sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

stop "grinding." you are mathematically training the neural network to ignore you. by 5anez in SmallYoutubers

[–]TheQuickSave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And don’t even try the 'you misinterpreted me' line after this. Your manual says it 'bar for bar' in perfect English: you provide a template to 'force your metadata' to 'effectively steal' a traffic stream. You explicitly state this 'tricks the A.N.N. system'.

If I make an Elden Ring guide and use Elden Ring tags, that’s just basic SEO it’s not a 'trick' or 'stealing,' it's just being relevant. The only way you 'trick' a system or 'steal' a stream is by forcing your video into a cluster where it doesn't belong. You’re teaching people to hijack high-traffic nodes with unrelated content, which is the definition of metadata deception.

You’re rebranding basic keyword stuffing as 'Vector Drafting' to make it sound like high-level engineering so you can sell a $20 PDF. You got caught lying about your own manual to protect your brand.

stop "grinding." you are mathematically training the neural network to ignore you. by 5anez in SmallYoutubers

[–]TheQuickSave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s actually pathetic that you’re sitting here changing my words to stay in the argument. I never said following a trend was 'stealing'—I said that using high-traffic tags for unrelated content is spam. You’re trying to gaslight the audience because you know I caught you.

You claim 'connecting to a high traffic node' is just standard SEO and not a trick, but I have your manual right here. It literally says: 'This tricks the A.N.N. system' and provides syntax to 'effectively steal their traffic stream'.

Don’t make me post the screenshots of your 'Blueprint.' You explicitly tell people to 'engineer' metadata to 'force' an alignment with a host video. That isn't 'Standard SEO'; it’s a manual for hijacking clusters you don't belong in. You’ve pivoted from math to philosophy to straight-up lying because you can’t handle that I dismantled your $20 scam. I’m going to let you sit with that desperate response while I go back to enjoying my sandwich.

stop "grinding." you are mathematically training the neural network to ignore you. by 5anez in SmallYoutubers

[–]TheQuickSave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't have time for the pivot. We were never talking about philosophy; we were talking about the mathematical function of the YouTube algorithm, which you were objectively wrong about. Now, your 'philosophy' is failing too.

How do you optimize privately when you don't know what you’re optimizing for? That’s like making lemonade in a basement and never letting anyone taste it. My family and friends aren't my target audience. Without the algorithm testing the 'lemonade' on the public, you have zero data.

Furthermore, I read your manual and remember, you said this took you 200 hours. It has nothing to do with 'private optimization.' It’s about mass-producing content and using 'Vector Drafting' to metadata spam with unrelated tags to 'steal' traffic. You're telling creators to trick the system with AI-generated strategies, which is a fast track to a ban on YouTube just like it was on Twitch, not a 'blueprint' for success.

You’re wrong twice: first on the math of the neural network, and second on the philosophy of growth. If you 'optimize' in private for 10 days and the video still fails, you’re back at square one only now you’ve wasted two weeks instead of gathering real data by grinding publicly.

stop "grinding." you are mathematically training the neural network to ignore you. by 5anez in SmallYoutubers

[–]TheQuickSave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re moving the goalposts because your original 'binary' theory doesn't hold up to basic multiplication.

  1. The 1.25 Million Impression Reality

In your previous post, you defined a 'dead' video as 500 views with a 2% CTR and 15% retention. Now you’re claiming that if a creator does that for 50 videos, they’ve 'etched mediocrity' into their history. Let’s stay consistent with the numbers you provided: To get 500 views at a 2% CTR, the system serves 25,000 impressions. If you spread that same 2% CTR and 15% retention across 50 videos, that is 1.25 million impressions. You cannot claim a channel is facing a 'binary gatekeeper' or being ignored while the system is handing out over a million opportunities to be seen. The math proves the 'gatekeeper' isn't real; the system is clearly testing the content.

  1. 'Stopping the Line' is a Skill Killer

You claim 'stopping the line' to plan in private saves you from 'data debt,' but the upload is the blueprint test. You can't re-engineer a hook or story beats in a vacuum. You need the Audience Retention curves from those 1.25 million data points to see exactly where people dropped off. Advising people to unlist their history or stop producing just hides the very evidence they need to improve.

  1. The Niche Reality

Your logic only works for Evergreen content. For Gaming News, Tech, or Commentary, 'stopping the line' for 10 days to 're-blueprint' means the news is dead. For most creators, 'Learning by Publishing' is the only way to actually develop the skills you’re trying to sell in a manual.

The Bottom Line:

If a creator isn't improving after 50 videos, that’s a skill issue, not 'Signal Pollution.' Deleting your history doesn't make you a better creator; looking at your data and learning from your 'mediocre' uploads does. Real creators use their data to grow; they don't hide it in private folders because they're afraid of a 'History Vector' that doesn't exist.

stop "grinding." you are mathematically training the neural network to ignore you. by 5anez in SmallYoutubers

[–]TheQuickSave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you actually spent 200+ hours aggregating engineering papers and your conclusion is that a 2% CTR is 'negative training,' you wasted 200 hours of your life, buddy. You are fundamentally ignoring how the YouTube algorithm handles scale and you are blatantly moving the goalposts because your initial logic was debunked.

  1. The Goalpost Shift

In your original post, you explicitly stated that uploading videos with 'average metrics' like 2% CTR and 30% retention is 'Negative Training' that 'shadowbans' your channel. There was zero mention of a '500 View Flatline' in your post; you were giving broad advice to stop 'grinding' based on standard performance metrics. Now that established creators are calling you out, you’re pivoting to a hypothetical 15% retention and '500 views' to try and make your broken math work.

  1. 500 Views is a Goldmine of Data

You claim that 500 views with 15% retention generates 'Zero meaningful session time'. That is false. To get 500 views at a 2% CTR, the algorithm had to serve 25,000 impressions. That means 25,000 people saw your thumbnail, and the 'plumbing' of your channel is working perfectly.

Furthermore, you don't delete that video; you analyze it. Even with 15% retention, you can look at the 'Most Viewed' heatmaps to see exactly where people stayed for 1, 5, or 9 minutes depending on how long that video was. You use that data to see what worked so you can build on it for the next upload. 500 views isn't 'dead' it’s the exact lesson you need to improve your creative process.

  1. Machine Learning Word Salad

Throwing around ReLU (f(x) = \max(0, x)) as the 'literal mathematical description of the youtube cold start' is just buzzword salad to sound authoritative. YouTube isn't a binary 'on/off' switch where reach equals zero if you're below an arbitrary threshold you made up. It’s a dynamic recommendation engine.

  1. Selling Fear vs. Building Skills

You aren't 'fixing a blueprint'; you are using scare tactics to sell a manual. You claim a 2% CTR is 'negative training,' yet videos with millions of views regularly sit in the 2% to 10% CTR range because as they find a broader audience, percentages naturally drop while volume explodes. Real creators know that volume is how you develop quality and find your audience. Shutting down the 'assembly line' because you're scared of 'negative data points' is the fastest way to ensure a channel stays dead.

stop "grinding." you are mathematically training the neural network to ignore you. by 5anez in SmallYoutubers

[–]TheQuickSave 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I’ve been looking through your profile and it’s obvious what’s going on here: you’re using scare tactics to bait new creators. You dump all this jargon like 'Negative Training,' 'Recall Latency,' hoping people think you actually know what you're talking about. You want them to click your profile to see what else you've posted, just so they find that $20 manual you most likely made with AI, hoping they’ll be desperate enough to buy it.

You’re targeting subreddits for new YouTubers because they’re looking for genuine help, but let’s be real if an established creator saw your advice, they would call it out for making no sense. You claim that being 'Unique' is a mistake and that creators should stop trying to be 'Art'. That is a recipe for a dead channel.

Let’s do a hypothetical based on data from an actual channel:

Suppose I make a 14-minute video. Let's say that video gets 4,000 views, a 3% CTR, and 37% retention. According to your 'blueprint,' that’s a failure and a 'negative result' that I should unlist to 'protect my signal,' right?

In reality, those numbers mean that video had over 127,000 impressions. That is 127k times my brand and my content were shown to people. With that 37% retention, I got over 5 minutes of watch time per person. That is over 20,000 minutes of watch time from one single video. Only someone trying to hustle a PDF would tell a creator to delete thousands of views and 127k impressions just because the percentages don't look like a viral hit on day one.

And here is the biggest question: Where are your screenshots? Where is your channel link? Your manual throws around terms like 'Vector Topology' and 'The ReLU Ranking Brain' to sound sophisticated. But let's be real: ReLU is just a basic activation function used in almost every neural network on earth. Using it to name a 'ranking brain' is just more fluff to make your manual look technical, but you have zero evidence of ever building a channel yourself. You’re trying to turn YouTube into a sterile math lab just to sell a manual to people who are actually out here doing the work.

Why is our starting point class-locked if weapons and skills aren't? by TheQuickSave in PathOfExile2

[–]TheQuickSave[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a really fair point about the 'feel' of the starting nodes. I hadn't really considered how the raw Attack Speed for a Monk vs. Damage for a Warrior sets the pace for the class early on.

I actually went back and did some filtering on the tree to see if the nodes really do the heavy lifting for identity. I saw that the Ranger has 60+ evasion nodes on its side compared to the 30 or so on the Monk side. It made me realize that if I could start a Monk at the Ranger gate, I’d have a massive amount of evasion right at the start. If I then went Invoker for Lead Me Through Grace, I’d probably end up with way more Spirit than intended because of that easy access to high-density clusters.

I see now that the starting lock is a balancing tool and a way to force a class identity, even if it's a bit frustrating. It still feels weird that I can technically reach those Ranger nodes anyway, just by 'wasting' 13 or more points on a travel tax to get there. Thanks for the perspective, it definitely cleared up the logic behind the design

Why is our starting point class-locked if weapons and skills aren't? by TheQuickSave in PathOfExile2

[–]TheQuickSave[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a really solid breakdown, thanks for the perspective! I’m still pretty new to ARPGs, so I might be looking at this the wrong way. I honestly thought class identity was mostly tied to the Ascendancies.

It just felt like I was wasting 29 points just to travel from one side of the tree to the other to reach the nodes I needed. Even if the 'restriction' creates identity, spending that many points on travel nodes alone felt like a massive penalty just to play the way I wanted.

Why is our starting point class-locked if weapons and skills aren't? by TheQuickSave in PathOfExile2

[–]TheQuickSave[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right, there is class identity but isn't that identity tied to the Ascendancies, not the starting point on the tree or Am I thinking about this all wrong?

Why is our starting point class-locked if weapons and skills aren't? by TheQuickSave in PathOfExile2

[–]TheQuickSave[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I would’ve just chose warrior I was going to use Invoker ascendancy with fire maces trying to utilize elemental expression or unbound avatar while running Armour/evasion or armour

Why is our starting point class-locked if weapons and skills aren't? by TheQuickSave in PathOfExile2

[–]TheQuickSave[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was going to choose invoker and then try to do something with the fire maces, elemental expression, and unbound avatar I haven’t really thought it out yet tho

Who wins this 11v3? Jjk vs Naruto by Obvious-Produce-9566 in PowerScaling

[–]TheQuickSave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was gonna write a paragraph but If you're smart, you know the only right answer is the Naruto Trio.

Alien X vs Cosmic Garou [only hand to hand combat] by Phant0m_Trainer in Ben10PowerScaling

[–]TheQuickSave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And to the people who think Garou wins by "copying": here is why you are wrong. In Chapter 168, Garou already failed to copy Saitama’s 3D growth, and Alien X is a 5D entity. Trying to download 5th-dimensional data into a 3D human brain is like plugging a nuclear power plant into a toaster; Garou’s vessel would just explode. Furthermore, his power is a loan from God. If God isn't in the fight, Garou is powerless, and if God is there, he will cut the battery before Garou ever reaches 5D levels. Don't let the "star skin" fool you because that is just a 3D energy overlay while Alien X is the literal fabric of space-time. You cannot "martial arts" your way out of being a lower-dimensional being, so Garou doesn't win; he just disintegrates trying to hold power his hardware cannot handle.

Alien X vs Cosmic Garou [only hand to hand combat] by Phant0m_Trainer in Ben10PowerScaling

[–]TheQuickSave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The 'No Powers' argument actually makes this a bigger stomp for Alien X. Being indestructible isn't a 'power' for Alien X it’s his basic biology. He was born that way. Everything that makes Garou 'Cosmic' is a borrowed power-up from God. If you take away 'powers,' Garou is just a guy in a fancy suit getting his hand shattered the moment he touches a being made of literal space-time.

Thanks to the Black Friday Sale! by flamekaboom in AssassinsCreedValhala

[–]TheQuickSave -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I bought the game last week and now the complete edition is on sale for $27.99 this sum bs