He also said that he would consider Linus Media Group unionizing a "personal failure," which is about as good as you could typically expect from a business owner but still not great.
Giving him the benefit of the doubt, he probably meant that if a business owner treats his employees well, there shouldnt be a need to unionize. But that would mean he fundamentally misunderstands what a union is and why you want one. I dont know which is worse.
Your benefit of the doubt assumption is correct. He has explained it in detail a couple of times. Like you I find it unfortunate and frustrating.
Still, based on some of the numbers they have talked about their employee retention is very good and considering how talented many of the people who work for him are, if it were a shitty place to work that could likely easily find work elsewhere. I have a number of criticisms of Linus and his ADHD snap judgments or out of touch privileged takes, but he still strikes me as someone that does genuinely want to do the right thing that got insanely lucky and had to adapt to a crazy situation no random person off thee street would ever be that prepared before.
His POV on that from what I could tell was that he didn't want a union to be necessary. He wasn't opposed to the benefits one would provide, he just wanted to have a workplace where people didn't need to unionize just to get those benefits.
He also admits to pirating games and media. So like I think I agree, adblockers are a way to access things without "paying". Think people thought he was saying piracy like it was a bad thing. But I think he was just being literal.
In essence what he said was "know what you're doing" from what I can tell. No major judgement of the behavior, but instead just a notice that one should be aware of their actions.
Personally I'd love if more sites just added a ko-fi link or similar. You made good stuff? Here's some money I can spare, and if I get even more use out of your content in the future, I'll pay you a little more then.
I don't support ltt but that's the weakest (most cope least knowledgeable) argument there is honestly
like that makes sense because by adblocking you are basically receiving "paid" content for "free" (i put quotes bc the site isn't getting paid unless you click but whatever)
he elaborates to say that he isn't criticising it, just drawing an analogue, and that he uses one himself iirc
ublock origin+sponsorblock <3 btw
btw my reason for not liking ltt is just that i don't like the consolidation of media and info sources, and that there's just higher quality content to watch
Not to be an Internet pedant, but technically most definitions of Internet piracy describe it as illegally copying and distributing copyrighted content. Adblockers aren't doing either, they're just hiding UI elements and letting you access content your browser has already fetched, right from the original source
They also started to favor quantity of content over quality.
While true before a year ago, at the same time the SMM thing happened, they did some content mistakes, owned up to them and started doing the exact opposite of what you're saying
I certainly hope so. I stopped caring about them years ago for other reasons. I simply saw that story over the news when it happened.
But I could argue that it still took them the departure of their social media manager to realize what they were doing. If she just left without talking about her experience, who knows how they would be today.
the leaving of her and the change in content production were actually seperate issues. iirc she spoke up once the content issues came up. Her problem wasn't even "just" toxic work schedules/loads, but actual harrasment from someone, which aparently wasn't properly dealt with at the time
Well they do disclose their investment but I dont think it is what they were referencing. It makes sense for them to cover as they have a stake in the company doing well.