> 00:25:35.590
+by copy paste translating it. If someone goes
+in to fix my article, I still get a share
+
+00:25:35.590 --> 00:25:41.270
+of whatever their work amounts to, in perpetuity.
+This disincentivizes people from ever improving
+
+00:25:41.270 --> 00:25:46.100
+an article until there is literally nothing
+left to stake claims on. This competitive
+
+00:25:46.100 --> 00:25:51.760
+collaboration was untenable from the start,
+the monetization scheme was untenable from
+
+00:25:51.760 --> 00:25:52.760
+the start.
+
+00:25:52.760 --> 00:25:57.970
+All that aside, the worst hole in the business
+model is the premise itself: Why would I go
+
+00:25:57.970 --> 00:26:03.440
+to an incomplete website to seek my information,
+under the promise that this information is
+
+00:26:03.440 --> 00:26:08.960
+“decentralized”-- somehow presuming that
+1, wikipedia is centralized, which I guess
+
+00:26:08.960 --> 00:26:14.080
+is code for secretly run by Hillary Clinton
+or something, and 2, that a platform with
+
+00:26:14.080 --> 00:26:18.500
+literal monetary incentives would produce
+more objective high quality articles than
+
+00:26:18.500 --> 00:26:23.970
+a volunteer system. The concept was that it
+was “free from censorship” but when pressed,
+
+00:26:23.970 --> 00:26:28.539
+nobody could name an actual censorious thing
+about Wikipedia, and given that the articles
+
+00:26:28.539 --> 00:26:32.630
+that came out on launch were just like…
+bad incel talking points, I can only imagine
+
+00:26:32.630 --> 00:26:34.909
+what censorship meant to that community.
+
+00:26:34.909 --> 00:26:38.791
+This whole thing was like watching someone
+say “Let the free market decide” without
+
+00:26:38.791 --> 00:26:43.020
+getting that that’s just an empty platitude,
+as the market crowdfunds an initiative to
+
+00:26:43.020 --> 00:26:46.889
+have Mr Market Decider himself lowered into
+a vat of acid.
+
+00:26:46.889 --> 00:26:50.440
+In the end it was a terrible product with
+foolish goals, and a contributor-base who
+
+00:26:50.440 --> 00:26:55.720
+cared more about monetizing an idea than seeing
+that idea flourish… and yet it had enough
+
+00:26:55.720 --> 00:26:59.660
+of an earnest streak I can’t exactly call
+it a grift.
+
+00:26:59.660 --> 00:27:03.409
+That said it also certainly wasn’t free
+of the crypto cult culture, of systematic
+
+00:27:03.409 --> 00:27:08.620
+aggression towards anyone pointing out a flaw.
+A fear of fear poisoned people’s minds.
+
+00:27:08.620 --> 00:27:13.860
+The term “Fudding” meaning fear, uncertainty,
+doubt, was thrown around at any instance of
+
+00:27:13.860 --> 00:27:18.960
+a perceived critique. Naturally, this abject
+W for Free Speech enjoyers was not conducive
+
+00:27:18.960 --> 00:27:21.210
+to getting problems noticed or fixed.
+
+00:27:21.210 --> 00:27:25.779
+It’s like the toxic positivity of a video
+game hype train, but worse cause people think
+
+00:27:25.779 --> 00:27:30.100
+it’s gonna make them the next American Billionaire.
+I think I said something in the discord one
+
+00:27:30.100 --> 00:27:34.580
+time about how there was a bug, and got @’d
+by like six people over it.
+
+00:27:34.580 --> 00:27:37.920
+By the time I had remembered the site even
+existed and further cashed out what I had
+
+00:27:37.920 --> 00:27:43.720
+left of whatever paltry amount of their token
+I got, they had around 3000 articles up and
+
+00:27:43.720 --> 00:27:49.270
+the vast vast majority of them suffered from
+these aforementioned problems. The company,
+
+00:27:49.270 --> 00:27:55.110
+which may I remind you was literally three
+guys in an office, went dark in 2017-2018
+
+00:27:55.110 --> 00:27:59.500
+though I wouldn’t say it was a rugpull.
+Lunyr’s failure derived from incompetence
+
+00:27:59.500 --> 00:28:01.000
+not intent.
+
+00:28:01.000 --> 00:28:05.740
+In the end, it’s not exactly concrete proof
+of where monetization leads, nor is it free
+
+00:28:05.740 --> 00:28:10.669
+from the…cultivated culture of duplicity,
+haste, immediate-gratification, and outright
+
+00:28:10.669 --> 00:28:15.390
+grifting common to Crypto land. It does, however,
+still provide us with an understanding of
+
+00:28:15.390 --> 00:28:20.240
+how incentives have to meet with the userbase
+intent, and without sufficient control over
+
+00:28:20.240 --> 00:28:25.590
+users in other ways, the whole thing collapses.
+Further, it’s a strong example of how these
+
+00:28:25.590 --> 00:28:32.059
+platforms are reliant on incentivizing communities
+to exist and create for them. They needed
+
+00:28:32.059 --> 00:28:36.680
+the contest not to drum up interest, or as
+a marketing ploy, but to literally get their
+
+00:28:36.680 --> 00:28:41.990
+site populated with articles. I mean, what
+were all the losers gonna do? *not* post their
+
+00:28:41.990 --> 00:28:45.270
+thing right after and try and still score
+some cash?
+
+00:28:45.270 --> 00:28:49.620
+Can we learn anything from the way this site
+functioned? The intrinsic model of a crypto
+
+00:28:49.620 --> 00:28:55.020
+climate warps it a fair bit to being more
+about early adoption and revolutionary promises.
+
+00:28:55.020 --> 00:28:58.710
+So much is predicated on getting in at the
+ground floor, that the business model itself
+
+00:28:58.710 --> 00:29:03.380
+is hardly applicable to other sites.
+That said, the climate of crypto is a window
+
+00:29:03.380 --> 00:29:09.169
+into the logical endpoint of a hyper-monetized
+internet. Crypto itself exists with the promise
+
+00:29:09.169 --> 00:29:15.140
+of monetizing everything. That’s why there’s
+projects seeking to like… turn MMO grinds
+
+00:29:15.140 --> 00:29:21.870
+into earning potential. NFTs, by design are
+not only an art theft scam, but also, remarkably,
+
+00:29:21.870 --> 00:29:28.210
+driven by the idea one can monetize *memes*
+something we all take as famously having no
+
+00:29:28.210 --> 00:29:29.590
+ownership.
+
+00:29:29.590 --> 00:29:34.230
+To return to a narrower insight: Lunyr is
+a case study of how their incentive structures
+
+00:29:34.230 --> 00:29:39.620
+for generating content– or more correctly
+prompting user generated content, seeing as
+
+00:29:39.620 --> 00:29:44.960
+they didn’t make anything themselves, made
+the collapse inevitable irrespective of the
+
+00:29:44.960 --> 00:29:46.730
+broader crypto ecosystem.
+
+00:29:46.730 --> 00:29:51.290
+From this, we’re set to look at incentives
+more narrowly and we’re going to do so on
+
+00:29:51.290 --> 00:29:53.770
+a site that literally all of you are acquainted
+with.
+
+00:29:54.970 --> 00:29:59.110
+With youtube, a journey of sorts began for
+me, and while I’m sure it’s got as much
+
+00:29:59.110 --> 00:30:03.560
+passing similarity to the journey of others
+as it does moments of disconnect, it is my
+
+00:30:03.560 --> 00:30:09.630
+window into another intersection of monetization
+and a platform, one I had far less of a view
+
+00:30:09.630 --> 00:30:12.270
+into when I simply consumed on the platform.
+When I started out, it was a lonely thing.
+
+00:30:12.270 --> 00:30:14.049
+There was nobody I could really talk to about
+“work” struggles. Even when I found spaces
+
+00:30:14.049 --> 00:30:19.270
+of creators, it felt more like I was walking
+past communities or through their places of
+
+00:30:19.270 --> 00:30:23.210
+congregation, on a journey alone, rather than
+walking with them.
+
+00:30:23.210 --> 00:30:26.860
+I had to walk that Lonesome valley by myself.
+
+00:30:26.860 --> 00:30:31.610
+Early on I compiled a list of videos from
+various creators seeking to explain the process
+
+00:30:31.610 --> 00:30:36.669
+a bit, from Thoughtslime’s two or so tutorials
+on what to consider when doing youtube, to
+
+00:30:36.669 --> 00:30:42.250
+the odd Q&As of many creators where people
+had asked things about The Process– and
+
+00:30:42.250 --> 00:30:47.240
+to things less intended for the purpose of
+getting people into creation like Big Joel’s
+
+00:30:47.240 --> 00:30:51.840
+video on small creators– something that
+gave me direction, intended or not, on where
+
+00:30:51.840 --> 00:30:53.269
+to go next.
+
+00:30:53.269 --> 00:30:59.720
+From there, I gravitated to these “Small
+Youtuber” spaces, particularly the discords.
+
+00:30:59.720 --> 00:31:04.900
+I’m…alright at being present in online
+community spaces, so being in discords wasn’t
+
+00:31:04.900 --> 00:31:10.000
+particularly strange to me. What was strange
+was the way it kind of reminded me of Lunyr.
+
+00:31:10.000 --> 00:31:13.539
+Not in that it was a grift or whatever, and
+not that everyone there was just hoping to
+
+00:31:13.539 --> 00:31:18.169
+make a quick buck…but they were all there
+to make *something*.
+
+00:31:18.169 --> 00:31:20.809
+They wanted to Make It™
+
+00:31:20.809 --> 00:31:24.640
+And that came with its own culture– one
+I wouldn’t say translates fully to Youtube
+
+00:31:24.640 --> 00:31:29.809
+the platform, but it presents pretty plainly
+many concerns the platform plagues its creators
+
+00:31:29.809 --> 00:31:32.559
+with.
+Brushing aside the army of 14 year old hopefuls
+
+00:31:32.559 --> 00:31:37.250
+who join to take no critique themselves while
+loudly saying the system is broken because
+
+00:31:37.250 --> 00:31:42.160
+their 2 episode minecraft letsplay has been
+uploaded for 19 minutes and hasn’t cleared
+
+00:31:42.160 --> 00:31:45.799
+a million views…Most people were there to
+put in the work in some form.
+
+00:31:45.799 --> 00:31:50.820
+I don’t think the space ever got competitive
+or included bad faith advice as some form
+
+00:31:50.820 --> 00:31:56.179
+of sabotage, it was uplifting, but it’s
+uplifting in a “nobody wants to be here”
+
+00:31:56.179 --> 00:32:00.559
+kinda way. Less Crab Bucket and more… waiting
+to get adopted.
+
+00:32:00.559 --> 00:32:05.149
+If adoption required like… ample lifehacks
+and eye catching cool hair or something. The
+
+00:32:05.149 --> 00:32:06.480
+metaphor is escaping me.
+
+00:32:06.480 --> 00:32:11.610
+What I saw there was largely people trying
+to workshop things, figure out not just their
+
+00:32:11.610 --> 00:32:16.690
+craft, but the algorithm. When I later “graduated”
+to the “Partnered Youtube” discord, it
+
+00:32:16.690 --> 00:32:20.660
+felt like all the hustle elements of the culture
+were cranked up to 11. Now, there’s nothing
+
+00:32:20.660 --> 00:32:24.980
+wrong with playing the game, so to speak.
+It’s impressive that people are even collaborating
+
+00:32:24.980 --> 00:32:30.279
+and sharing how to “make it” on some level.
+Honestly, I kinda get why people fall for
+
+00:32:30.279 --> 00:32:34.250
+sigma male grindset stuff. Given the way that
+youtubers are basically all entrepreneurs,
+
+00:32:34.250 --> 00:32:39.890
+you’d think this stuff would be super popular
+here. In terms of how one “runs” a youtube,
+
+00:32:39.890 --> 00:32:44.910
+you have to put in tons of hours before it
+becomes “worth your time” financially.
+
+00:32:44.910 --> 00:32:50.080
+It’s very aspirational.
+But it isn’t how I hear most anyone in at
+
+00:32:50.080 --> 00:32:54.350
+least the parts of youtube I’m on talk about
+their channel. It’s something more reserved
+
+00:32:54.350 --> 00:33:00.100
+for the people who are, I imagine, yearning
+to be stars, thus the… yearning discords.
+
+00:33:00.100 --> 00:33:05.019
+There’s a few reasons for why even with
+a *left tube* that is very concerned with
+
+00:33:05.019 --> 00:33:11.919
+visibility and subsistence, few people fall
+into the grindbrain– one of which is gigantic.
+
+00:33:11.919 --> 00:33:17.250
+Among the smaller reasons is creativity and
+expression. Ugh. Imagine that, creativity
+
+00:33:17.250 --> 00:33:21.639
+is reduced to being a small impediment to
+hustle, rather than a counterpoint, so grand
+
+00:33:21.639 --> 00:33:26.590
+is the large hurdle. The creativity thing
+is really easy to explain: People make things
+
+00:33:26.590 --> 00:33:31.990
+cause they want to make them. That’s always
+going to be contrary to monetary incentive,
+
+00:33:31.990 --> 00:33:36.920
+even when they overlap. Passion pervaded even
+in those youtuber spaces, even when people
+
+00:33:36.920 --> 00:33:41.539
+were also talking about branding or falling
+into pits of gamification.
+
+00:33:41.539 --> 00:33:45.610
+While I was in the Youtube Discords, I almost
+felt like all the advice didn’t apply to
+
+00:33:45.610 --> 00:33:50.409
+me. At the time I debated if I was being stubborn
+about style, and sometimes I was, which is
+
+00:33:50.409 --> 00:33:56.110
+why I can see growth, in retrospect, that
+makes me wince, that I didn’t –for example–
+
+00:33:56.110 --> 00:34:15.649
+notice my audio was bad. But when I look back
+at the space I feel like it genuinely was
+
+00:34:15.649 --> 00:34:20.310
+ill-fitting advice for the side of Youtube
+I wanted to end up on. Advice about how the
+
+00:34:20.310 --> 00:34:25.520
+“first 50 videos are gonna suck” doesn’t
+really work for channels at my pace. Advice
+
+00:34:25.520 --> 00:34:31.079
+about uploading every four days at the exact
+same time doesn’t suit longer form content.
+
+00:34:31.079 --> 00:34:36.210
+People still had outlets for creativity, sure,
+but the grind took precedence. The goals were
+
+00:34:36.210 --> 00:34:39.310
+always reaching numbers, not people.
+
+00:34:39.310 --> 00:34:42.440
+As a brief aside:
+I don’t mean to sound dismissive, necessarily.
+
+00:34:42.440 --> 00:34:46.490
+Maybe there’s some stuff in there we could
+all do to learn. Sometimes I worry we might
+
+00:34:46.490 --> 00:34:51.099
+over-presume our own suppression and just
+stop trying to “play the game” even a
+
+00:34:51.099 --> 00:34:55.099
+little. Sometimes I worry there are ways we
+are out of touch. And perhaps I should only
+
+00:34:55.099 --> 00:34:59.200
+speak for myself here, but sometimes I worry
+that we value integrity more than the platform
+
+00:34:59.200 --> 00:35:03.320
+allows and aren’t pragmatic with our concessions
+in order to reach goals.
+
+00:35:03.320 --> 00:35:05.369
+But this video can’t be all worry.
+
+00:35:05.369 --> 00:35:10.431
+Another thing those Youtuber spaces operated
+on, beyond grind and an…individualist community
+
+00:35:10.431 --> 00:35:16.210
+was… some measure of mysticism.
+These spaces act as, whether they know it
+
+00:35:16.210 --> 00:35:20.619
+or not, cults of appeasement
+And their Gospel transcends them, to the whole
+
+00:35:20.619 --> 00:35:24.760
+of the site.
+The Algorithm is a capricious god to be flattered.
+
+00:35:24.760 --> 00:35:32.750
+Guides are made, remade, rituals discussed,
+debates formed around the nature of the machine.
+
+00:35:32.750 --> 00:35:38.710
+Less passion has gone into divining the cosmological
+significance of saints than that of the Algorithm’s
+
+00:35:38.710 --> 00:35:41.580
+nature.
+The Algorithm is kept obtuse by Youtube as
+
+00:35:41.580 --> 00:35:47.160
+a matter of practice, it is in their interest
+to avoid the very “gaming” most people
+
+00:35:47.160 --> 00:35:48.840
+implicitly seek.
+
+00:35:48.840 --> 00:35:54.130
+And in that logic, that which strives to answer
+the algorithm, a transformation occurs whereby
+
+00:35:54.130 --> 00:35:59.780
+opinions and taste become “best practice”
+and a “language” of content creation forms
+
+00:35:59.780 --> 00:36:07.140
+that is unintelligible to the viewers of said
+content. Said language is expressed in “objective
+
+00:36:07.140 --> 00:36:12.480
+quality notes” for thumbnails. Yes, thumbnails
+can be bad or lack readability but there’s
+
+00:36:12.480 --> 00:36:17.970
+nothing inherent in the human condition to
+the memetic prevalence of soyfacing or whatever
+
+00:36:17.970 --> 00:36:23.369
+the hell people call the gaping mouth feigned
+surprise thing. Yes, arrows are something
+
+00:36:23.369 --> 00:36:27.820
+we’re trained to look at, and then follow
+with our eyes, but I don’t actually know
+
+00:36:27.820 --> 00:36:30.980
+that it makes a video twice as enticing to
+see them.
+
+00:36:30.980 --> 00:36:35.579
+When Hideo Kojima “predicted memes” or
+whatever dorks attribute to him as “the
+
+00:36:35.579 --> 00:36:42.310
+point” of the Gene Meme Scene and MGS2,
+he didn’t mean wojaks or cat pics, he meant
+
+00:36:42.310 --> 00:36:47.630
+the way information is conveyed, the memetic
+conditions, stuff like the “language”
+
+00:36:47.630 --> 00:36:48.630
+of thumbnails.
+
+00:36:48.630 --> 00:36:55.230
+It’s a product of platform culture, regardless
+of it it works or is mocked…or both. Clickbait
+
+00:36:55.230 --> 00:37:00.630
+is, allegedly discouraged by youtube’s own
+rules, but said rules aren't using the colloquial
+
+00:37:00.630 --> 00:37:07.140
+definition of “kinda cringy predictable
+curiosity fishing” They *Want* you to do
+
+00:37:07.140 --> 00:37:08.140
+that.
+
+00:37:08.140 --> 00:37:13.140
+No, there’s a slight shift in how they define
+rulebreaking clickbait, towards being outright
+
+00:37:13.140 --> 00:37:18.349
+deceptive, something where the content inside
+doesn’t match up. But how is that determined,
+
+00:37:18.349 --> 00:37:22.630
+exactly? If Matthew Patthew doesn’t make
+a shocked face in his A-reel, poggin it out
+
+00:37:22.630 --> 00:37:27.540
+big mood, is it clickbait? What about tiddy
+thumbnails? I don’t think there’s any
+
+00:37:27.540 --> 00:37:32.370
+more quantitative evidence that tiddy thumbnails
+lead to people clicking off from a video midway
+
+00:37:32.370 --> 00:37:37.250
+than your average thumbnail. I don’t imagine
+people feel betrayed that there wasn’t bouncy
+
+00:37:37.250 --> 00:37:42.080
+bazonga content in the video titled “This
+GUY SOLD THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE TWICE”
+
+00:37:42.080 --> 00:37:43.810
+Bait might just work.
+
+00:37:43.810 --> 00:37:47.450
+But I would be skeptical of anyone who claimed
+to know for certain or that they could prove
+
+00:37:47.450 --> 00:37:48.450
+it.
+
+00:37:48.450 --> 00:37:53.260
+A lack of access to algorithmic knowledge
+is supplanted with what is, essentially folk
+
+00:37:53.260 --> 00:37:59.210
+practice backed up by loose science. We don’t
+know the line between superstition and feature.
+
+00:37:59.210 --> 00:38:03.880
+An example you might see on twitter is posting
+the link to a video in the replies, not the
+
+00:38:03.880 --> 00:38:08.750
+original tweet, because something something
+links are suppressed. These folk practices
+
+00:38:08.750 --> 00:38:13.920
+are sometimes localized to one community,
+and sometimes the product of… self-deputized
+
+00:38:13.920 --> 00:38:17.849
+experts whose claim to expertise is a subscriber
+count.
+
+00:38:17.849 --> 00:38:24.120
+A while ago noted Elon Musk reply guy Mr Beast
+gave the advice of making 100 videos before
+
+00:38:24.120 --> 00:38:29.859
+being a success. Beyond being a comical example
+of falling for a survivorship bias paradigm
+
+00:38:29.859 --> 00:38:35.010
+to ask the big youtubers how to get big when
+the real answer is “who knows” there’s
+
+00:38:35.010 --> 00:38:39.950
+something very funny to how his imprecise
+wording led to some guy, or…probably a middle
+
+00:38:39.950 --> 00:38:46.260
+schooler, really, in the youtube discord creating
+100 videos in an attempt to follow that advice.
+
+00:38:46.260 --> 00:38:50.900
+The Kicker here is that many of the people
+a step down in the “qualified to give advice”
+
+00:38:50.900 --> 00:38:55.720
+sphere are falling for that same bias. Where
+Mr Beast himself is just presuming he skilled
+
+00:38:55.720 --> 00:39:01.480
+his way to the top, the people looking to
+him as a case study have a different blindness.
+
+00:39:01.480 --> 00:39:06.270
+The Beast Observers, as I’ll call them,
+look at large channels, huge ones, and analyze
+
+00:39:06.270 --> 00:39:11.420
+relative success compared to eachother as
+though that data is unquestionably transferable.
+
+00:39:11.420 --> 00:39:16.210
+“This thumbnail with the pog face got a
+million more views than this video doing uhh…ahh
+
+00:39:16.210 --> 00:39:21.260
+the home alone face –so better keep poggin”
+“this title doesn’t have nouns and it
+
+00:39:21.260 --> 00:39:25.859
+did better so we can see that nouns are out”
+–these methods of analysis are woefully
+
+00:39:25.859 --> 00:39:31.660
+incurious focusing on current success patterns
+rather than the *rise* to that level. They
+
+00:39:31.660 --> 00:39:35.410
+make economists look like what economists
+think they are.
+
+00:39:35.410 --> 00:39:39.520
+These “analyses” from looking at huge
+channels to understand success presume and
+
+00:39:39.520 --> 00:39:45.050
+ignore too much to be objective. They presume
+an objective path at all. First and foremost
+
+00:39:45.050 --> 00:39:50.890
+on my list of massive blindspots is the unquestioned
+assumption in the analysis that from subscriber
+
+00:39:50.890 --> 00:39:55.130
+1 to subscriber 1 million the journey has
+the same rules barring an exception we’ll
+
+00:39:55.130 --> 00:39:56.130
+get to.
+
+00:39:56.130 --> 00:39:59.410
+In presenting the “data” how they often
+do, there’s a presumption that Mr Beast
+
+00:39:59.410 --> 00:40:04.810
+is earning the attention of 111 million views
+from scratch each time, that any and everyone
+
+00:40:04.810 --> 00:40:10.630
+could be enticed by the ultimate juicy thumbnail.
+There is, at once, an urge to understand youtube
+
+00:40:10.630 --> 00:40:14.380
+as a predictable machine, despite YouTube
+itself having a vested interest in that not
+
+00:40:14.380 --> 00:40:19.080
+being the case– and an urge to pretend everyone
+can “make it” with the right tactics.
+
+00:40:19.080 --> 00:40:24.000
+And while not as stark a zero sum game as
+Crypto, that cannot be true. Not only because
+
+00:40:24.000 --> 00:40:30.230
+creativity and ideas will always retain a
+portion of value, but also because Time –even
+
+00:40:30.230 --> 00:40:36.040
+shared across 2.1 billion people– is finite.
+The Attention Economy is very real.
+
+00:40:36.040 --> 00:40:39.490
+And that’s saying nothing about taste or
+preference or language. It’s like pyramid
+
+00:40:39.490 --> 00:40:44.190
+scheme exponential growth presumptions all
+over again. There is no way to entice the
+
+00:40:44.190 --> 00:40:48.410
+whole of the platform. Not every single person
+is a potential subscriber.
+
+00:40:48.410 --> 00:40:52.380
+Now, that’s not to disparage the actual
+success of these deputies. Some of their efforts
+
+00:40:52.380 --> 00:40:57.190
+may have been naive, but their results were
+very real, subscriber count in at least the
+
+00:40:57.190 --> 00:40:58.900
+tens of thousands.
+
+00:40:58.900 --> 00:41:03.280
+But the individual practices and beliefs were
+not what caught my attention the most in the
+
+00:41:03.280 --> 00:41:07.720
+end. The striking part, the thing that formed
+the Lonesome Valley, for me, was that these
+
+00:41:07.720 --> 00:41:11.300
+were communities built around wanting to exit
+said community.
+
+00:41:11.300 --> 00:41:15.520
+It was a space designed where everyone in
+it wanted to leave as soon as they could,
+
+00:41:15.520 --> 00:41:20.440
+seeking self-reliance and independence, to
+have their own communities later. It’s another
+
+00:41:20.440 --> 00:41:25.069
+“communal” space with individualist aims.
+Sure, people could network, but I don’t
+
+00:41:25.069 --> 00:41:29.619
+know how much that actually happened. One
+channel I discovered from the starter space
+
+00:41:29.619 --> 00:41:32.819
+is Shea’s Violin who I’m shoehorning in
+here with the hopes some of you will check
+
+00:41:32.819 --> 00:41:38.480
+out her channel. Supporting others, community,
+is something Youtube does the least to encourage.
+
+00:41:38.480 --> 00:41:42.780
+It’s something WE fail to encourage half
+the time, even though it’s important and
+
+00:41:42.780 --> 00:41:46.330
+effective.
+That’s, I suspect, an implicit element of
+
+00:41:46.330 --> 00:41:51.720
+collaboration in the space– that people
+collaborate in order to have an “excuse”
+
+00:41:51.720 --> 00:41:55.710
+to share each-other. I don’t know if that
+marks me as paranoid, or if I’m right, but
+
+00:41:55.710 --> 00:41:59.790
+I really do get the sense that there’s some
+part of it all that’s about having an excuse
+
+00:41:59.790 --> 00:42:04.690
+to mention another creator, not as payment
+for the service of working together, but to
+
+00:42:04.690 --> 00:42:10.990
+work together as a justification for citation,
+for name-dropping, for vouching. Building
+
+00:42:10.990 --> 00:42:15.569
+eachother up is the main tool we have to weaken
+the hold the algorithm has.
+
+00:42:15.569 --> 00:42:20.960
+In fact, there’s also a small collective
+trying to Kill God right now, called F the
+
+00:42:20.960 --> 00:42:22.109
+Algorithm.
+
+00:42:22.109 --> 00:42:26.790
+Now you may ask yourself if it’s relevant
+that I may have been featured on FtA as their
+
+00:42:26.790 --> 00:42:29.470
+monthly nepotism pick once, welllll.
+
+00:42:29.470 --> 00:42:34.900
+Really–and I do mean this–the reason I
+bring them up is to point at how there is
+
+00:42:34.900 --> 00:42:40.380
+concrete organization to circumvent the algorithm
+through community support, rather than bow
+
+00:42:40.380 --> 00:42:46.230
+to and be subsumed by its vagaries or sliding
+back down into a forced sense of individualism,
+
+00:42:46.230 --> 00:42:48.230
+back into the Lonesome Valley.
+
+00:42:48.230 --> 00:42:53.470
+The reason I bring up these Youtuber spaces
+and their counterpoint in F the algorithm,
+
+00:42:53.470 --> 00:42:58.119
+despite not being platforms themselves, is
+that they demonstrate how Youtube’s monetization
+
+00:42:58.119 --> 00:43:03.660
+culture ripples out, how it affects people
+even at the most entry of levels, creates
+
+00:43:03.660 --> 00:43:08.000
+“languages” of creativity, or…moreso,
+production.
+
+00:43:08.000 --> 00:43:14.870
+The creativity itself is a casualty to trying
+to be “picked up.” Uniformity begets best
+
+00:43:14.870 --> 00:43:21.770
+practice, best practice begets uniformity,
+so unto us all. In the language of youtube
+
+00:43:21.770 --> 00:43:27.100
+an Objectively Good thumbnail can exist. “Objectively
+Good Practices” exist.
+
+00:43:27.100 --> 00:43:31.930
+Hell, while making this video I legitimately
+debated excising the entire Lunyr section
+
+00:43:31.930 --> 00:43:36.559
+so I could market it as its own standalone
+video, one that could more easily be attached
+
+00:43:36.559 --> 00:43:40.760
+to discussions of crypto cringe, more easily
+offered as some manner of companion piece
+
+00:43:40.760 --> 00:43:42.380
+to Line Goes Up.
+
+00:43:42.380 --> 00:43:46.420
+Alternative to making it a punchy standalone
+bit, I would feel disingenuous making it the
+
+00:43:46.420 --> 00:43:51.619
+center feature of the title or thumbnail for
+*this* video. In turn, people won’t know
+
+00:43:51.619 --> 00:43:56.660
+to come to this video for a juicy crypto L.
+I’ve had to, in that, consider the integrity
+
+00:43:56.660 --> 00:44:02.670
+of making an exploration of monetization culture
+in one “succinct” video, or tearing out
+
+00:44:02.670 --> 00:44:08.590
+a chunk to use as bait on its own. That itself
+is the impact of monetization culture.
+
+00:44:08.590 --> 00:44:14.339
+In that same vein I debated the near hyperbolic
+positions of finding it either supremely tasteless
+
+00:44:14.339 --> 00:44:18.800
+or entirely to my point to mention patreon
+in this video.
+
+00:44:18.800 --> 00:44:22.940
+While I recognize having an algorithm and
+monetization culture itself are nominally
+
+00:44:22.940 --> 00:44:28.099
+distinct and that all sites have algorithms
+(despite what some people think) we don’t
+
+00:44:28.099 --> 00:44:32.460
+see the same fretting over algorithmic impact
+on other sites unless there’s a flare up
+
+00:44:32.460 --> 00:44:37.690
+in consciousness about the presence of an
+algorithmic bias, like Facebook or Tiktok
+
+00:44:37.690 --> 00:44:42.740
+boosting fringe ideologies.
+There’s a reason “Youtube and The Algorithm”
+
+00:44:42.740 --> 00:44:48.500
+is a truly endless discussion, rivaling theology.
+
+00:44:50.640 --> 00:44:51.640
+I’m so F*cking stressed out from running
+my Pet Lizard’s Instagram account, I’m
+
+00:44:51.640 --> 00:44:52.640
+about to have A Nervous Breakdown.
+I told my therapist…
+
+00:44:52.640 --> 00:44:56.570
+She said “well take a break from your pet
+lizard’s instagram account”
+
+00:44:56.570 --> 00:45:05.770
+I said “I can’t! It’s my sole source
+of income!”
+
+00:45:05.770 --> 00:45:07.810
+[smoking intensifies]
+
+00:45:07.810 --> 00:45:11.910
+When I started doing youtube a year ago, I
+didn’t really have a sense of how to compare
+
+00:45:11.910 --> 00:45:17.119
+my experience to others, to get my bearings
+on when I was doing something right or wrong,
+
+00:45:17.119 --> 00:45:23.359
+to find feedback. I craved it, particularly,
+because I knew on some level platform success
+
+00:45:23.359 --> 00:45:30.160
+was not correlated to quality. There was an
+algorithm in the way of meritocracy. Nevertheless,
+
+00:45:30.160 --> 00:45:36.280
+I still held, and indeed may never relinquish,
+that sense of a looming… Question of Merit.
+
+00:45:36.280 --> 00:45:40.109
+At the end of the day, I don’t know how
+anyone who makes content on a platform like
+
+00:45:40.109 --> 00:45:46.130
+this could even believe in meritocracy. I’m
+not exactly pulling from a huge sample size,
+
+00:45:46.130 --> 00:45:50.530
+mind you, but just from my own work since
+I’ve started, it’s been incredibly obvious
+
+00:45:50.530 --> 00:45:55.990
+that Youtube has complete control over my
+success on the platform. You may say that’s
+
+00:45:55.990 --> 00:46:00.890
+hyperbolic. And maybe it is, but here’s
+my perspective on the matter: In a space where
+
+00:46:00.890 --> 00:46:06.570
+total appeal, that is, appeal to every single
+potential viewer is not my goal, all I can
+
+00:46:06.570 --> 00:46:11.960
+do, as a creator, is try to present myself
+in ways that either I find appealing, or I
+
+00:46:11.960 --> 00:46:17.051
+assume will appeal to an audience.
+Those aren’t entirely the same thing, and
+
+00:46:17.051 --> 00:46:21.630
+there’s a question raised about displaying
+one’s own taste in personality vs appealing
+
+00:46:21.630 --> 00:46:27.980
+to people and being a “character” but
+that’s a huge branching topic all its own.
+
+00:46:27.980 --> 00:46:32.790
+Mirroring that is another branch into what
+living under an algorithm is even like, and
+
+00:46:32.790 --> 00:46:37.441
+how a subculture of snake oil seminars has
+formed in that ecosystem, but I’ll leave
+
+00:46:37.441 --> 00:46:42.140
+that exploration to Super Eyepatch Wolf’s
+video linked below. There’s little I could
+
+00:46:42.140 --> 00:46:46.690
+add to that conversation beyond the glimpse
+at the creator discords I already gave.
+
+00:46:46.690 --> 00:46:52.770
+For now I want to center on a different element,
+the reason for the Algorithm: Audience.
+
+00:46:52.770 --> 00:46:57.539
+The audience we’re appealing to is and isn’t
+people. Of course, youtube’s algorithm,
+
+00:46:57.539 --> 00:47:01.640
+from what we know, really only cares about
+marketability and watch time. It promotes
+
+00:47:01.640 --> 00:47:05.950
+people who keep people on the platform for
+as long as possible, in range of their ads
+
+00:47:05.950 --> 00:47:10.900
+for as long as possible. But there’s something
+of a tension there. Quality is measured by
+
+00:47:10.900 --> 00:47:16.300
+quantity. It’s a framework of: “Let the
+free market of the attention economy decide”
+
+00:47:16.300 --> 00:47:21.079
+rather than the marketplace of ideas. There’s
+a lot of implicit assumptions about the value
+
+00:47:21.079 --> 00:47:26.369
+of a video in the valuing of watch time.
+While it would be easy, nay, expected for
+
+00:47:26.369 --> 00:47:31.520
+me to say this is all bad, this is ultimately
+the quirk that has led to the relative success
+
+00:47:31.520 --> 00:47:36.431
+of the Video Essay Genre in a world of tiks
+and toks. And credit where it’s due, the
+
+00:47:36.431 --> 00:47:40.849
+reason I keep to this medium, both in terms
+of consumption and production are because
+
+00:47:40.849 --> 00:47:47.100
+it is *the best* way to find and be part of
+thoughtful, topical, and radical conversations.
+
+00:47:47.100 --> 00:47:50.740
+Imagine telling literally anyone in the year
+2000 that there would be a video hosting site
+
+00:47:50.740 --> 00:47:55.119
+where people make a living not just giving
+quirky skit-laden rants about “[popular
+
+00:47:55.119 --> 00:48:00.180
+thing]” but in-depth analysis of global
+economic conditions. Imagine telling someone
+
+00:48:00.180 --> 00:48:05.550
+that even in Early Youtube days. You’d sound
+more out of touch than early Lunyr adopters,
+
+00:48:05.550 --> 00:48:07.880
+except for the whole part about being wrong.
+
+00:48:07.880 --> 00:48:12.760
+But remember. Just as Quality is measured
+by Quantity here, viability is measured by
+
+00:48:12.760 --> 00:48:17.550
+someone…or something, that doesn’t even
+watch the videos.
+
+00:48:17.550 --> 00:48:21.830
+James Stephanie Sterling of The Jimquisition
+has– I promise I’m going somewhere with
+
+00:48:21.830 --> 00:48:27.420
+this–, in the past, raised the point that
+game players are not consumers so much as
+
+00:48:27.420 --> 00:48:32.720
+cattle when it comes to how very large publishers
+work their business models. The customers
+
+00:48:32.720 --> 00:48:37.780
+are shareholders who are, in turn, catered
+to with large presentations not showcasing
+
+00:48:37.780 --> 00:48:43.339
+new and exciting games, but revenue streams
+and monetization models. That’s why despite
+
+00:48:43.339 --> 00:48:48.210
+being remarkably unpopular, something very
+few people really wanted in the games they
+
+00:48:48.210 --> 00:48:53.710
+played, NFTs sort of manifested in a manufactured
+consent kind of way and were just offered
+
+00:48:53.710 --> 00:48:58.960
+as inevitable exciting upcoming features,
+with the guise that players had demanded them.
+
+00:48:58.960 --> 00:49:03.859
+It was a new revenue stream, and it indeed
+had been demanded by customers, but those
+
+00:49:03.859 --> 00:49:06.150
+customers weren’t the players.
+
+00:49:06.150 --> 00:49:12.869
+And so unto Youtube and platforms like it.
+Advertisers are the customers, buying ad space.
+
+00:49:12.869 --> 00:49:18.750
+Creators aren’t creating content, as far
+as youtube cares, they’re creating ad space.
+
+00:49:18.750 --> 00:49:24.510
+Content consumers, in turn, are less customers
+to be appealed to as they are the responsibility
+
+00:49:24.510 --> 00:49:31.500
+of a creator to cultivate. I am but a free-range
+cow growing its own grass. There’s not even
+
+00:49:31.500 --> 00:49:34.270
+an effective illusion of hierarchy here..
+
+00:49:34.270 --> 00:49:38.240
+And, mind you, youtube doesn’t pay creators,
+technically.
+
+00:49:38.240 --> 00:49:42.059
+Let’s compare this model to two typical
+service style jobs in the US:
+
+00:49:42.059 --> 00:49:47.220
+A cafe job works like this: a worker puts
+together x drinks an hour each worth some
+
+00:49:47.220 --> 00:49:51.940
+small cost in materials and sells them. Profit
+for the business comes from the difference
+
+00:49:51.940 --> 00:49:56.869
+between the income represented by how much
+the drink sells for and expense in the form
+
+00:49:56.869 --> 00:50:02.099
+of materials and labor cost. Basic stuff.
+A bartender is the same thing, except we have
+
+00:50:02.099 --> 00:50:07.329
+to change the model for expense. There’s
+no labor cost. In a sense, because the bartender
+
+00:50:07.329 --> 00:50:11.390
+earns from the goodwill of patrons through
+tips alone, as a worker, they are, from a
+
+00:50:11.390 --> 00:50:16.140
+twisted perspective, renting the bar and its
+stock from the owner in order to put on a
+
+00:50:16.140 --> 00:50:21.680
+show of work. The cost of doing their work
+is simply everything they made from drinks.
+
+00:50:21.680 --> 00:50:26.490
+They may not bring their own tools.
+Youtube is somewhere between this. It both
+
+00:50:26.490 --> 00:50:32.040
+seeks the charity of patrons, and gives a
+cut of ads. We effectively rent the platform
+
+00:50:32.040 --> 00:50:36.700
+by paying half our earnings. In that way,
+pay is based on performance without pretending
+
+00:50:36.700 --> 00:50:41.590
+to be a commission model. You’re paid what
+you “earn” in that you are not paid if
+
+00:50:41.590 --> 00:50:46.980
+you earn them nothing. But at least you owe
+no rent for the space.
+
+00:50:46.980 --> 00:50:50.910
+Now imagine if a bartender’s boss, instead
+of just scheduling for good or bad shifts,
+
+00:50:50.910 --> 00:50:56.420
+had a lever they could pull to invite people
+to the bar and more or less invent a “good/busy”
+
+00:50:56.420 --> 00:51:01.710
+night whenever. Now imagine the bartender
+never knows when it’s gonna happen, if ever,
+
+00:51:01.710 --> 00:51:06.700
+and granted, no promises are made, but there’s
+always the idea. Instead of the normal system
+
+00:51:06.700 --> 00:51:12.150
+of taking a slow tuesday to earn a good friday,
+we are constantly working Sunday, with no
+
+00:51:12.150 --> 00:51:14.230
+idea if the crowd is coming.
+
+00:51:14.230 --> 00:51:19.089
+And it doesn’t seem to be based on quality
+of work, expediency, contentedness of guests,
+
+00:51:19.089 --> 00:51:23.890
+just quantity of drinks drunk. But there’s
+hints everywhere that maybe the lever gets
+
+00:51:23.890 --> 00:51:27.470
+pulled based on what outfit the bartender
+wears and what drink they’ve got listed
+
+00:51:27.470 --> 00:51:30.480
+on their sandwich board outside.
+More than anything, there’s a pervading
+
+00:51:30.480 --> 00:51:34.390
+mood that the boss might hate your music taste
+and just hasn’t told you yet, even though
+
+00:51:34.390 --> 00:51:38.020
+you still use the default bar playlist and
+radio safe edits.
+
+00:51:38.020 --> 00:51:39.099
+That’s youtube.
+
+00:51:39.099 --> 00:51:42.930
+To anyone who has spent more than one angry
+headline pondering what censorship truly is
+
+00:51:42.930 --> 00:51:46.451
+in the corporate age, it is no surprise that
+the dictates of content are not the First
+
+00:51:46.451 --> 00:51:50.290
+Amendment or “cancel culture” or anything
+beanie boy would decry, they’re…corporations.
+
+00:51:50.290 --> 00:51:55.540
+I almost want to go on a whole tangent about
+the massive sides of the human experience
+
+00:51:55.540 --> 00:52:00.210
+that are left out of discussion on platforms
+because of this angle, but I don’t want
+
+00:52:00.210 --> 00:52:04.059
+to risk demonetizing this video that’s also
+already approaching an untenable length. For
+
+00:52:04.059 --> 00:52:08.450
+just a singular example, look at what creators
+like Evie Lupine have to go through to talk
+
+00:52:08.450 --> 00:52:12.670
+about their content, the hoops being jumped
+through, and the eternal feeling of being
+
+00:52:12.670 --> 00:52:17.420
+“unsafe” from it all suddenly vanishing,
+of getting hit by the ban bat that’s so
+
+00:52:17.420 --> 00:52:21.190
+inconsistent and malleable it might as well
+be a pool noodle.
+
+00:52:21.190 --> 00:52:26.680
+Much, very much has been said on this topic
+before. It exemplifies the negative current,
+
+00:52:26.680 --> 00:52:31.420
+an impact of monetization culture, just as
+much as bait content, just as much as memetic
+
+00:52:31.420 --> 00:52:36.160
+language. The key takeaway from a space like
+YouTube is that its monetization, the way
+
+00:52:36.160 --> 00:52:42.020
+it has the potential to be a job has shifted
+the incentives for making content. To Corporate
+
+00:52:42.020 --> 00:52:46.299
+Youtube, the ideal would be that nobody even
+looks at or thinks about their analytics,
+
+00:52:46.299 --> 00:52:51.710
+“just, just create some things, make stuff,
+fill the space,” that’s their ideal. We
+
+00:52:51.710 --> 00:52:56.060
+shouldn’t even think of the fact the algorithm
+is there, just let it do its magic
+
+00:52:56.060 --> 00:53:01.530
+Instead, they’ve created a space where entire
+channels find success in trying to talk people
+
+00:53:01.530 --> 00:53:03.390
+through navigating the algorithm.
+
+00:53:03.390 --> 00:53:08.059
+There’s a paradox to those channels too,
+which I only note here because I love a good
+
+00:53:08.059 --> 00:53:10.940
+paradox.
+Say my channel is expressly dedicated to teaching
+
+00:53:10.940 --> 00:53:16.499
+people about the algorithm. Subscribe for
+more hot tips like these! Okay, now, the audience
+
+00:53:16.499 --> 00:53:21.420
+is only going to be youtube hopefuls. But
+how does one get that ball rolling? Who would
+
+00:53:21.420 --> 00:53:25.670
+listen to some guy claiming to have Cracked
+the Code™ on the algorithm, who himself
+
+00:53:25.670 --> 00:53:31.650
+only has like…300 subscribers, you know?
+They don’t *make* content that looks remotely
+
+00:53:31.650 --> 00:53:37.220
+similar to what any aspirants come to them
+for. They aren’t like you or any of the
+
+00:53:37.220 --> 00:53:42.359
+hopefuls. Using themselves as an example of
+what to do is absurd, because their audience
+
+00:53:42.359 --> 00:53:47.579
+is remarkably desperate, by design. I don’t
+say this to knock them, but to simply call
+
+00:53:47.579 --> 00:53:50.710
+attention to the way authority for these claims
+works.
+
+00:53:50.710 --> 00:53:54.559
+I watched a few hours of content from these
+kinds of channels to shore up my thoughts
+
+00:53:54.559 --> 00:53:59.050
+for this section and it wasn’t very worth
+it, at least for the sake of this video’s
+
+00:53:59.050 --> 00:54:03.261
+content. In terms of the advice they had,
+I learned what I’ve always known, which
+
+00:54:03.261 --> 00:54:08.000
+is that youtube is unsuited for “rapid pivots”
+as I appear to do on my channel, and that
+
+00:54:08.000 --> 00:54:14.180
+youtube deeply prioritizes growing within
+niches over reaching into many niches. Which
+
+00:54:14.180 --> 00:54:19.809
+makes sense. The reason larger channels, even
+in LeftTube Land can do pivots is because
+
+00:54:19.809 --> 00:54:23.840
+with their personality in effect becoming
+their own niche they are, effectively, too
+
+00:54:23.840 --> 00:54:27.130
+big to fail.
+By every tip and bit of advice they give,
+
+00:54:27.130 --> 00:54:32.220
+Hbomberguy should be an abject failure channel,
+and yet he’s managed to “crack the code”
+
+00:54:32.220 --> 00:54:37.000
+in an entirely different direction. It’s
+the kind of thing they, in salvaging authority,
+
+00:54:37.000 --> 00:54:41.750
+would incredulously laugh off as “It shouldn’t
+work but it does” like a poker player who
+
+00:54:41.750 --> 00:54:43.109
+failed to call a bluff.
+
+00:54:43.109 --> 00:54:48.680
+Regarding the content of the gurus:
+The advice is usually genuine, sometimes sound,
+
+00:54:48.680 --> 00:54:52.760
+and always more subjective than they can admit.
+One added feature of it all is that they often
+
+00:54:52.760 --> 00:54:58.130
+want to play up how much youtube is “constantly
+evolving” so that they can remake old guides.
+
+00:54:58.130 --> 00:54:59.319
+It’s a business.
+
+00:54:59.319 --> 00:55:03.960
+They’re a monetized channel that makes its
+money in ways that I can seldom call outright
+
+00:55:03.960 --> 00:55:07.809
+predatory, despite its intrinsically desperate
+audience. Some of these channels are also
+
+00:55:07.809 --> 00:55:12.170
+the only place I’ve seen discussions of
+what I can only call…content creator self
+
+00:55:12.170 --> 00:55:17.201
+care? Things like reminders of one’s own
+worth, that this is a job, that it’s not
+
+00:55:17.201 --> 00:55:23.410
+a reflection of self worth, that Youtube hasn’t
+exactly done you any favors. It’s almost…radical
+
+00:55:23.410 --> 00:55:27.069
+to see that in spaces so dedicated to grind.
+
+00:55:27.069 --> 00:55:32.490
+My point is that there is a, perhaps unexpected,
+kindness in these guide spaces sometimes,
+
+00:55:32.490 --> 00:55:38.160
+it’s not raw grift. But that gets washed
+out by where the brunt of content positions
+
+00:55:38.160 --> 00:55:39.160
+itself.
+
+00:55:39.160 --> 00:55:44.380
+The odd but entirely predictable prevalence
+of videos claiming to be a guide to the…exact
+
+00:55:44.380 --> 00:55:49.589
+minimum requirements for monetization paints
+its own picture. This stuff is exclusively
+
+00:55:49.589 --> 00:55:54.910
+a product of the monetization culture. Without
+the culture, yes, people would still desire
+
+00:55:54.910 --> 00:56:00.750
+to be viewed, but I think folk practice would
+outstrip guides. This stuff is pure business.
+
+00:56:00.750 --> 00:56:05.460
+It’s mysticism. It’s content that would
+be entirely meaningless without other youtubers
+
+00:56:05.460 --> 00:56:11.230
+and self-imagined “soon-to-be” youtubers
+to consume it. It’s bait and confidence,
+
+00:56:11.230 --> 00:56:13.430
+but that’s business.
+
+00:56:13.430 --> 00:56:17.349
+Looking back at it all, I want to say “Oh
+Brave New World” to this whole monetized
+
+00:56:17.349 --> 00:56:22.520
+platform thing, this world of creativity being
+a job, but the truth is… our expression
+
+00:56:22.520 --> 00:56:26.430
+has always been for sale.
+
+00:56:26.430 --> 00:56:30.450
+The monetization of content has always kind
+of been there, but in a more implicit and
+
+00:56:30.450 --> 00:56:34.359
+insidious way. Don’t worry this isn’t
+about to pivot into some lecture about the
+
+00:56:34.359 --> 00:56:38.540
+patronage of Early Modern painters or something.
+Also, before this point I’ve contained the
+
+00:56:38.540 --> 00:56:45.410
+conversation to sites focused on…well, “creators”
+figures intended to be the key content generators.
+
+00:56:45.410 --> 00:56:51.010
+But I want to expand our perception of what
+“content” is and, in turn, who does “content
+
+00:56:51.010 --> 00:56:52.010
+generation.”
+
+00:56:52.010 --> 00:56:55.780
+We’re sticking to the internet, and going
+back to 1994.
+
+00:56:55.780 --> 00:57:00.040
+Note that there is a lot going on in this
+essay to come, and I won’t unpack even most
+
+00:57:00.040 --> 00:57:05.349
+of it. I look to it here, for our purposes
+as a cultural artifact, one that illuminates
+
+00:57:05.349 --> 00:57:08.539
+how innate these issues are to the internet.
+_______________________________________
+
+00:57:08.539 --> 00:57:14.211
+it is fashionable to suggest that cyberspace
+is some kind of island of the blessed where
+
+00:57:14.211 --> 00:57:17.900
+people are free to indulge and express their
+Individuality.
+
+00:57:17.900 --> 00:57:23.059
+some people write about cyberspace as though
+it were a 60′s utopia. in reality, this
+
+00:57:23.059 --> 00:57:29.440
+is not true. major online services, like comp-u-serv
+and america online, regular[ly] guide and
+
+00:57:29.440 --> 00:57:34.970
+censor discourse. even some allegedly free-wheeling
+(albeit politically correct) boards like the
+
+00:57:34.970 --> 00:57:39.559
+WELL censor discourse. the difference is only
+a matter of the method and degree.
+
+00:57:39.559 --> 00:57:46.039
+i have seen many people spill their guts on-line,
+and i did so myself until, at last, i began
+
+00:57:46.039 --> 00:57:51.640
+to see that i had commodified myself. commodification
+means that you turn something into a product
+
+00:57:51.640 --> 00:57:57.099
+which has a money-value. in the nineteenth
+century, commodities were made in factories,
+
+00:57:57.099 --> 00:58:02.950
+which karl marx called “the means of production.”
+capitalists were people who owned the means
+
+00:58:02.950 --> 00:58:06.670
+of production, and the commodities were made
+by workers who were mostly exploited.
+
+00:58:06.670 --> 00:58:11.359
+i created my interior thoughts as a means
+of production for the corporation that owned
+
+00:58:11.359 --> 00:58:15.800
+the board i was posting to, and that commodity
+was being sold to other commodity/consumer
+
+00:58:15.800 --> 00:58:22.190
+entities as entertainment. that means that
+i sold my soul like a tennis shoe and i derived
+
+00:58:22.190 --> 00:58:27.150
+no profit from the sale of my soul…
+proponents of so-called cyber-communities
+
+00:58:27.150 --> 00:58:31.940
+rarely emphasize the economic, business-mind
+nature of the community: many cyber-communities
+
+00:58:31.940 --> 00:58:38.049
+are businesses that rely upon the commodification
+of human interaction. they market their businesses
+
+00:58:38.049 --> 00:58:44.089
+by appeal to hysterical identification and
+fetishism no more or less than the corporations
+
+00:58:44.089 --> 00:58:46.930
+that brought us the two hundred dollar athletic
+shoe.
+
+00:58:46.930 --> 00:58:53.890
+people can talk about cyberspace as a Utopian
+community only because it is literature, and
+
+00:58:53.890 --> 00:58:58.579
+therefore subject to editorial revision. [Prior]
+events plus another where a woman’s death
+
+00:58:58.579 --> 00:59:03.760
+was choreographed as spectacle online, made
+me think about what electronic community was,
+
+00:59:03.760 --> 00:59:09.059
+and how it probably really did not exist,
+except like i said, as a kind of market for
+
+00:59:09.059 --> 00:59:13.640
+the consumption of sign-value.
+
+00:59:14.789 --> 00:59:19.079
+The full essay is linked below. It’s interesting
+and briefly touches many things that are…
+
+00:59:19.079 --> 00:59:23.660
+outside the scope of our discussion. I do
+not intend to do a disservice to the questions
+
+00:59:23.660 --> 00:59:28.470
+it has for diversity, feminism, greenwashing,
+any of that, by not including them. I recommend
+
+00:59:28.470 --> 00:59:32.079
+it in future, and may even cite it again someday.
+
+00:59:32.079 --> 00:59:36.780
+I won’t spiral all of this into talking
+about the failed liberatory promise of techno-futurism
+
+00:59:36.780 --> 00:59:41.740
+and the internet, but I can’t help feeling
+like with the communal internet, we are looking
+
+00:59:41.740 --> 00:59:46.400
+at a revolution betrayed. Perhaps that too
+is for another day.
+
+00:59:46.400 --> 00:59:51.359
+From Pandora’s Vox, we see that questions
+of commodity, of production have been here
+
+00:59:51.359 --> 00:59:56.869
+longer than, I would wager, half of today’s
+prolific internet users have even been alive.
+
+00:59:56.869 --> 01:00:02.700
+In a sense, crypto is an attempted modern
+solution to this now age-old problem. It is
+
+01:00:02.700 --> 01:00:08.650
+a solution that required the intensification
+of the problem in the process of solving it.
+
+01:00:08.650 --> 01:00:14.130
+Crypto looked at how this manufacture of content
+for the Owners of the Internet in 1994 could
+
+01:00:14.130 --> 01:00:20.720
+be solved by simply placing the power of monetization
+in the hands of creators, of manufacturers.
+
+01:00:20.720 --> 01:00:25.140
+With that vision set, their eyes widened at
+the potential of making every single facet
+
+01:00:25.140 --> 01:00:31.119
+of digital existence an earning opportunity,
+of effectively seeing all things as production,
+
+01:00:31.119 --> 01:00:35.680
+without ever speaking in terms of labor. They
+have blurred the meaning of being “paid
+
+01:00:35.680 --> 01:00:40.300
+for one’s time” imagining the entirety
+of digital existence as transactional, which
+
+01:00:40.300 --> 01:00:45.200
+is, in some sense, like viewing every meal
+in one’s life by a dollar to calorie ratio.
+
+01:00:45.200 --> 01:00:50.230
+It’s practical to a point of misery, mathematical
+to the point of inhumanity.
+
+01:00:50.230 --> 01:00:54.750
+The execution of that ideal was far from successful
+and, in turn, more or less created monetary
+
+01:00:54.750 --> 01:00:59.980
+schemes we’ve always had. Most of digital
+monetization as a practice, from 1994 to now,
+
+01:00:59.980 --> 01:01:05.789
+has used some manner of democratization or
+empowerment as its rallying cry, giving YOU
+
+01:01:05.789 --> 01:01:11.020
+the Creators a slice of the pie, finally.
+But from Medium’s deployable walls to crypto’s
+
+01:01:11.020 --> 01:01:15.329
+feudal structures, to Youtube’s kingmaking
+ghost in the machine, we’ve gotten nowhere
+
+01:01:15.329 --> 01:01:16.660
+fast.
+
+01:01:16.660 --> 01:01:20.789
+Tangential to this, there’s also a means
+of monetizing our interaction not as a creative
+
+01:01:20.789 --> 01:01:25.430
+energy, but as a malicious little monsters.
+To that, there’s a video by SK the Crusader
+
+01:01:25.430 --> 01:01:30.880
+that goes into the Main Character phenomena,
+which has been with us since Humdog’s time.
+
+01:01:30.880 --> 01:01:36.710
+Ultimately, this is not a perfect and totalizing
+view of the past, but it is a prescient relic.
+
+01:01:36.710 --> 01:01:43.630
+In it, we see a disdain for imagined utopia,
+a critique, contempt, thus for the evangelizing
+
+01:01:43.630 --> 01:01:49.210
+utopians… who denied the monetization was
+a danger. It hearkens to the cryptospace near
+
+01:01:49.210 --> 01:01:58.980
+two decades early. But it also reminds me
+of someone and somewhere else.
+
+01:01:58.980 --> 01:02:04.210
+Okay okay, no I can’t find a way to pretend
+Runescape is a platform, even if it does have
+
+01:02:04.210 --> 01:02:06.450
+one hell of a shitposting community.
+
+01:02:06.450 --> 01:02:10.890
+We’re returning to the present day with
+Twitter, a place I never expected would become
+
+01:02:10.890 --> 01:02:12.470
+part of my job.
+
+01:02:12.470 --> 01:02:16.950
+Twitter is a bit of an odd addition to this
+mix because it’s inherently opposed to monetization,
+
+01:02:16.950 --> 01:02:21.589
+and not just in a “how do we even do it”
+kind of way like Vine was.
+
+01:02:21.589 --> 01:02:26.109
+I… I can’t believe I’m saying this but
+maybe more sites need to be like twitter.
+
+01:02:26.109 --> 01:02:27.510
+Or like it was.
+
+01:02:27.510 --> 01:02:32.510
+I won’t go too deep into the evolving story
+of Twitter’s…descent, both in that it
+
+01:02:32.510 --> 01:02:37.140
+is ongoing, and in that it’s covered ground,
+but here’s the shortest bit for the blissfully
+
+01:02:37.140 --> 01:02:38.380
+logged out:
+
+01:02:38.380 --> 01:02:43.049
+In a fundamental misunderstanding of how Verification
+is even given its value, Musk opted to turn
+
+01:02:43.049 --> 01:02:49.070
+it into a mix of paid status symbol, a membership
+system, and a soft…inverse paywall. There
+
+01:02:49.070 --> 01:02:54.020
+are supposed algorithmic benefits to having
+the verification, though nothing has materialized
+
+01:02:54.020 --> 01:02:58.760
+as of yet. If we know anything from exploring
+Youtube, it’s that preferential algorithm
+
+01:02:58.760 --> 01:03:02.980
+treatment is a dream for many.
+Following a slew of impersonation gags that
+
+01:03:02.980 --> 01:03:08.320
+cost advertisers collective billions in market
+cap value of their stock, and delighted the
+
+01:03:08.320 --> 01:03:13.520
+entire internet, all for $8, there are now
+allegedly plans to make company and government
+
+01:03:13.520 --> 01:03:18.119
+specific verification. The whole thing has
+been like watching someone walk backwards
+
+01:03:18.119 --> 01:03:19.869
+in a spiral.
+
+01:03:19.869 --> 01:03:24.349
+Inexplicably we have ended up with Musk being
+a hands-on moderator like this is some dingy
+
+01:03:24.349 --> 01:03:28.150
+DnD forum in 1994, or a contemporary crypto
+scam.
+
+01:03:28.150 --> 01:03:32.779
+There has, for weeks now, been talk about
+abandoning the platform. But there’s an
+
+01:03:32.779 --> 01:03:36.420
+important part of that which hasn’t exactly
+been hashed out.
+
+01:03:36.420 --> 01:03:41.720
+The reason “where do we go now” is an
+unanswerable question is because all the options,
+
+01:03:41.720 --> 01:03:47.090
+frankly, suck. Those of us on twitter know
+we are on an imperfect platform. And all the
+
+01:03:47.090 --> 01:03:51.231
+other ones are no better. People talking about
+Hive bring up that it’s “owned by an ableist
+
+01:03:51.231 --> 01:03:56.101
+and a trump supporter” as though that isn’t
+the case with 4/5ths of the venture capital
+
+01:03:56.101 --> 01:04:00.000
+funded tech landscape.
+Like seriously, good luck finding a site that
+
+01:04:00.000 --> 01:04:03.130
+isn’t owned by an ethically compromised
+billionaire.
+
+01:04:03.130 --> 01:04:08.100
+My personal solution is that we all just colonize
+academia.edu and set up accounts, shitposting
+
+01:04:08.100 --> 01:04:11.369
+in faux-essay, or critical response format.
+
+01:04:11.369 --> 01:04:15.079
+“Sir,
+I have reviewed your recent post with regards
+
+01:04:15.079 --> 01:04:22.200
+to the claim that Stalin “would have been
+an e-boy” with intense frustration. It is
+
+01:04:22.200 --> 01:04:28.390
+clear to me you lack either the seriousness
+or the vigor to make it in this discipline.
+
+01:04:28.390 --> 01:04:32.460
+Clearly, Bukharin was the one with e-boy energy.”
+
+01:04:32.460 --> 01:04:38.980
+Now, realistically twitter is no stranger
+to jokes and hyperbole about leaving the “hellsite”
+
+01:04:38.980 --> 01:04:43.549
+forever, but I want to, for a moment, take
+quick stock of what stands to be lost with
+
+01:04:43.549 --> 01:04:47.650
+Twitter, because I think it’s dawning on
+people that this sucks for a reason.
+
+01:04:47.650 --> 01:04:51.510
+Twitter is very helpful and effective for
+activists and outreach programs.
+
+01:04:51.510 --> 01:04:55.930
+Much has been said about the efficacy of organization
+and dissemination of information during the
+
+01:04:55.930 --> 01:04:57.530
+Floyd protests.
+
+01:04:57.530 --> 01:05:01.930
+For an even older example, think of the role
+social media took in the Arab Spring, you
+
+01:05:01.930 --> 01:05:06.210
+may likely know more about the presence Twitter
+had in that historical moment than the current
+
+01:05:06.210 --> 01:05:09.450
+state of a single country for whom it was
+historical.
+
+01:05:09.450 --> 01:05:14.390
+But those things are practical. They’re
+important, but not the focus of this discussion.
+
+01:05:14.390 --> 01:05:18.460
+I won’t go into every detail of twitter’s
+culture, as shitpositng is more universal
+
+01:05:18.460 --> 01:05:23.369
+than the site, but I will explain what features
+I think make it both a useful tool, a place
+
+01:05:23.369 --> 01:05:28.270
+of communities, and in some ways, resistant
+to advertisers and…until now, cataclysmic
+
+01:05:28.270 --> 01:05:29.380
+levels of monetization.
+
+01:05:29.380 --> 01:05:34.650
+Twitter’s features allow for relatively
+easy circulation of content, but also curation
+
+01:05:34.650 --> 01:05:39.010
+of one’s own feed. Where places like Tiktok
+just blast you with the next thing in a row
+
+01:05:39.010 --> 01:05:43.480
+and it can be like Russian Roulette for transphobia,
+twitter is more about following people than
+
+01:05:43.480 --> 01:05:48.599
+implicit ideas. There is an algorithm, to
+be sure, but ad-spaces are noted when they’re
+
+01:05:48.599 --> 01:05:52.779
+present, and other than the occasional slot
+dedicated to outright promotion or “based
+
+01:05:52.779 --> 01:05:57.970
+on your likes” content, most of the momentum
+behind discovery is social networking.
+
+01:05:57.970 --> 01:06:02.260
+Corporations know this, which is why there’s
+the existence of Brand Twitter, and brands
+
+01:06:02.260 --> 01:06:03.789
+trying to go viral.
+
+01:06:03.789 --> 01:06:07.050
+Likes and retweets come from individuals,
+and while you can’t exactly predict the
+
+01:06:07.050 --> 01:06:10.829
+extent of what a mutual might like, which
+could mean getting smacked in the face with
+
+01:06:10.829 --> 01:06:15.130
+er*tic zootopia art, for the most part it’s
+a curated experience.
+
+01:06:15.130 --> 01:06:19.829
+The other end of this curation is that muting
+and blocking accounts is easy and effective.
+
+01:06:19.829 --> 01:06:24.930
+You can block advertisers, no questions asked.
+It’s so mundane a significant feature I’m
+
+01:06:24.930 --> 01:06:28.130
+going to repeat it for emphasis: you can block
+advertisers.
+
+01:06:28.130 --> 01:06:32.869
+That may sound like it would cost twitter
+a lot of potential clients, but think of it
+
+01:06:32.869 --> 01:06:38.080
+as the obverse of self selection. Advertisers
+want their product shown to people who *are*
+
+01:06:38.080 --> 01:06:45.010
+interested, and if people who expressly *aren’t*
+block them, that’s not a “wasted” impression.
+
+01:06:45.010 --> 01:06:49.720
+Some people like to brag about how deranged
+their ads get because of their expert curation.
+
+01:06:49.720 --> 01:06:54.140
+Ads themselves are not rampant, which makes
+me wonder if Musk’s claim that Twitter Blue
+
+01:06:54.140 --> 01:06:58.340
+will give you half the ads is either true
+and meaningless, or they’re going to also
+
+01:06:58.340 --> 01:07:02.310
+crank the ad dial.
+…if there’s anyone left who wants to advertise.
+
+01:07:02.310 --> 01:07:07.150
+Either way, it is very funny to see a paid
+premium service that doesn’t even offer
+
+01:07:07.150 --> 01:07:11.940
+an ad-free experience. And again, we had the
+means to block ads we didn’t like, which
+
+01:07:11.940 --> 01:07:13.960
+could be…cathartic.
+
+01:07:13.960 --> 01:07:19.040
+Ads aren’t the nuisance of twitter, bots
+are. But bots are blocked just as easily and
+
+01:07:19.040 --> 01:07:24.020
+only really swarm to viral posts or ones that
+mention keywords. I took a video of finding
+
+01:07:24.020 --> 01:07:28.829
+an ad, blocking it, and then scrolling until
+I found another one and gave up after 2.5
+
+01:07:28.829 --> 01:07:34.390
+minutes because I was tired of speed scrolling.
+Note this isn’t emptier than pre-Musk. The
+
+01:07:34.390 --> 01:07:39.890
+only difference is that half the ads now are
+some Saudi image laundering program.
+
+01:07:39.890 --> 01:07:43.299
+Interesting to note here is that Musk’s
+paid verification system conflicts directly
+
+01:07:43.299 --> 01:07:47.940
+with this “block whoever” system. With
+this system of “negative curation” the
+
+01:07:47.940 --> 01:07:51.760
+incentive to actually be boosted isn’t all
+that strong when you anticipate selective
+
+01:07:51.760 --> 01:07:57.220
+blocks. Verified status won’t evade blocking.
+And in turn, as intimated when I said this
+
+01:07:57.220 --> 01:08:01.710
+became a new badge of shame to wear, people
+have already figured out that best practice
+
+01:08:01.710 --> 01:08:06.070
+will be to auto-block anyone that has paid
+verification, at once getting rid of the clowns
+
+01:08:06.070 --> 01:08:09.530
+willing to shell out and nullifying the signal
+boost they paid for.
+
+01:08:09.530 --> 01:08:15.320
+This, all together, is the impact of monetization,
+even in the negative, in resistance. Twitter
+
+01:08:15.320 --> 01:08:20.390
+is resistant to monetization because it gives
+the users some tools of curation.
+
+01:08:20.390 --> 01:08:24.600
+And even without those tools, Twitter doesn’t
+have the same capacity towards monetization
+
+01:08:24.600 --> 01:08:28.739
+as something like Youtube. Musk, bizarrely,
+said in one tweet that he planned to turn
+
+01:08:28.739 --> 01:08:33.969
+twitter into a youtube competitor, saying
+it would be partly financed by the verified.
+
+01:08:33.969 --> 01:08:38.509
+This would ostensibly adopt a somehow worse
+form of what Medium does with its content
+
+01:08:38.509 --> 01:08:44.110
+with a vastly more significant data footprint.
+He wanted to offer room for posting 40 minute
+
+01:08:44.110 --> 01:08:49.960
+videos at 1080p. That could be anywhere from
+300 mb to 3 gigs an upload. On top of that,
+
+01:08:49.960 --> 01:08:54.359
+Twitter does not have what I would call a
+navigable system. Tweets are meant to be flung
+
+01:08:54.359 --> 01:08:58.929
+into the aether and then forgotten about,
+not something as laboriously crafted and “shelf
+
+01:08:58.929 --> 01:09:01.130
+stable” as a youtube video.
+
+01:09:01.130 --> 01:09:02.969
+Let’s step aside for a second.
+
+01:09:02.969 --> 01:09:08.529
+A few months ago Patreon lost a LOT of money
+and had to fire a LOT of people over a failed
+
+01:09:08.529 --> 01:09:13.420
+attempt to break into tiktok. What Patreon
+did was throw a lot money at a few big tiktokers
+
+01:09:13.420 --> 01:09:18.219
+and *some* money towards mid sized ones, in
+an effort to promote patreon, to get the tikotkers
+
+01:09:18.219 --> 01:09:22.940
+to try it out and tell everyone to pay them.
+This misstep was colossal.
+
+01:09:22.940 --> 01:09:26.171
+For reasons other than this, I was already
+convinced that Patreon didn’t understand
+
+01:09:26.171 --> 01:09:30.650
+its own platform. But illustrative for our
+purpose is how they failed to understand Tiktok.
+
+01:09:30.650 --> 01:09:35.600
+They assumed that creation was the same on
+there as it would be on youtube, that fandoms,
+
+01:09:35.600 --> 01:09:40.469
+followings, support, was the same. They mistakenly
+assumed that just because a tiktokker had
+
+01:09:40.469 --> 01:09:45.029
+1 million subs and millions of views, it would
+be the same as hooking youtube audiences.
+
+01:09:45.029 --> 01:09:48.640
+They failed to consider the relative value
+people put into short form video content consumed
+
+01:09:48.640 --> 01:09:53.810
+in a slurry. Supporting creators from places
+like Youtube off-platform leads to the creation
+
+01:09:53.810 --> 01:09:59.530
+of things meant to endure– works.Tangible
+things. Not necessarily to be viewed as funded
+
+01:09:59.530 --> 01:10:04.130
+projects, but at least as something with presence.
+There are people who make longer form content
+
+01:10:04.130 --> 01:10:09.360
+than shorts for whom patreon would also be
+a bad fit, on youtube no less. They also tried
+
+01:10:09.360 --> 01:10:14.460
+to get Mr Beast to join patreon which is an
+even worse idea and I cannot afford to tangent
+
+01:10:14.460 --> 01:10:17.370
+into that.
+The point is that they saw that some youtubers
+
+01:10:17.370 --> 01:10:21.969
+use patreon and without thinking through the
+specific details of who, why, and how, they
+
+01:10:21.969 --> 01:10:25.280
+tried to slap that idea onto another video
+platform.
+
+01:10:25.280 --> 01:10:30.070
+Similarly, Musk failed to consider just how
+many people would be willing to pay for twitter.
+
+01:10:30.070 --> 01:10:34.270
+Sycophants came out of the woodwork to be
+like “it’s just $8” usually ending it
+
+01:10:34.270 --> 01:10:39.300
+with the new calling card of the least funny
+people on earth, the tilted cry laugh emoji.
+
+01:10:39.300 --> 01:10:43.290
+All that to say that Twitter is not in the
+hands of someone who understands twitter.
+
+01:10:43.290 --> 01:10:47.510
+Musk is redesigning the app around his own
+experience with having an abnormally high
+
+01:10:47.510 --> 01:10:51.970
+bot following and presuming that’s a shared
+experience for all users, he’s presuming
+
+01:10:51.970 --> 01:10:57.600
+his experience as the world’s richest man
+is normal. He’s listening to a cadre of
+
+01:10:57.600 --> 01:11:03.560
+dorks and somehow creating a publicly observable
+echo chamber. Twitter is, ostensibly, in the
+
+01:11:03.560 --> 01:11:08.460
+hands of those assuring the emperor his clothes
+look lovely.
+
+01:11:08.460 --> 01:11:14.500
+This leads us to the situation we were always
+in, Twitter, our space, is out of our hands.
+
+01:11:14.500 --> 01:11:20.563
+I have likely done an imperfect job distinguishing creativity and production.
+
+01:11:20.563 --> 01:11:23.002
+To that end, I will
+restate and emphasize.
+
+01:11:23.002 --> 01:11:29.136
+Creation is jeopardized when it becomes production
+on the behalf of an entity like these platforms.
+
+01:11:29.136 --> 01:11:37.770
+However, on these platforms we cannot avoid
+our creations becoming productions, even when we are, ourselves, unrewarded.
+
+01:11:37.770 --> 01:11:43.409
+Digital spaces are not a commons, not freely
+owned by us all, though we are what comprises
+
+01:11:43.409 --> 01:11:48.610
+them. Without people, there is no platform.
+That leads to a separate and, perhaps more
+
+01:11:48.610 --> 01:11:50.179
+subliminal theme:
+
+01:11:50.179 --> 01:11:54.420
+The way that these sites rely on users as
+content creators.
+
+01:11:54.420 --> 01:11:58.020
+Simply that.
+In part, though not formally a response to
+
+01:11:58.020 --> 01:12:03.719
+Line Goes Up, it did inspire this work, in
+a perhaps unexpected way. The obvious route
+
+01:12:03.719 --> 01:12:08.420
+would be that I had the Lunyr story, but really
+it wasn’t the “I too know about crypto
+
+01:12:08.420 --> 01:12:13.860
+nonsense” as much as it was that it forced
+me to remember those spaces, their culture,
+
+01:12:13.860 --> 01:12:19.400
+and in doing so, I reconciled the uncomfortable
+overlap with my youtube experience, with discussions
+
+01:12:19.400 --> 01:12:25.250
+of individualist communities, aspiration,
+“making it.” I remembered that while crypto
+
+01:12:25.250 --> 01:12:31.659
+is a creatively bankrupt space, conversations
+in Small Youtube were nearly as stark. What
+
+01:12:31.659 --> 01:12:37.239
+Lunyr did in having it’s only remotely academic
+articles end up being about crypto projects
+
+01:12:37.239 --> 01:12:42.449
+feels like what Medium is doing with its articles
+on being good at Medium, what part of youtube
+
+01:12:42.449 --> 01:12:44.550
+does with its gurus.
+
+01:12:44.550 --> 01:12:49.120
+There’s value to understanding how cultures
+shift with monetization, and how incentives
+
+01:12:49.120 --> 01:12:54.219
+are formed, and how those incentives shape
+what gets produced, but the biggest unifier
+
+01:12:54.219 --> 01:12:59.070
+here is that we don’t congregate on these
+sites because they, the site, provide us with
+
+01:12:59.070 --> 01:13:05.380
+content, we congregate to witness and experience
+other people. Despite these dual revelations,
+
+01:13:05.380 --> 01:13:10.401
+that of the filters and walls monetization
+creates and of platform versus people, we
+
+01:13:10.401 --> 01:13:16.810
+are not granted some easy actionable control.
+We are, thus, bound on both ends, unable to
+
+01:13:16.810 --> 01:13:23.280
+control our own output, even as nominally
+free agents, and unable to reorganize.
+
+01:13:23.280 --> 01:13:28.179
+Efforts such as F the Algorithm, as I mentioned,
+attempt to change this. Supporting others
+
+01:13:28.179 --> 01:13:33.310
+attempts to change this. But working within
+these systems, there will always be that specter
+
+01:13:33.310 --> 01:13:37.659
+of monetization, wielding the algorithm like
+a scythe.
+
+01:13:37.659 --> 01:13:41.980
+This is not my moment to call for revolution
+so that I may make art freely without having
+
+01:13:41.980 --> 01:13:47.150
+to earn my keep, no, even now in the throes
+of some form of passion, I have the clarity
+
+01:13:47.150 --> 01:13:52.840
+to see that as hyperbolic. It is more a reminder
+that we are creating communities in spaces
+
+01:13:52.840 --> 01:13:59.560
+we cannot own, cannot control, cannot take
+ownership of. What does the Twitter Purchase
+
+01:13:59.560 --> 01:14:05.330
+prove if not that? There is no Promised Land
+we might flee to next.
+
+01:14:05.330 --> 01:14:09.580
+To end this on a note about the Digital Commons
+would appear to get away from my point, but
+
+01:14:09.580 --> 01:14:14.550
+in truth these things are interlinked. As
+I said, as Humdog expressed for us, these
+
+01:14:14.550 --> 01:14:18.900
+problems have been with us far longer than
+even the titans of the modern internet in
+
+01:14:18.900 --> 01:14:22.989
+Google and Facebook.
+We saw the flood wash over the dreams of the
+
+01:14:22.989 --> 01:14:27.970
+early tech utopians, and we could not build
+upon that land, for laying foundation deep
+
+01:14:27.970 --> 01:14:33.949
+into mud, jagged with rubble, required power
+we could not have, could not organize. It
+
+01:14:33.949 --> 01:14:38.480
+is not the fault or failing of anyone on the
+internet today that it is how it is. Companies
+
+01:14:38.480 --> 01:14:44.640
+laid new foundations, and we moved onto the
+land they owned. The Commons was never an
+
+01:14:44.640 --> 01:14:53.390
+option, the root issue, bigger than the whole
+of the internet.
+
+01:14:55.489 --> 01:14:59.970
+Originally I intended to just cut this video
+off. Full stop. I wanted to end on a note
+
+01:14:59.970 --> 01:15:05.120
+of dramatic impact but I don’t think it
+matters that much. People click off when they
+
+01:15:05.120 --> 01:15:09.870
+do and being overly wrought in drama in the
+last ten seconds isn’t what makes a video
+
+01:15:09.870 --> 01:15:14.409
+“do well”
+I’m very very brainpoisoned right now about
+
+01:15:14.409 --> 01:15:20.580
+algorithms and success and caught in that
+mixed web of like, wanting things to do well,
+
+01:15:20.580 --> 01:15:25.100
+naturally, and worrying I’m losing sight
+of the distinction between reaching people
+
+01:15:25.100 --> 01:15:29.230
+and reaching numbers.
+As I said at the start, this video has (or
+
+01:15:29.230 --> 01:15:33.810
+will have, depending on schedule) a companion
+video that’s fully anecdotal and just exploring
+
+01:15:33.810 --> 01:15:39.450
+the last year. It’ll probably also be melodramatic
+or sappy.
+
+01:15:39.450 --> 01:15:43.910
+Speaking of sappy.
+Thanks, like, real, sincere thanks to everyone
+
+01:15:43.910 --> 01:15:49.380
+who contributes to the production of these
+things, be it voice talent, with Little Hoot
+
+01:15:49.380 --> 01:15:54.690
+and Armchair Egyptology, script reads,..letting
+me use the lizard breakdown, or patrons.
+
+01:15:54.690 --> 01:16:00.449
+..That’s not to say or imply prior thanks
+were insincere, but I guess making this has
+
+01:16:00.449 --> 01:16:06.360
+made me hyper-aware of support.
+Voiced Credits thanks this time go to:
+
+01:16:06.360 --> 01:16:10.199
+Chandler Mason*
+Étienne Garant*
+
+01:16:10.199 --> 01:16:12.120
+Freddy*
+Hausum*
+
+01:16:12.120 --> 01:16:14.030
+Nic*
+Nitesurgeon*
+
+01:16:14.030 --> 01:16:19.060
+There’s a few new names here, and sorry
+if you came for map game and got smacked with
+
+01:16:19.060 --> 01:16:23.960
+this. There will be map game again soon, after
+the video in early January where I’m remaking
+
+01:16:23.960 --> 01:16:29.929
+my first one. That one doesn’t really have
+a negotiable schedule spot if it’s an anniversary.
+
+01:16:29.929 --> 01:16:33.370
+But there I go, breaking my rule on promising
+things.
+
+01:16:33.370 --> 01:16:35.139
+Uhh, bye.
+
diff --git a/videos/20221210 - Monetization will ruin the internet (again) - [-EKF9P8EDS0].mkv b/videos/20221210 - Monetization will ruin the internet (again) - [-EKF9P8EDS0].mkv
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5c36fb5
Binary files /dev/null and b/videos/20221210 - Monetization will ruin the internet (again) - [-EKF9P8EDS0].mkv differ
diff --git a/videos/Are There Internet Dialects？ ｜ Idea Channel ｜ PBS Digital Studios [SDPasRas5u0].en-qlPKC2UN_YU.vtt b/videos/Are There Internet Dialects？ ｜ Idea Channel ｜ PBS Digital Studios [SDPasRas5u0].en-qlPKC2UN_YU.vtt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..de4aefa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/videos/Are There Internet Dialects？ ｜ Idea Channel ｜ PBS Digital Studios [SDPasRas5u0].en-qlPKC2UN_YU.vtt	
@@ -0,0 +1,1174 @@
+WEBVTT
+Kind: captions
+Language: en
+
+00:00:00.040 --> 00:00:00.610
+Here's an idea.
+
+00:00:00.610 --> 00:00:02.886
+Certain parts of the internet
+have their own dialects.
+
+00:00:07.500 --> 00:00:10.100
+I've joked more than once that
+the internet is my home town.
+
+00:00:10.100 --> 00:00:12.516
+And I want to be completely
+clear that that is not a joke.
+
+00:00:12.516 --> 00:00:13.930
+I am literally
+from the internet.
+
+00:00:13.930 --> 00:00:14.430
+OK.
+
+00:00:14.430 --> 00:00:15.590
+Really, I'm from Massachusetts.
+
+00:00:15.590 --> 00:00:18.089
+But I have been wondering, in
+the way that most of my family
+
+00:00:18.089 --> 00:00:21.390
+has a strong Boston accent,
+do I or other people
+
+00:00:21.390 --> 00:00:23.530
+have internet accents?
+
+00:00:23.530 --> 00:00:24.504
+Is that a thing?
+
+00:00:24.504 --> 00:00:25.920
+Is there some part
+of the internet
+
+00:00:25.920 --> 00:00:28.020
+that I sound like I am from?
+
+00:00:28.020 --> 00:00:29.830
+I mean, it's probably
+not an accent,
+
+00:00:29.830 --> 00:00:31.304
+because accents
+are pronunciation.
+
+00:00:31.304 --> 00:00:33.220
+And on the internet, you
+don't talk, you type.
+
+00:00:33.220 --> 00:00:35.210
+And when you're reading
+what I have written,
+
+00:00:35.210 --> 00:00:36.460
+I'm not doing the pronouncing.
+
+00:00:36.460 --> 00:00:38.750
+You are, in your head.
+
+00:00:38.750 --> 00:00:41.210
+Unless I start writing
+like James Joyce, I guess.
+
+00:00:41.210 --> 00:00:43.160
+We know you like Latin
+with essies impures,
+
+00:00:43.160 --> 00:00:45.650
+and your liber as they sea,
+we certney like gurgles,
+
+00:00:45.650 --> 00:00:47.830
+love the nagleygargley,
+so arrahbeejee.
+
+00:00:47.830 --> 00:00:50.790
+So maybe on the internet, it's
+not an accent but a dialect.
+
+00:00:50.790 --> 00:00:52.770
+Dialects account for
+pronunciation, but also
+
+00:00:52.770 --> 00:00:55.120
+word choice, vocabulary,
+how those words are
+
+00:00:55.120 --> 00:00:56.420
+arranged and used.
+
+00:00:56.420 --> 00:00:58.740
+Usually, we take dialect to
+indicate a group of people
+
+00:00:58.740 --> 00:01:01.300
+in a place, like southern
+American English, Rioplatense
+
+00:01:01.300 --> 00:01:04.080
+Spanish, or the Norrland
+dialects of northern Sweden.
+
+00:01:04.080 --> 00:01:06.450
+But These are simply
+regional dialects.
+
+00:01:06.450 --> 00:01:09.330
+Dialect refers to any
+characteristic use of language
+
+00:01:09.330 --> 00:01:13.160
+by a group of people-- a region,
+ethnicity, social class--
+
+00:01:13.160 --> 00:01:16.000
+including uses that don't
+really sound characteristic,
+
+00:01:16.000 --> 00:01:19.880
+like Midwestern American English
+or, quote, general American,
+
+00:01:19.880 --> 00:01:22.680
+the seemingly featureless
+dialect of American English
+
+00:01:22.680 --> 00:01:24.880
+that most national
+newscasters speak.
+
+00:01:24.880 --> 00:01:26.860
+I'm chasing down
+leads and practicing
+
+00:01:26.860 --> 00:01:28.172
+my non-regional diction.
+
+00:01:28.172 --> 00:01:29.630
+And speaking of
+speaking of which,
+
+00:01:29.630 --> 00:01:32.050
+since American English is
+the thing I speak the most,
+
+00:01:32.050 --> 00:01:33.510
+besides highly of
+Chris Pratt, it's
+
+00:01:33.510 --> 00:01:36.430
+gonna have to be the lingua
+franca for this episode.
+
+00:01:36.430 --> 00:01:38.366
+I'm sure all of this
+stuff applies really well
+
+00:01:38.366 --> 00:01:39.740
+to other languages
+and internets,
+
+00:01:39.740 --> 00:01:42.320
+and I hope that you'll tell
+me how in the comments.
+
+00:01:42.320 --> 00:01:44.200
+So then I wonder, if
+there is such a thing
+
+00:01:44.200 --> 00:01:47.630
+as general American
+internet variety,
+
+00:01:47.630 --> 00:01:52.790
+a kind of uninflected standard
+dialect of internet English.
+
+00:01:52.790 --> 00:01:53.640
+I think so.
+
+00:01:53.640 --> 00:01:56.100
+I think it's marked by
+the use of common acronyms
+
+00:01:56.100 --> 00:01:58.600
+and emoticons, lots of
+which are shared with SMS
+
+00:01:58.600 --> 00:02:00.900
+speak, maybe a
+nervously deployed
+
+00:02:00.900 --> 00:02:04.100
+hash tag or the occasional
+nonstandard abbreviation,
+
+00:02:04.100 --> 00:02:07.330
+maybe the only semi
+self-conscious use of the word
+
+00:02:07.330 --> 00:02:08.690
+selfie.
+
+00:02:08.690 --> 00:02:10.320
+I think of general
+internet English
+
+00:02:10.320 --> 00:02:13.040
+as being used by those
+with no particular internet
+
+00:02:13.040 --> 00:02:16.630
+affiliation, or who are old.
+
+00:02:16.630 --> 00:02:19.760
+General internet English is
+an email from your coworker
+
+00:02:19.760 --> 00:02:22.430
+who really enjoys
+going jet skiing.
+
+00:02:22.430 --> 00:02:25.761
+It's the opposite end of
+the spectrum from, say, /b/.
+
+00:02:25.761 --> 00:02:27.260
+And here, I think
+it's worth pausing
+
+00:02:27.260 --> 00:02:30.150
+to say that it is always
+irresponsible to confidently
+
+00:02:30.150 --> 00:02:33.370
+proclaim that all people
+in X location do Y thing.
+
+00:02:33.370 --> 00:02:35.460
+I think all of my
+generalizations
+
+00:02:35.460 --> 00:02:37.770
+have at least one
+foot in reality.
+
+00:02:37.770 --> 00:02:40.070
+But if you disagree, I
+hope you will tell me why.
+
+00:02:40.070 --> 00:02:43.220
+So that being said, lots of the
+boards on 4chan have clearly
+
+00:02:43.220 --> 00:02:44.720
+identifiable ways
+of communicating,
+
+00:02:44.720 --> 00:02:47.300
+but /b/'s is more so.
+
+00:02:47.300 --> 00:02:49.770
+Many anons on /b/ make
+liberal use of epithets
+
+00:02:49.770 --> 00:02:53.040
+for homosexuality, describe
+people or media as cancer,
+
+00:02:53.040 --> 00:02:55.270
+and generally traffic in
+conversation unsuitable
+
+00:02:55.270 --> 00:02:58.500
+for your run of the
+mill grandma, Let's say.
+
+00:02:58.500 --> 00:03:00.850
+Some features of communication,
+like green texting,
+
+00:03:00.850 --> 00:03:03.780
+which isn't particular to
+/b/ but 4chan as a whole,
+
+00:03:03.780 --> 00:03:07.320
+exists because the code
+of 4chan provides it.
+
+00:03:07.320 --> 00:03:10.930
+This is an important part of the
+equation-- available technology
+
+00:03:10.930 --> 00:03:14.440
+influencing components of
+mediated communication.
+
+00:03:14.440 --> 00:03:16.380
+For example, the fact
+that Tumblr animates
+
+00:03:16.380 --> 00:03:19.970
+gifs in stream made them
+important and powerfully
+
+00:03:19.970 --> 00:03:22.750
+expressive there, which is
+funny because while gifs might
+
+00:03:22.750 --> 00:03:25.700
+be powerfully expressive,
+the stereotypical Tumblr text
+
+00:03:25.700 --> 00:03:29.530
+post lacks effusiveness--
+all lowercase, very fluid,
+
+00:03:29.530 --> 00:03:30.470
+no punctuation.
+
+00:03:30.470 --> 00:03:33.350
+It's like Cormac McCarthy
+without capital letters,
+
+00:03:33.350 --> 00:03:36.280
+and channeling some kind of
+recognizable quirkiness instead
+
+00:03:36.280 --> 00:03:38.660
+of frustration at the
+futility of justice
+
+00:03:38.660 --> 00:03:39.840
+in a society on the brink.
+
+00:03:39.840 --> 00:03:43.260
+MAN: TBH, I literally
+say "literally" and "TBH"
+
+00:03:43.260 --> 00:03:45.650
+literally all the time, TBH.
+
+00:03:45.650 --> 00:03:47.810
+Anyway, TBH we
+could literally spend
+
+00:03:47.810 --> 00:03:49.900
+the rest of the day talking
+about how people talk.
+
+00:03:49.900 --> 00:03:53.070
+But I still have some questions,
+and we're be running out
+
+00:03:53.070 --> 00:03:53.976
+of time here.
+
+00:03:53.976 --> 00:03:55.600
+Doesn't there seem
+to be something more
+
+00:03:55.600 --> 00:03:57.940
+to these couple examples
+than just this is
+
+00:03:57.940 --> 00:03:59.070
+how these people talk?
+
+00:03:59.070 --> 00:04:01.210
+More than simply words
+and how they're used,
+
+00:04:01.210 --> 00:04:04.290
+it also seems to reflect
+the values and norms
+
+00:04:04.290 --> 00:04:05.650
+of the community itself.
+
+00:04:05.650 --> 00:04:09.830
+Tumblr's stereotypical text post
+is hesitant, even vulnerable,
+
+00:04:09.830 --> 00:04:12.440
+on a website where many
+people value sensitivity
+
+00:04:12.440 --> 00:04:15.540
+and occasionally become so
+emotional that they simply
+
+00:04:15.540 --> 00:04:17.589
+cannot even-- myself included.
+
+00:04:17.589 --> 00:04:22.560
+I frequently am just
+completely unable to even,
+
+00:04:22.560 --> 00:04:24.840
+especially if there's a
+Chris Pratt gif set involved.
+
+00:04:24.840 --> 00:04:25.515
+What?
+
+00:04:25.515 --> 00:04:25.790
+I literally can't even.
+
+00:04:25.790 --> 00:04:26.670
+I'm done.
+
+00:04:26.670 --> 00:04:29.890
+/b/ is a very fast paced
+environment concerned with very
+
+00:04:29.890 --> 00:04:32.440
+particular aspects of
+the internet and culture.
+
+00:04:32.440 --> 00:04:35.360
+It appears unwelcoming
+to most newcomers,
+
+00:04:35.360 --> 00:04:37.170
+and its language reflects that.
+
+00:04:37.170 --> 00:04:39.730
+This isn't necessarily true
+of dialects which, yes,
+
+00:04:39.730 --> 00:04:42.370
+are particular uses of language,
+but don't really account
+
+00:04:42.370 --> 00:04:44.150
+for any kind of value system.
+
+00:04:44.150 --> 00:04:46.780
+The fact that Rhode Islanders
+use "cabinet" for "milkshake"
+
+00:04:46.780 --> 00:04:49.060
+or that Bostonians call the
+person who repairs shoes
+
+00:04:49.060 --> 00:04:51.840
+a "cobbler" doesn't
+arise from any attitude
+
+00:04:51.840 --> 00:04:55.060
+about dairy products, loafers,
+or being from New England.
+
+00:04:55.060 --> 00:04:56.600
+My boy's wicked smart.
+
+00:04:56.600 --> 00:04:59.170
+So maybe we're not
+talking about dialects?
+
+00:04:59.170 --> 00:05:00.820
+Educational theorist
+Etienne Wenger
+
+00:05:00.820 --> 00:05:03.130
+wrote about communities
+of practice,
+
+00:05:03.130 --> 00:05:06.000
+which describe
+roughly-- very roughly--
+
+00:05:06.000 --> 00:05:08.100
+people who do things together.
+
+00:05:08.100 --> 00:05:09.990
+The concept of
+practice, he wrote,
+
+00:05:09.990 --> 00:05:13.890
+connotes doing, but not
+just doing in and of itself.
+
+00:05:13.890 --> 00:05:16.950
+It is doing in a historical
+and social context that
+
+00:05:16.950 --> 00:05:20.170
+gives structure and
+meaning to what we do.
+
+00:05:20.170 --> 00:05:24.130
+In this sense, practice
+is always social practice.
+
+00:05:24.130 --> 00:05:26.610
+Communities forming
+around said practice share
+
+00:05:26.610 --> 00:05:29.660
+all kinds of stuff, including
+but not limited to, quote,
+
+00:05:29.660 --> 00:05:32.770
+untold rules of thumb,
+recognizable intuitions,
+
+00:05:32.770 --> 00:05:37.680
+specific perceptions, well-tuned
+sensitivities, and shared world
+
+00:05:37.680 --> 00:05:38.495
+views.
+
+00:05:38.495 --> 00:05:40.435
+I know you all in
+for just enough.
+
+00:05:40.435 --> 00:05:42.500
+For Wenger, the idea of
+communities of practice
+
+00:05:42.500 --> 00:05:44.830
+is rooted in
+education, specifically
+
+00:05:44.830 --> 00:05:46.850
+about interests and professions.
+
+00:05:46.850 --> 00:05:49.540
+But its uses are
+really wide ranging.
+
+00:05:49.540 --> 00:05:51.180
+Linguistics professor
+Penelope Eckert,
+
+00:05:51.180 --> 00:05:53.080
+who you might remember
+from our BMO episode,
+
+00:05:53.080 --> 00:05:55.590
+wrote about how communities
+of practice, because they
+
+00:05:55.590 --> 00:05:57.130
+share all of those
+things, can have
+
+00:05:57.130 --> 00:05:59.610
+very strong linguistic aspects.
+
+00:05:59.610 --> 00:06:01.550
+Speakers develop
+linguistic patterns
+
+00:06:01.550 --> 00:06:04.650
+as they engage in activity in
+the communities in which they
+
+00:06:04.650 --> 00:06:06.230
+participate, she writes.
+
+00:06:06.230 --> 00:06:09.280
+And later, social identity,
+community membership,
+
+00:06:09.280 --> 00:06:13.800
+forms of participation, the full
+range of community practice,
+
+00:06:13.800 --> 00:06:16.430
+and the symbolic value
+of linguistic form
+
+00:06:16.430 --> 00:06:19.250
+are being constantly and
+mutually constructed.
+
+00:06:19.250 --> 00:06:21.500
+Eckert was writing specifically
+about the construction
+
+00:06:21.500 --> 00:06:21.999
+of gender.
+
+00:06:21.999 --> 00:06:24.120
+But her thesis still
+applies, I think.
+
+00:06:24.120 --> 00:06:26.890
+In short, what you do,
+who you do it with,
+
+00:06:26.890 --> 00:06:30.490
+how you talk about it, how the
+talking advertises or supports
+
+00:06:30.490 --> 00:06:33.210
+the doing, and how
+you self-identify
+
+00:06:33.210 --> 00:06:37.529
+as a doer of things are
+all very intimately linked.
+
+00:06:37.529 --> 00:06:40.070
+Captain Rachel on Twitter let
+me know that alternatively, you
+
+00:06:40.070 --> 00:06:42.290
+could call these speech
+communities, a term
+
+00:06:42.290 --> 00:06:44.920
+with a separate but related
+background and connotation,
+
+00:06:44.920 --> 00:06:48.250
+lacking a specific
+emphasis on doing stuff,
+
+00:06:48.250 --> 00:06:51.150
+but with a similar insistence
+that members share, quote,
+
+00:06:51.150 --> 00:06:54.540
+language ideology, beliefs
+about language, identity,
+
+00:06:54.540 --> 00:06:58.260
+and membership, and attitudes
+towards language use.
+
+00:06:58.260 --> 00:07:01.230
+Of course, people rarely
+belong to just one community
+
+00:07:01.230 --> 00:07:03.360
+of practice or speech community.
+
+00:07:03.360 --> 00:07:05.170
+Like Settlers of
+Catan, your alliances
+
+00:07:05.170 --> 00:07:08.620
+are always changing,
+intensifying, attenuating,
+
+00:07:08.620 --> 00:07:10.880
+and with them, the
+way you communicate.
+
+00:07:10.880 --> 00:07:15.380
+So maybe I talk more Tumblrish
+on Tumblr and less Twitterese
+
+00:07:15.380 --> 00:07:16.290
+on Facebook.
+
+00:07:16.290 --> 00:07:18.590
+Maybe sometimes my
+Something Awful or IRC days
+
+00:07:18.590 --> 00:07:22.010
+ring through when I want to
+feel cool or let someone else
+
+00:07:22.010 --> 00:07:24.030
+know that I know what's up.
+
+00:07:24.030 --> 00:07:26.270
+And oh, on the original
+topic of pronunciation,
+
+00:07:26.270 --> 00:07:28.550
+I am trying to adopt
+the Idea Channel
+
+00:07:28.550 --> 00:07:32.150
+native pronunciation of
+zhaif, because I do really
+
+00:07:32.150 --> 00:07:32.822
+want to fit in.
+
+00:07:32.822 --> 00:07:33.780
+What do you guys think?
+
+00:07:33.780 --> 00:07:36.640
+What are the recognizable speech
+communities on the internet?
+
+00:07:36.640 --> 00:07:40.640
+And do their characteristics say
+something about that community?
+
+00:07:40.640 --> 00:07:41.950
+Let us know in the comments.
+
+00:07:41.950 --> 00:07:45.340
+And unbeknownst to you
+would ire turn o'er see,
+
+00:07:45.340 --> 00:07:47.600
+a nuncio would I return here.
+
+00:07:47.600 --> 00:07:48.730
+Subscribe.
+
+00:07:48.730 --> 00:07:50.270
+It doesn't actually
+say subscribe.
+
+00:07:50.270 --> 00:07:53.430
+I added the subscribe
+to "Finnegan's Wake."
+
+00:07:53.430 --> 00:07:54.450
+Sorry, Joyce.
+
+00:07:54.450 --> 00:07:56.679
+(SINGING) Do you want
+to read some comments?
+
+00:07:56.679 --> 00:07:58.720
+Let's see what you guys
+had to say about "Frozen"
+
+00:07:58.720 --> 00:08:00.550
+as a critique of fairy tales.
+
+00:08:00.550 --> 00:08:02.230
+yepimbatman makes
+a really good point
+
+00:08:02.230 --> 00:08:05.290
+when they bring up "Shrek,"
+which is a movie we did not
+
+00:08:05.290 --> 00:08:06.097
+spend any time on.
+
+00:08:06.097 --> 00:08:07.680
+And yes, that is a
+complete oversight.
+
+00:08:07.680 --> 00:08:10.830
+I think I feel similarly to
+how String.Epsilon feels,
+
+00:08:10.830 --> 00:08:13.620
+which is that "Shrek,"
+to me, communicates
+
+00:08:13.620 --> 00:08:16.840
+a kind of parody, satire, maybe
+even pastiche of fairy tales.
+
+00:08:16.840 --> 00:08:21.150
+But it's not nearly as much of
+a kind of genre deconstruction
+
+00:08:21.150 --> 00:08:23.360
+as "Frozen" is.
+
+00:08:23.360 --> 00:08:27.340
+I mean, it does contain actual
+elements from real fairy tales,
+
+00:08:27.340 --> 00:08:31.670
+but it seems much more like
+a set of jokes relating to,
+
+00:08:31.670 --> 00:08:36.600
+as opposed to a dismantling
+of, which-- yeah.
+
+00:08:36.600 --> 00:08:37.100
+Yeah.
+
+00:08:37.100 --> 00:08:38.039
+I think that's how I feel.
+
+00:08:38.039 --> 00:08:39.980
+Relatedly, Desiree
+DeCosta brings up "Mulan"
+
+00:08:39.980 --> 00:08:42.030
+and "Brave" as
+examples of movies
+
+00:08:42.030 --> 00:08:44.250
+that did things similar
+to what "Frozen" has done,
+
+00:08:44.250 --> 00:08:47.894
+but didn't maybe receive
+the same level of notoriety.
+
+00:08:47.894 --> 00:08:49.310
+And I totally agree
+that these are
+
+00:08:49.310 --> 00:08:51.840
+movies that are super
+important and have
+
+00:08:51.840 --> 00:08:53.091
+done cool and exciting things.
+
+00:08:53.091 --> 00:08:54.506
+But the reason
+they didn't come up
+
+00:08:54.506 --> 00:08:56.140
+is because they
+don't so much sit
+
+00:08:56.140 --> 00:09:00.280
+inside that genre
+deconstruction idea--
+
+00:09:00.280 --> 00:09:02.280
+that "Mulan" is based
+on a Chinese myth,
+
+00:09:02.280 --> 00:09:04.530
+"Brave" is a
+totally new property
+
+00:09:04.530 --> 00:09:06.370
+that has its own
+sort of reference
+
+00:09:06.370 --> 00:09:07.620
+to things that came before it.
+
+00:09:07.620 --> 00:09:11.485
+But I don't think that they
+sort of relate to that,
+
+00:09:11.485 --> 00:09:15.050
+like we were talking about,
+culturally ingrained kind
+
+00:09:15.050 --> 00:09:17.880
+of story nearly as much.
+
+00:09:17.880 --> 00:09:19.610
+nyihead and I are on
+similar wavelengths
+
+00:09:19.610 --> 00:09:23.870
+in that what Terence Hawkes
+says about the critic finalizing
+
+00:09:23.870 --> 00:09:26.120
+a work is true, but
+that distinguishing
+
+00:09:26.120 --> 00:09:28.140
+between the
+professionally-trained critic
+
+00:09:28.140 --> 00:09:30.880
+and the fan who is
+critiquing things
+
+00:09:30.880 --> 00:09:33.380
+does stink of a
+little bit of elitism.
+
+00:09:33.380 --> 00:09:35.249
+So yeah, I agree.
+
+00:09:35.249 --> 00:09:37.040
+Anna Robinson writes
+a really great comment
+
+00:09:37.040 --> 00:09:39.180
+that maps the trajectory
+of the Disney Renaissance
+
+00:09:39.180 --> 00:09:42.050
+to art history, and says
+that their current period is
+
+00:09:42.050 --> 00:09:45.950
+something like the neoclassical
+period of Disney fairy tales.
+
+00:09:45.950 --> 00:09:47.500
+And yeah, I really
+love this idea.
+
+00:09:47.500 --> 00:09:49.700
+And this makes me
+wonder how long is it
+
+00:09:49.700 --> 00:09:55.150
+going to take for us to get
+to the Disney postmodern fairy
+
+00:09:55.150 --> 00:09:56.150
+tale period?
+
+00:09:56.150 --> 00:09:59.715
+And what is it
+going to look like?
+
+00:09:59.715 --> 00:10:04.460
+I'm gonna like brain chew
+on that for a little while.
+
+00:10:04.460 --> 00:10:07.340
+Disney and postmodern are two
+things that I don't normally
+
+00:10:07.340 --> 00:10:08.590
+put together.
+
+00:10:08.590 --> 00:10:11.190
+Mikaele Baker writes a comment
+about Strauss-Howe generational
+
+00:10:11.190 --> 00:10:13.400
+theory and how applying
+those ideas to "Frozen"
+
+00:10:13.400 --> 00:10:15.840
+might not turn out perfectly.
+
+00:10:15.840 --> 00:10:17.700
+But it still could
+provide some insight
+
+00:10:17.700 --> 00:10:20.160
+into how it works as a movie
+and why it is so popular.
+
+00:10:20.160 --> 00:10:23.930
+And this comment is
+just-- it is so good.
+
+00:10:23.930 --> 00:10:26.472
+I wish I could spend so much
+more time talking about how
+
+00:10:26.472 --> 00:10:27.680
+good I think this comment is.
+
+00:10:27.680 --> 00:10:29.346
+But I can't, so you
+should just read it.
+
+00:10:29.346 --> 00:10:31.710
+Links to this one and the
+rest in the doobly-doo.
+
+00:10:31.710 --> 00:10:35.770
+Mikaele, awesome-- just awesome.
+
+00:10:35.770 --> 00:10:37.640
+This is why I do this--
+comments like this.
+
+00:10:37.640 --> 00:10:40.280
+NKR178 writes that while
+people critiquing "Frozen"
+
+00:10:40.280 --> 00:10:44.260
+might have realized the movie,
+"Frozen" itself does not
+
+00:10:44.260 --> 00:10:48.100
+necessarily realize its
+genre of fairy tale,
+
+00:10:48.100 --> 00:10:51.510
+and that because of its
+ideological positioning,
+
+00:10:51.510 --> 00:10:54.080
+it can come across as
+simply an attack on it
+
+00:10:54.080 --> 00:10:57.759
+and not a realization of genre.
+
+00:10:57.759 --> 00:11:00.050
+And I think this is a really
+fair and important point--
+
+00:11:00.050 --> 00:11:03.830
+that every genre deconstruction
+is not necessarily
+
+00:11:03.830 --> 00:11:05.780
+a realization of that genre.
+
+00:11:05.780 --> 00:11:09.180
+And the point might be to
+actually deconstruct it,
+
+00:11:09.180 --> 00:11:12.950
+to do maybe even some kind of
+violence to that genre, which
+
+00:11:12.950 --> 00:11:16.140
+can be good or bad, depending
+upon your relationship
+
+00:11:16.140 --> 00:11:19.340
+to that genre or the work
+you do in the deconstructing.
+
+00:11:19.340 --> 00:11:21.180
+But yeah, this was a
+really great comment.
+
+00:11:21.180 --> 00:11:23.096
+Amy Kinsman writes a
+really insightful comment
+
+00:11:23.096 --> 00:11:24.560
+about how "Frozen"
+might actually
+
+00:11:24.560 --> 00:11:28.170
+create its own
+critics-- that because
+
+00:11:28.170 --> 00:11:32.010
+of what it does with its genre,
+it will implant in the audience
+
+00:11:32.010 --> 00:11:34.870
+a tendency to be critical
+of it, and then draws
+
+00:11:34.870 --> 00:11:37.040
+a really awesome connection
+to Bioshock Infinite,
+
+00:11:37.040 --> 00:11:40.800
+right, which is a game that
+really encouraged the players
+
+00:11:40.800 --> 00:11:42.580
+to look critically
+at what was being
+
+00:11:42.580 --> 00:11:45.020
+asked of them in the game.
+
+00:11:45.020 --> 00:11:47.760
+And by extension,
+maybe other games.
+
+00:11:47.760 --> 00:11:50.140
+So yeah, this is-- I did not
+even make that connection.
+
+00:11:50.140 --> 00:11:51.750
+And that's really awesome.
+
+00:11:51.750 --> 00:11:53.833
+(SINGING) The fact that I
+don't read your comments
+
+00:11:53.833 --> 00:11:58.590
+shouldn't bother you anyway,
+because there's a lot of them.
+
+00:11:58.590 --> 00:12:01.800
+At this point, it's basically
+like winning the lottery.
+
+00:12:01.800 --> 00:12:03.607
+Thank you for writing
+this one, though.
+
+00:12:03.607 --> 00:12:05.190
+This week's episode
+was brought to you
+
+00:12:05.190 --> 00:12:07.820
+by the hard work of these
+people, who say "bubbler"
+
+00:12:07.820 --> 00:12:09.320
+instead of "water fountain."
+
+00:12:09.320 --> 00:12:11.820
+We have a Facebook, an IRC,
+and a subreddit-- links
+
+00:12:11.820 --> 00:12:13.290
+in the doobly-doo.
+
+00:12:13.290 --> 00:12:15.550
+There are two
+things of the week.
+
+00:12:15.550 --> 00:12:17.400
+A tweet from @enochobus
+who points us
+
+00:12:17.400 --> 00:12:19.840
+towards a Wired article
+about an Instagram
+
+00:12:19.840 --> 00:12:22.680
+account that posts
+only amazing looking
+
+00:12:22.680 --> 00:12:25.490
+glitches that are so
+cool, and a post on Tumblr
+
+00:12:25.490 --> 00:12:30.800
+from therisingtides about how
+criticism in the age of Tumblr
+
+00:12:30.800 --> 00:12:34.320
+is becoming much easier
+and is somehow contributing
+
+00:12:34.320 --> 00:12:37.376
+to the popularity of things.
+
+00:12:37.376 --> 00:12:38.750
+It's very good,
+very interesting.
+
+00:12:38.750 --> 00:12:39.541
+You should read it.
+
+00:12:48.267 --> 00:12:49.850
+And for this week's
+record swap, we're
+
+00:12:49.850 --> 00:12:51.600
+going to be replacing
+Jack Elliott singing
+
+00:12:51.600 --> 00:13:04.075
+the songs of Woody Guthrie
+with Okkyung Lee's "Ghil."
+
+00:13:04.075 --> 00:13:06.420
+I really wish you
+could see that better.
+
+00:13:06.420 --> 00:13:08.260
+Well, adios, Jack Elliott.
+
+00:13:08.260 --> 00:13:12.050
+Welcome, Okkung Lee.
+
diff --git a/videos/Are There Internet Dialects？ ｜ Idea Channel ｜ PBS Digital Studios [SDPasRas5u0].mkv b/videos/Are There Internet Dialects？ ｜ Idea Channel ｜ PBS Digital Studios [SDPasRas5u0].mkv
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fac07d1
Binary files /dev/null and b/videos/Are There Internet Dialects？ ｜ Idea Channel ｜ PBS Digital Studios [SDPasRas5u0].mkv differ