A month ago, YouTube decided to limit Indian mobile users to a maximum of 480p, citing bandwidth constraints. However, with 85 percent of YouTube users residing outside India, completely unaffected, the decision prompts questions about discrimination and equal access to the digital commons.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/YouTube-stop-with-the-480p-bandwidth-discrimination-in-India-already.465786.0.html
I don't think this has anything to do with the lockdown, but is all about how cheap bandwidth is in India now. With Jio entering the market and cutting mobile bandwidth prices by 98% or more, no Indian user has an incentive to cut back on bandwidth use anymore. As a heavy YT user, I used to cut back most of my video watching to 480p, to at least not hit the daily 1GB quota, but I just ended up getting a couple more SIM cards late last year and watch most everything in 720p ever since, racking up around 50 GBs of YT video monthly.
Once Corona hit, they wouldn't let me go over 480p on my phone, which I used more, but still allow 1080p and higher on my tablet, so there seems to be some kind of device profiling going on (not based on YT account as I never login, and if they force it, I delete the app's storage and my preferences just to get back out again). They should just sell gift cards and let us pay by the video, but since they stupidly don't do that, we get these strange limits instead.
"millions of Indian YouTube users who are forced to watch YouTube videos at a paltry 480p."
I mean, it's not like anyone is forced to watch YouTube. YouTube is not some universal human right, it's a profit-aimed website and it can do whatever it feels like. I live in Czechia, and we often get the lower quality products than customers in Germany from same manufacturer (e.g. juice has lower percentage of fruit but it's the same product that costs the same money). But am I going to complain about discrimination? No, because nobody forces me to buy it. If I don't like the product, I can buy juice from other manufacturer or just drink water. To sum it up - entitlement tastes like spikes, so don't be upset that YouTube lowers the quality in your country, be happy that it's available there in a first place... You will be much happier in life if you look at things this way! :)
Quote from: Lightkeeper on May 18, 2020, 14:05:10
"millions of Indian YouTube users who are forced to watch YouTube videos at a paltry 480p."
I mean, it's not like anyone is forced to watch YouTube. YouTube is not some universal human right, it's a profit-aimed website and it can do whatever it feels like. I live in Czechia, and we often get the lower quality products than customers in Germany from same manufacturer (e.g. juice has lower percentage of fruit but it's the same product that costs the same money). But am I going to complain about discrimination? No, because nobody forces me to buy it. If I don't like the product, I can buy juice from other manufacturer or just drink water. To sum it up - entitlement tastes like spikes, so don't be upset that YouTube lowers the quality in your country, be happy that it's available there in a first place... You will be much happier in life if you look at things this way! :)
Completely agree
Quote from: Unknown on May 18, 2020, 14:35:40
Quote from: Lightkeeper on May 18, 2020, 14:05:10
"millions of Indian YouTube users who are forced to watch YouTube videos at a paltry 480p."
I mean, it's not like anyone is forced to watch YouTube. YouTube is not some universal human right, it's a profit-aimed website and it can do whatever it feels like. I live in Czechia, and we often get the lower quality products than customers in Germany from same manufacturer (e.g. juice has lower percentage of fruit but it's the same product that costs the same money). But am I going to complain about discrimination? No, because nobody forces me to buy it. If I don't like the product, I can buy juice from other manufacturer or just drink water. To sum it up - entitlement tastes like spikes, so don't be upset that YouTube lowers the quality in your country, be happy that it's available there in a first place... You will be much happier in life if you look at things this way! :)
Completely agree
::)
I think you completely miss the author's point. He's questioning
why Indian users get penalised, when they make up a relatively small part of the demand whilst being a not insubstantial part of the market.
On the face of it, it seems unreasonable and inconsistent to limit Indian viewers, whilst allowing countries that have similar income revenues to have much better quality.
Not to mention, I can imagine the degree of inequality is far higher in India than Eastern Europe, so the people with access to YouTube in India are likely to have incomes considerably higher than the GDP per capita anyway.
Quote from: t4n0n on May 18, 2020, 14:50:29
Quote from: Unknown on May 18, 2020, 14:35:40
Quote from: Lightkeeper on May 18, 2020, 14:05:10
"millions of Indian YouTube users who are forced to watch YouTube videos at a paltry 480p."
I mean, it's not like anyone is forced to watch YouTube. YouTube is not some universal human right, it's a profit-aimed website and it can do whatever it feels like. I live in Czechia, and we often get the lower quality products than customers in Germany from same manufacturer (e.g. juice has lower percentage of fruit but it's the same product that costs the same money). But am I going to complain about discrimination? No, because nobody forces me to buy it. If I don't like the product, I can buy juice from other manufacturer or just drink water. To sum it up - entitlement tastes like spikes, so don't be upset that YouTube lowers the quality in your country, be happy that it's available there in a first place... You will be much happier in life if you look at things this way! :)
Completely agree
::)
I think you completely miss the author's point. He's questioning why Indian users get penalised, when they make up a relatively small part of the demand whilst being a not insubstantial part of the market.
On the face of it, it seems unreasonable and inconsistent to limit Indian viewers, whilst allowing countries that have similar income revenues to have much better quality.
Not to mention, I can imagine the degree of inequality is far higher in India than Eastern Europe, so the people with access to YouTube in India are likely to have incomes considerably higher than the GDP per capita anyway.
It might sound unreasonable on a first glance, but I'm pretty sure YouTube/Google has a sizeable team of experts to determine what's worth for them and what isn't, and I'm sure they know better than you or me or the author of the article. But the point is - it shouldn't matter whether they lower the streaming quality in India because they have lower GDP, because the bandwidths are cheap or just because Google doesn't like Indian mythology. They're not charity and YouTube isn't a basic human need.
Quote from: Lightkeeper on May 18, 2020, 14:05:10
"millions of Indian YouTube users who are forced to watch YouTube videos at a paltry 480p."
I mean, it's not like anyone is forced to watch YouTube. YouTube is not some universal human right, it's a profit-aimed website and it can do whatever it feels like. I live in Czechia, and we often get the lower quality products than customers in Germany from same manufacturer (e.g. juice has lower percentage of fruit but it's the same product that costs the same money). But am I going to complain about discrimination? No, because nobody forces me to buy it. If I don't like the product, I can buy juice from other manufacturer or just drink water. To sum it up - entitlement tastes like spikes, so don't be upset that YouTube lowers the quality in your country, be happy that it's available there in a first place... You will be much happier in life if you look at things this way! :)
I think you are doing the same, forcing your thoughts on the editor.
Quote from: EZIO on May 18, 2020, 15:26:12
Quote from: Lightkeeper on May 18, 2020, 14:05:10
"millions of Indian YouTube users who are forced to watch YouTube videos at a paltry 480p."
I mean, it's not like anyone is forced to watch YouTube. YouTube is not some universal human right, it's a profit-aimed website and it can do whatever it feels like. I live in Czechia, and we often get the lower quality products than customers in Germany from same manufacturer (e.g. juice has lower percentage of fruit but it's the same product that costs the same money). But am I going to complain about discrimination? No, because nobody forces me to buy it. If I don't like the product, I can buy juice from other manufacturer or just drink water. To sum it up - entitlement tastes like spikes, so don't be upset that YouTube lowers the quality in your country, be happy that it's available there in a first place... You will be much happier in life if you look at things this way! :)
I think you are doing the same, forcing your thoughts on the editor.
Completely Agree.
Quote from: EZIO on May 18, 2020, 15:26:12
Quote from: Lightkeeper on May 18, 2020, 14:05:10
"millions of Indian YouTube users who are forced to watch YouTube videos at a paltry 480p."
I mean, it's not like anyone is forced to watch YouTube. YouTube is not some universal human right, it's a profit-aimed website and it can do whatever it feels like. I live in Czechia, and we often get the lower quality products than customers in Germany from same manufacturer (e.g. juice has lower percentage of fruit but it's the same product that costs the same money). But am I going to complain about discrimination? No, because nobody forces me to buy it. If I don't like the product, I can buy juice from other manufacturer or just drink water. To sum it up - entitlement tastes like spikes, so don't be upset that YouTube lowers the quality in your country, be happy that it's available there in a first place... You will be much happier in life if you look at things this way! :)
I think you are doing the same, forcing your thoughts on the editor.
Would you mind to elaborate on how was I 'forcing my thoughts' tho? I don't feel like the author was 'forcing' his point of view either, he just gave his opinion and I offered mine, that's it :)
NBC is really going down the gutter.
Quote from: Lightkeeper on May 18, 2020, 14:05:10
"millions of Indian YouTube users who are forced to watch YouTube videos at a paltry 480p."
I mean, it's not like anyone is forced to watch YouTube. YouTube is not some universal human right, it's a profit-aimed website and it can do whatever it feels like. I live in Czechia, and we often get the lower quality products than customers in Germany from same manufacturer (e.g. juice has lower percentage of fruit but it's the same product that costs the same money). But am I going to complain about discrimination? No, because nobody forces me to buy it. If I don't like the product, I can buy juice from other manufacturer or just drink water. To sum it up - entitlement tastes like spikes, so don't be upset that YouTube lowers the quality in your country, be happy that it's available there in a first place... You will be much happier in life if you look at things this way! :)
I understand where you're coming from with that particular argument. I spent half my life in the US. Even things likes Cheetos taste better over there because they're made to higher quality standard. But I feel that's missing the point about what the Internet has become. The UN declared Internet access a fundamental human right back in 2016. Seen from that perspective, the top internet platforms in the world, sites like YouTube, social media platforms, and search engines are more akin to public utilities. Yes, YouTube, Google, Facebook, and others are private entities. But they're not just providing a one-off service. They're public utility providers in the same way that a private electricity distributor is a utility provider. There are so many people using YouTube for e-learning. So many people make informed purchase decisions after watching YouTube videos. It would be like if your power or water distributor decided to deliver an inferior water or electricity supply to some people and not others. Calling that out isn't entitlement, I feel.
Quote from: Arjun Krishna Lal on May 18, 2020, 17:11:39
Quote from: Lightkeeper on May 18, 2020, 14:05:10
"millions of Indian YouTube users who are forced to watch YouTube videos at a paltry 480p."
I mean, it's not like anyone is forced to watch YouTube. YouTube is not some universal human right, it's a profit-aimed website and it can do whatever it feels like. I live in Czechia, and we often get the lower quality products than customers in Germany from same manufacturer (e.g. juice has lower percentage of fruit but it's the same product that costs the same money). But am I going to complain about discrimination? No, because nobody forces me to buy it. If I don't like the product, I can buy juice from other manufacturer or just drink water. To sum it up - entitlement tastes like spikes, so don't be upset that YouTube lowers the quality in your country, be happy that it's available there in a first place... You will be much happier in life if you look at things this way! :)
I understand where you're coming from with that particular argument. I spent half my life in the US. Even things likes Cheetos taste better over there because they're made to higher quality standard. But I feel that's missing the point about what the Internet has become. The UN declared Internet access a fundamental human right back in 2016. Seen from that perspective, the top internet platforms in the world, sites like YouTube, social media platforms, and search engines are more akin to public utilities. Yes, YouTube, Google, Facebook, and others are private entities. But they're not just providing a one-off service. They're public utility providers in the same way that a private electricity distributor is a utility provider. There are so many people using YouTube for e-learning. So many people make informed purchase decisions after watching YouTube videos. It would be like if your power or water distributor decided to deliver an inferior water or electricity supply to some people and not others. Calling that out isn't entitlement, I feel.
Well you do raise some good points... Let's just keep fingers crossed the whole coronavirus thing fades quickly so things like this can go back to normal.
Good points, but I don't think that the goal (a goal that is not universally shared, despite UN declarations) of universal internet access necessarily implies equal access to the various platforms on the internet which are normally run by for profit private entities.
In my opinion they just don't have as many servers there as in Europe or the US, so they can't handle the spike there that well.
And in Europe at least, the decision to lower quality came from the governments, so maybe the Indian one is at play too.
Do you really think Youtube has some grudge against India? This comes off very conspiracy theory-esque. If Youtube didn't value the indian market due to lower ad revenue income, why did not limit quality before the Corona pandemic? The real reason for the quality limit is probably a genuine infrastructure problem with the current situation or maybe they've done it on request of the government. The same happened in Europe, although they still have the option to manually change quality freely.
Its been 2 months of having 480p shoved down our collective throats by lazy cucked execs at google who decided a one size fits all for the entire indian demographic. It would have been fine if it defaulted to 480p and still had the option to change to 1080p, but these nannying fascists though so highly of themselves that they are deciding for us that nope, you dont need anything higher because fucking corona. Of course i just use a vpn and get my premium youtube app content in 1080p, but i shouldnt have to. I am paying for the bandwidth, and paying for the premium subscription to youtube. I am capable of deciding for myself how i want to view it. so yeah, the assholes who decided to keep this policy post 17th may can choke on a dick.
I've installed newpipe app, now instead of clicking video in YouTube app I share the video to newpipe which plays the video at whatever resolution I want. No ads is another benefit while the downside is YouTube doesn't know I watched the video so recommendations aren't updated.
I hope Google removes this restriction soon so I wouldn't have to do this extra step.
google.com/amp/s/www.newindianexpress.com/business/2020/mar/22/covid-19-netflix-amazon-and-other-ott-platforms-asked-to-lower-video-streaming-quality-2120136.amp
google.com/amp/s/www.thequint.com/amp/story/tech-and-auto%252Ftech-news%252Fnetflix-hotstar-coai-seek-indian-govt-support-lower-streaming-quality
Not sure if you guys had the time to actually see the news. The govt did request or at least the mobile network association did. Among the countries where data is very cheap, india is in the top. Since entire IT industry has moved to work from home and people need bandwidth (either broadband or mobile hotspot) to work. People mindlessly bogging on stupid content on YouTube wiill not help our economy.
Hence this restriction. And YouTube doesn't limit to 480p if you're on anything other than mobile or in a mobile network. I can still watch a 4k vid on wifi in my tv.
YouTube placed restrictions for Europe too after the govt requested them. With a population like ours where data is cheap and this stay at home mode can create quite a huge spike, it's necessary to place restrictions like this especially when it's coming mobile networks who own the infra. Maybe YouTube can reduce bitrate like Netflix but YouTube isn't singling out us.
That said we do face digital inequalities. I seriously wish we had xcloud here(much better than stadia). We don't have GeForce now and psnow either. Our Netflix library sucks balls. Tbh YouTube is the only place I'm not seeing this kinda discrimination but there has been a concern going on fishy dating app ads displayed to indian users recently. But other than that YouTube isn't singling us out on resolution restrictions. Calm down bro.
We have the same problem in Canada. 480p Only.