this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2025
163 points (96.6% liked)

PC Gaming

12281 readers
306 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hyperbolic title to be sure but I think it's justified to point out Fuck Bloomberg.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ulrich@feddit.org -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Whether you as a miserable Lemmy-goer likes it or not, "obvious stuff" makes for very simple reasoning and is plenty adequate explanation.

It's absolutely not.

the only way such a move would work is if we had a mass creator exodus which would force a much larger audience to follow them. Is that better?

No it's not better because it's not true. Steve already has a massive audience. He already has several dozen other social media platforms he can use to promote a new space. There are a dozen other ways he can make money. It's not unrealistic.

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You're assuming all of those followers are going to follow him to that platform and stay on it solely for his videos. They won't. A large chunk? Maybe. But not all of them. I'd say ~65% max, and that's one hell of a hit to earnings if they're ad-based. On top of that, moving to a platform that has a much lower userbase limits growth which means the content creator putting themselves into a situation of viewship decline which isn't smart. But you're a Peertube stan and don't care about those minor details so I'm sure it'll be fine.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You're assuming all of those followers are going to follow him

No I'm not, nor is that what I said.

On top of that, moving to a platform that has a much lower userbase limits growth which means the content creator putting themselves into a situation of viewship decline which isn't smart

Continuing to build your business on the rented land of a monopoly that doesn't give a single shit about you isn't smart either.

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No I'm not, nor is that what I said.

So we've got to that part of the discussion, have we? The part where the pieces line up too much for comfort so you deny what you were saying. Cool.

Continuing to contribute to a monopoly isn't smart either.

This is something I actually agree with but short of a mass exodus of big creators, I see it being too small to matter, only serving to cripple the creators who jump ship.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

We've gotten to the part of the conversation where you run out of legitimate arguments and resort to strawmanning.