My YouTube

I’ve had my YouTube channel since March 2006. I posted videos from time to time. After a few years, I was eligible to post videos longer than 15 minutes. Then I verified my account in the background and the channel was eligible for monetization and I became a YouTube Partner.

The cool thing about these are that it allowed you to upload videos longer than 15 minutes. By verifying, it allowed you to upload custom thumbnails. By enabling monetization and becoming a YouTube Partner, I could schedule when my videos would be published.

I just uploaded random videos of vacations, karaoke, and building LEGO sets for fun. When I reached 100 subscribers, I was able to add a custom URL (http://www.Youtube.com/StupidSystemus).

There is no set theme for my channel, but I do like creating time lapse vids of me building LEGO sets. I’ve incorporated gaming videos when I learned how to do that for console. I still post random videos from time to time.

Last year, YouTube made a requirement for channels to have 10,000 lifetime views to be eligible for YouTube Partner Program. On January 16, 2018, with the recent problems plaguing YouTube (Adpocalypse 1.0, 2.0, Logan Paul), in response, YouTube sent emails to small time content creators informing them that unless they have 4,000 hours of watch time within the past 12 months and 1,000 subscribers, they will lose all monetization tools and features within the YouTube Partner Program. They have until February 20, 2018 to surpass that threshold.

With my generous 250+ subscribers, my channel makes about $5-7/month. It’s peanuts compared to how much these other channels make, but it puts a smile to my face and keeps me making videos when I can. I don’t speak for all creators, but that small amount is probably what keeps them going and making videos as well. That small amount is enough to justify pouring your time effort to grow your channel.

YouTube’s response to the adpocalypse and their golden boy uploading a video of a dead body on Aokigahara is to punish tons of small time creators. They're just telling us they care about him and not about the rest of us cause he brings in a looooooooot of money. Can you imagine if websites that relied on page clicks get the same treatment? This just reinforces clickbait content and creating controversy to increase watch time from creators.

This whole thing sucks. It’s demoralizing.

At the same time, I never set out to make money on YouTube. I only enabled monetization because of the features that come with them. I hope they don’t go away. I love making videos.

I’m done.

The Worst Thing About the Internet

I remembered when I was a kid when my mom and our nanny were talking about this pamphlet they got from people passing them around outside the grocery store. I was 8 years old at the time (this was 1992) and could barely read in English. I knew enough to read the pamphlet headline: End of the world in 1999. They were talking about Revelations in the Bible. The pamphlet spoke about the wrongly dead coming back to life. It also talked about the good people being taken with the bad ones left behind. I didn't understand this concept as well as a kid, but I remembered thinking this would be like an alien mother ship taking all the good people away from Earth. This gave me a scare for a few weeks. Then, like most kids, I stopped asking questions and moved on. All the adults stopped talking about it, so it gave me a sense of security while still partly scared deep down.

Stories and rumors like these spread around cities through word of mouth, soothsayers and the gullible. Some were famous enough to get radio and TV time. People were particularly gullible and believe everything. Growing up, I look back to it all and found it both silly and alarming. It's silly because adults are embarrassed to be found wrong, especially by a child. It's alarming that people still spread these rumors and just as many wholly believe them.

My aunt had a "dumb" moment one time. My cousins and I were playing at our house. She came running over, screaming for her kids about something happening in the world. She made us turn on the TV and change the channel to HBO (of all the channels). There was a news reporter talking about an invasion. There were people running and in panic in the streets and other damages. It cuts back to the news reporter signing off and ending the broadcast with the static screen. Then the credits rolled in. My cousins were still asking our aunt (their mother) if everything is OK. I was speaking to myself loudly, saying not not to worry about it as this was just a movie made to look like a real event. My aunt was just staring at the screen and answered in single words to our cousins. They left and went home. I'm still amused about the whole encounter. I think my aunt got embarrassed for believing the movie to be real and didn't bother explaining her weird behavior. Her heart was in the right place, but she probably felt betrayed by it all.

Fake stories and rumors are still spread around the world in pretty much the same way. The only difference now is that we have the Internet. For all the advancements and convenience it gave the world, I think the worst thing about the Internet is giving stupidity a voice. Many have called this time period the Information Age. Anything we want to know, we can learn online. It's not immune to misinformation, unfortunately.

It's probably a human defect inherit to all of us. We put too much trust in the written word. We believe what we want to believe. We read with our own voice in our head or imagine how the words are said by the source (implied source, at least). We project our own understanding and interpret them as we see fit.

"So it was written, so it shall be done." Not all the time. Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

"To say that nothing is true, is to realize that the foundations of society are fragile, and that we must be the shepherds of our own civilization. To say that everything is permitted, is to understand that we are the architects of our actions, and that we must live with their consequences, whether glorious or tragic."

There are some serious truths in that quote. Do you think this is true? Or do you just want to believe it? Awake yet?

I'm done.

Of Supes and Spidey

Metallo: I ran Superman's face through a facial recognition scan. I found out his identity. He's Clark Kent! He works at the Daily Planet.

Lex Luthor: Yeah Metallo, we all know. Keep it to yourself.

Metallo: What? If everyone knows why isn't it public?

Lex Luthor: Because if we make him keep his job it's 8 hours less in the day he's trying to stop us.

Metallo: But we could attack him when he least suspects it!

Lex Luthor: Why, you think he's less bulletproof when he's at home in his pajamas?

-----------------------------------------

Spider-Man

Eddie Brock: JAMESON! YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE ME! PETER PARKER IS SPIDER-MAN

J. Jonah Jameson: Yeah, I know...

... What, you thought I didn't know? Kid walks in, baggy clothes and a bunch of posing shots he couldn't have possibly taken of anyone but himself? Of course it's him, But I'm not gonna tell him.

Men this day and age don't have the initiative and drive they used to. Girls break their heart, and what do they do? Post about it on their facespaces or mytwits, or whatever. And in walks a kid trying to make a difference, and some change, and you think I'm just going to pat the kid on the back? Hell no. Men crave competition, and and adversarial force to chase them on. I give the kid the works so he gives the city results. You tell a kid he's doing well, and he gets bored. A Spider-Man can't get BORED.

You, on the other hand, are what happens when everyone tells you you're gonna be great, and then it doesn't pan out. You had nowhere to go but down. And down you did. Is that thing even sanitary? You gave up after one case and got freaky with space goo? What sort of fabrege ego did you have?

I don't have to tell Parker I believe in him to get him to be a hero. You needed approval to keep yourself from going insane. Who's the real man of integrity and valor?

Now get the hell out of my office. I have tomorrow's headline to pick, and you were fired eight years ago.

I'm done.

Internet Pet Peeve

If you've been on the Internet and found yourself into an online discussion, debate or argument, you most likely have encountered people who don't really contribute anything, yet praised or commended for their comments. I'm talking about people who ask rhetorical questions with no follow up or people who use a personal stance on an issue against the person who said them, coming off as if they did something smart.

On the former, an example would be a person who responds to the topic or to another person in that discussion, saying "what else is new?" or "tell us something we don't already know?" On the latter, a more commonly observed reaction from people are twisting the topic or a comment in any discussion in favor of their side. It's a great skill when done wisely. However, in this case, the person will most likely say "it's ironic people are complaining about complainers" or something similar to that.

These comments and comebacks are quite lazy, to be honest. Half of me find these comments as "haha" funny, but when you really look into it, these types of reactions are just cirkle-jerk Internet elitism that avoids the real issue and subsequent discussion.

I'm far from conflicted in this topic. I know where I stand. Do you?

I'm done.