• LoafyLemon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Google making a good change on YouTube wasn’t on my bingo card this week. I’m positively surprised.

    • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      My money is on one of either

      • sorting made it too easy to skip shit content and YouTube decided they lost engagement
      • it’s too confusing for normies

      This is why we can’t have nice things.

      Damn I’ve gotten so cynical about social media.

    • sznio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      To bury old content on old channels.

      Go to Vsauce, sort from oldest and be surprised.

  • hhj@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have the feeling that the only reason they’re bringing back the feature is because of their push to integrate podcasts within YouTube. It makes sense to be able to sort by oldest to newest in the context of podcast episodes.

  • nadram@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    They try really hard to test our patience. It never should have been removed 🙄🙄🙄

    • Eribetra@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly, Youtube never should have removed that sorting option. Such a weird thing to do that only impairs users, without benefit for Youtube or content creators (assuming you can monetize old videos).

      • LuckyFeathers@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There may be an argument that not allowing to sort by oldest makes people watch fewer old videos which means they can reduce caching server costs by moving older videos off most of the servers. Not sure how big that impact would be financially, though.