this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
1532 points (99.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

5863 readers
3389 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kamen@lemmy.world 53 points 3 months ago (11 children)

It's logical if you're the user.

Imagine how for every one user doing this deliberately there are nine who pause a video and forget it in the background, wasting bandwidth in the process.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (10 children)

Is bandwith that expensive nowadays? I feel the argument is valid but was implemented when bandwidth was way more expensive.

I mean, if I upgrade my home internet box to the 40€ tier I'll have 10Gb symmetrical.

Edit: there are a lot of google fanbois here lol

[–] sigezayaq@startrek.website 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It’s not about your bandwidth, it’s about YouTube’s bandwidth. You probably don’t care, but for them it adds up to a lot

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I just showed how inexpensive it has become.

Do you think I think I'm youtube??

[–] pool_spray_098@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

You showed your home bandwidth. It means absolutely nothing in this discussion.

How often do people watch the first few seconds of a video and not finish it? It happens a lot. It probably happens a lot more often than that user actually finishing it. We could be talking about doubling Google's bandwidth requirement. Not to mention server CPU time, disk I/O. Do you have any idea how expensive the operational costs of YouTube probably are as it is? This is an efficiency game to successfully run a video platform which supports up to high bitrate 4k video at this unfathomable scale, servicing the entire planet.

It makes the most efficient sense for them to only let you buffer a little bit at a time, not more than you need.

I'm not kissing Google's ass. I'm just pointing out that if you want the service to exist, it has to be designed as efficiently as possible, otherwise it won't exist for long.

[–] FarmTaco@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Man ive got like 8 tabs right now with paused videos cause I cant focus on shit

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)