[Veratyr]

> Look, my time is valuable.

Clearly your time isn't valuable, as you spend it watching content you value at $0.

If the content you watched and hence the time you spent watching it actually held value to you, you would be happy to pay the meagre $10/mo subscription fee.

[icebraining]

I assume you spend most of your income of water, right? After all, it's the most indispensable element of out lives.

Also, as it was pointed out in this thread, less than 10% of the world population has access to those subscriptions.

[Veratyr]

> I assume you spend most of your income of water, right? After all, it's the most indispensable element of out lives.

Water is a commodity, it doesn't require you to contribute for it to be available, it's ubiquitous and cheap. I pay less than I value it at, yes, as a price has been set and there's no method or reason to pay more for it.

YouTube content however is not a commodity and the amount of money that goes into it affects the quality and quantity of content available. Throw $10m at water, you get nothing meaningfully better. Throw $10m at YouTube creators, you get a new major original series or a few small ones.

> Also, as it was pointed out in this thread, less than 10% of the world population has access to those subscriptions.

And they can pay for it with ads.

The price for the content has been set. You can choose to pay for it or you can choose to essentially steal it.