No, commercial services with a dominant position in the market cannot do whatever they want.

I’d rather see them on pause screen than interrupting the playback but because we can’t have any nice things, interruptions will also only get worse.

I mean, I do that sometimes, and it’s honestly not hard.

Keep doing it for your stuff, don’t try to make a rule for others to do the same.

I expect the same from others.

That’s the problem. You shouldn’t. It’s not your call to make. Deal with it.

I’m explaining the sentiment I see here.

The sentiment here is that a loud minority cries about a tiny fraction of submissions when they could just not watch the videos in the first place.

All I’m saying is to put in a little effort to link a relevant text article or add a few bullet points that the video covers. That’s it.

Literally nobody is stopping you from doing that for other submissions. Don’t task unpaid community members to do work for you, just because you don’t like videos.

Exactly. And with AI tools, getting a transcript and generating a summary shouldn’t be all that hard.

Write a summary bot then.

I’m not watching a random video someone posts just based on the headline

Then don’t.

I need a bit more reason to invest my time to contribute to the discussion.

You’re not that important. If you don’t contribute to a discussion just because the submission is a video, nobody will notice.

Don’t fucking post a two hour video that contains a few paragraphs of info then

You clearly don’t know what a summary is. I can summarize Lord of the Rings in three sentences. The details are still important.

If you don’t want to watch such a video, DON’T WATCH IT! Don’t forbid others to like what they like!

There’s a lot terrible articles with clickbate titles too.

The headline here does not need to be the same as the headline in the article. Other communities have rules not to editorialize headlines, this community does not. “Review of tech gadget X by outlet Y” is a perfectly fine headline here.

The purpose is to get you to watch the video, not to actually tell you what’s in the video.

There is no rule here to copy the video title into the submission headline. The submission here could be titled “PlayStation 5 Pro benchmarks by Digital Foundry”, no matter how DF names the video on YouTube. Demanding summaries of videos that can easily be longer than 45 minutes is just not reasonable at all.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect others to do the same.

Yes, it is. For a deep dive video a summary is easily several paragraphs long. Not only takes it time to write the summary, for a deep dive it would include making notes during the video, pausing several times, etc. In such a case of a deep dive, this can be an hour of work. So if you want summaries, you do the work. Don’t demand that from others and claim this is somehow a compromise.

Maybe you shouldn’t be active on a link aggregator platform then.

How about you write the summaries in the comments then if it’s just a bit of extra work?

a summary would be more than sufficient to quickly determine whether or not I would be interested in watching anyway.

That’s what the headlien is for.

A compromise would be to require a text summary of any video post.

That “compromise” would put a lot of work onto the person submitting a video, just because some people don’t like videos.

They still clog the feed and cause accidental clicks.

So because you do occasional misclicks, nobody else should be allowed to see any video submissions, even if they are super informative? Buddy, get a grip with reality. You’re not the center of the universe. Other people exist. “I don’t like something, therefore nobody can have it” is not a proper attitude.

Just don’t click on YouTube links if you don’t like them. Nobody makes you forces you to. No Lemmy client I know hides the URL and surprises you with video content. Plenty of video creators use that medium to showcase differences in technologies. Digital Foundry videos on topics such as frame generation come to mind.

Barely any game on GOG has a Linux port and CD Project enforces the Windows monopoly. GOG Galaxy only available for Windows, their own games only available for Windows, none of their massive resources put into improving WINE.

CD Project doesn’t do anything to improve WINE, so spending money there is wasted.

How do you know that Steam will be around in 20 years?

Use GOG instead, since the DRM-free game installers will outlive Steam :)

How do you know Windows will keep compatibility in 20 years? Valve money partially goes into Proton/WINE development and an evolution of that will absolutely be around in 20 years, just WINE was around 20 years ago already. CD Project doesn’t put any GOG/Cyberpunk money into breaking the Windows monopoly. (Also plenty of titles on Steam come without DRM because DRM is optional.)

The answer is literally the first word of the part I quoted.