Odysee, a decentralised YouTube alternative focused on free speech, is officially ending the serving of ads on the platform, starting today. The post:

"Dear friends of Odysee, Starting today, we’re removing all ads. We don’t need ads to make money as a platform and we are confident in the development of our own new monetisation programs that will help creators earn a living and at the same time keep Odysee alive. Ultimately, sacrificing the overall user experience to make a few bucks isn’t worth it to us and nor is it even sustainable for a platform that wishes to make something truly open and creatively free.

As we take this decision, one thing is certain to us, media platforms (even ones that market themselves as ‘free-speech’) typically devolve into advertising companies and end up becoming beholden to their paymasters. It’s been that way for centuries and is never going to change.

As we see YouTube become more aggressive with their ad deployment and ‘Free Speech’ platforms try to build their own ad businesses it’s apparent to us that we’re building a model for Odysee that will keep it sustainable not only financially, but in its ability to provide an incorruptible user experience.

Our approach may be considered niche or unconventional, that’s fine by us. Odysee will be used by the world on terms that are agreeable to its users, and we know our users don’t like ads.

Best, Founder & Creator, Chief Executive Officer. Julian Chandra"

  • DreitonLullaby@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    4 months ago

    Why not do proper research about the platform before attacking one of the only platforms trying to create the change they want to see in the world?

    • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I attack them because the change they want to create is not one I want. You can keep your Nazi and crypto trash to yourself.

        • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          You know what’s interesting to me? People only screech “free speech!” when they are trying to say something shitty.

          Freedom of persecution from the government for speech criticizing that government is a good thing.

          But “freedom of speech absolutism” is only ever used as an argument by shitty people trying to say shitty things. Free speech doesn’t mean you should be free from repercussions from your peers.

          Nazis don’t need a platform, and they don’t need Devil’s advocates like you.

          • DreitonLullaby@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            But “freedom of speech absolutism” is only ever used as an argument by shitty people trying to say shitty things. Free speech doesn’t mean you should be free from repercussions from your peers.

            Me commenting on Odysee that LibreWolf is a great browser for privacy, or that SuperTuxKart and Veloren are good open source games is me saying shitty things, is it? You don’t even know the things that are said by the people you are talking about who advocate free speech absolutism. Further, Odysee inherently does not allow an absolutist level of free speech (it legally can’t), which is the whole reason they have community guidelines that must be followed.

            Edit: I accidentally seemed to be implying that I was a free speech absolutist when I am not. I do not believe that people should be allowed to promote violence or hatred of any kind; Odysee doesn’t allow this either. What I DO believe, is that those people should be allowed to express through speech what their own views are; even Nazi’s; as long as they aren’t promoting Nazism, violence, hatred or similar. So no, I am not being a devils advocate, because if the platform was completely 100% free speech to the point where it actually allows true hate speech, promotion or encouragement of violence and hatred etc., I wouldn’t be supporting the platform and defending it at all. If it were like that and I was still promoting it, than fair… calling me a devil’s advocate would make sense.