Forums / Media / Websites

Let's see the negative changes to websites that have happened in 2020:

Youtube:
Turning off comments sections of videos "made for kids" and then for auto-generated topic channels. More censorship in terms of comment visibility. More false positive videos getting removed. Videos filled with more ads than before and many don't see any money for it. Also became harder to navigate due to search showing fewer videos per page.

Twitch: More PC bullshit. More DMCA when it comes to audio with many important clips being lost.

Pornhub: Removing millions of videos, removing ability to download the videos.

Facebook: More censorship as usual.

Twitter: Adding ability to limit replies to your tweets, creating even more echo chambers. Also, more rules and ways to get banned.

Pastebin: Removing pastes using automated methods, having major false positive issue.

Patreon: More restrictions what is allowed on site.

Deviantart: Eclipse website design was made mandatory. The site became much harder to navigate.

Reddit: More subreddit bans, mods being more banhappy than ever before. More ads.

There are probably many websites that I have missed.
If this decline accelerates, imagine how bad 2021 will be.

Websites are being more sterile and tame. Long are the tacky unique logos and layouts. Reject modernity,return to Zombo.com

Another point I wanna make is how fractured things are getting.

Don't like Twitter, reddit, 4chan, etc because of "echo-chambers"? Here's more saturation and even more echo-chambers that are being more decentralized.

So the Internet communities have, in sort of way, become like they were in the early days of the Internet?

Reject modern website design and social media, return to Geocities and IRC

Return to Geocities, embrace the gifs, images, and personalized layouts of one's own website.

I find it nonsensical that there's an application for 'YouTube Kids', and yet YouTube itself is obliged to mark videos 'for kids'. Theoretically, having the designated 'YouTube Kids' should have solved this debacle. If they're just going to turn YouTube itself into an amalgamation of content for all audiences, doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of "YouTube Kids"? I understand content 'for kids' seeps onto YouTube itself, and that won't stop kids from creating accounts using fake ages to post content (which could later be used to exploit them), but if YouTube directly made the distinction in their code of conduct that YouTube is geared towards audiences 13 and over while YouTube Kids is for the 'under 13' content variety, all while enforcing their terms of services, namely against child endangerment and exploitation when it does seep onto YT's site (and reinforce measures to better counteract kids using regular YouTube), maybe structurally YouTube could at least manage this whole situation better. The primary issue lies in not necessarily instating these rules and regulations, but YouTube's enforcement of them.

I've noticed a lot of the time YouTube avoids taking action against a lot of material that realistically does violate their own ToS unless people call the issue out, and even then it's still not as enforced as it should be. It's understandable that YouTube can't always be playing watch dog 24/7 on every single rule violation, but there are numerous cases where a YouTuber prominent in size will openly violate a part of YouTube's terms of services – and be subsequently called out for it – but no action will be done against it. Take 'N&A Productions' who has been violating 'spam and deceptive practices' for years now, by hosting "giveaways" in which the viewer has to subscribe to his channel and like his video in order to win a 'free gift card'. As far as what's been reported, there have been no verifiable instances of any of his viewers legitimately winning the give away, nor has Amir (N&A Productions) ever sent any verifiable proof that he is giving the cards away despite outwardly stating he regularly gives them away. This isn't even counting the amount of times he – and YouTubers like him, such as Jaystation – have exploited people's deaths for views. With the amount of traction gained against this channel (YouTubers like Cr1tikal and Pyrocynical have criticized his channel in the past), YouTube still doesn't bat an eye. I suspect it's because he markets his videos as 'for kids' entertainment', and he thinks that's a formidable excuse to keep promoting his illicit behaviours which exploit kids' naiveté.

I don't think YouTube is by any means incapable of enforcing their terms of service, take PewDiePie's 'Coco' music video for instance. YouTube had no issue wiping that video off the face of their site, even though PewDiePie himself explicitly stated that he didn't actually endanger the children involved (e.g. using a 'censored' version of the song on the set), and was releasing a 'behind the scenes' version of the song showing the process behind the song, unfiltered. YouTube somehow doesn't give this the benefit of the doubt, but with cases like N&A Productions's, they dismiss his genuinely exploitative practices because he states 'they're skits/entertainment'.

COPPA has been one of (if not the) most stupid decision that YT has ever taken

Thanks to it clips from old cool cartoons have been increasibly getting less fun to search for because most are being claimed by it

FUCK COPPA!

To an extent, I agree with this. Especially for shows which don't have a target demographic of children, and are intended for all audiences. Case in point: Gravity Falls. The YouTube algorithm seems to mark anything that could potentially pertain to children as 'for kids' without looking at context. For reference, I have seen a Rick and Morty parody for 'Star Versus the Forces of Evil' get marked by the algorithm as 'Content for YouTube Kids', when Rick and Morty is an adultswim show that is marked 14+.

Blame Uncle Sam for that one, not YouTube. Granted, privacy, especially for children, is important, but the government will always find a way to fuck up dealing with the problem because it's run by boomers.

See also legally mandated cookie nags. The right solution would have been something like the legal enforcement of the do-not-track header, instead of making every single website make you pick between like 4 levels of cookie permissions.

Privacy is important, yes but I WOULD NOT let my kids on the internet. I would have an internet free household. Yes, even I would have no internet.

Kids shouldn’t be on the internet at all lol, it’s so unfiltered.

Yeah the problem with that "kids shouldn't be on the internet" rethoric is that a lot of us here have started using the internet when we were kids. Especially during the good ol' Flash days of the internet where we fuck around watching stick figures killing each other in graphic ways and jerking it to dress up games because we get to see a 2D pussy.

That being said, the heavy amount of censorship on content that either are infringing on copyrighted material (despite it being used under the guidelines of fair use) or to appease advertisers who will sponsor your material is a major downgrade to how it was during the 2000s. I get that the internet as a whole is something everybody is using seriously and there are some shit from the old internet days that are best rid of such as dumbass flame wars (which didn't really went away consider "Cancel Culture) or fucked up images/comments sent by trolls (again also didn't went away); but the direction its going with being advertiser friendly is more of hinderance then an improvement.

Its a weird dichotomy really. We want an internet that is free and creator friendly for all to enjoy . . . but if we were real we still kind of need the money as the Internet isn't 100% free to use.

It's true that the impact will be felt in 2021, celotehpraja