Patreon’s fee change punishes supporters who make small pledges

This week, the popular patronage system Patreon made an announcement that has shaken its user base to the core: It’s implementing a fee change that will gut the current pledge system and is already devastating people who rely on it to support their creative endeavors.

If you’re unfamiliar with Patreon, it’s a service that allows individual people to financially support creators, such as webcomics authors, writers, podcasters and YouTube stars. Rather than a service like PayPal or Venmo, which offers one-time payments, Patreon operates on a per-month basis. Supporters pledge a certain amount per month — $1 is the minimum — and their cards are automatically charged at the beginning of the month for the amount they’ve committed across the platform. And obviously Patreon takes a cut, which is how it makes money.

Until now, it’s been a pretty simple, no-frills system that many people in creative fields have taken advantage of. Musician Amanda Palmer, podcaster Sam Harris, YouTube star Jackson Bird and comics creator Jon Rosenberg are just a few of the big names that use the service.

In the interest of full disclosure, I personally use Patreon to cover the expenses of a podcast I’m the cohost of, called Desi Geek Girls. We make a reasonable amount per month, but we certainly aren’t dependent on it. That’s not the case for many creators, who rely on the service to support themselves on a day-to-day basis, using the service to pay rent, purchase groceries and buy equipment and supplies for their creative endeavors.

This week, though, Patreon introduced new changes that turns all of this upside down. On Wednesday, the service sent an email to creators outlining changes to the fee structure of pledges. Rather than extracting a processing fee from the creator side, Patreon is going to start charging supporters extra. The new service fee is 2.9 percent plus 35 cents per pledge. It’s effective on December 18th for new pledges and as of January 1st for existing ones. Additionally, patrons will now be charged individually on the date of their pledge anniversary, rather than in bulk at the beginning of the month.

Now, this may not seem like a lot, but from anecdotal and personal experience, $1 pledges make up the backbone of Patreon. Generally speaking, people have a limited amount they’re able to pledge, and rather than send $10 to one thing, they will often send $1 to 10 different projects they want to support. This new fee structure will wreak havoc on that system. Every $1 pledge will cost patrons $1.38 under this new model. Small donors are, in essence, going to pay 38 percent more under this new system. This change incentivizes bigger individual pledges. One $10 pledge will now cost a supporter $10.64 per month, while ten $1 pledges will be $13.80. This change will gut the $1, and perhaps the $5, economy on Patreon.

After the backlash, Patreon updated its announcement post to address some of its users’ concerns and explain the fee change further. The team claims that creators and patrons both found the old payments system incredibly confusing, which resulted in thousands of support tickets from confused customers. The fee structure was also unclear — a 5 percent fee from Patreon, plus a processing fee that ranged from 2 percent to 10 percent from a third party. It’s true that this updated model simplifies things. The issue is who is bearing the burden of these fees.

Patreon has positioned this change as a benefit to creators; their announcement email had the subject line “Creators now take home exactly 95 percent.” When creators receive their pledges every month, there is always some variability in exactly how much makes it to their accounts because of Patreon’s fees. Now, creators will receive 95 percent of what they’re pledged; Patreon will take the other 5 percent, plus the service fee from patrons. While this “streamlining” of fees might make things more predictable, it’s already having negative effects. The creator of the popular webcomic Questionable Content, Jeph Jacques, told Engadget that as of this morning, he’s lost between 200 and 250 patrons, out of over 5,000. Meanwhile, comic creator Kate Leth told Engadget she’s lost around 50 supporters, out of almost 1,500. The fee change went public yesterday, and hasn’t even starting hitting people’s wallets yet.

LOVING this new update to @Patreon pic.twitter.com/ZaAED8Rd8V

— Kate Leth 🦇✨🌈 (@kateleth) December 7, 2017

Patreon update: yes, the change matters to people pic.twitter.com/Yx6qfGW3Kd

— Mikey Neumann (@mikeyface) December 8, 2017

It’s not just about number of patrons, though. It’s about percentages. Ryan North, the writer of Marvel’s The Unbeatable Squirrel Girl and creator of the popular webcomic Dinosaur Comics, told Engadget that in November, he had 734 patrons (He has 687 at the time of this writing, for comparison). Fifty-three percent, or 392, were at $1 or less. An additional 278 are at the $3 level. That’s a whopping 91 percent of North’s supporters. This illustrates how important small donors are, and they already might be getting scared off.

Creators have asked Patreon if they can continue to bear the burden of the service fees. The answer has been a resounding “no.” Everyone has to move to the new model, whether they like it or not, and for both creator and patron, it’s not good for the bottom line. Patreon maintains that this fee change “was never (and still isn’t) about making more money for Patreon as a company.” While many users of the service have taken issue with that statement, positioning this as a cash grab, the fact is that Patreon is a company. It has the right to try and increase its revenue. But claiming that it’s trying to do what’s best for both creators and supporters, when both are vocal about how this change is harmful, is disingenuous, to say the least.

Google pauses crackdown on apps that use accessibility features

Almost a month ago, Google cracked down on developers that used Android’s accessibility features for apps that weren’t expressly created for people with disabilities. The company told developers that they had to show how their code actually helped those with a disability or face removal from the Play Store within 30 days. Now, however, Google is pausing that final solution for another month to consider “responsible and innovative uses of accessibility services.”

Several developers complained about the strict policy enforcement, which could affect apps like Last Pass (which uses accessibility features to help fill in form fields and passwords), Tasker (which uses the features to monitor launched apps) and Greenify (which shuts down apps when they use too much power).

“This is really bad news,” Universal Copy’s developer wrote on the Android Reddit. “We will have no other choice than unpublishing the app from the Play Store.”

In the current email, Google asked recipients to send feedback around their appropriate use of the accessibility features in Android: “If you believe your app uses the Accessibility API for a responsible, innovative purpose that isn’t related to accessibility, please respond to this email and tell us more about how your app benefits users. This kind of feedback may be helpful to us as we complete our evaluation of accessibility services.”

Via: Ars Technica

Source: Reddit

Destroying net neutrality will hurt artists and small businesses the most

The internet as we know it could change come December 14th. FCC chairman and former Verizon attorney Ajit Pai is expected to undo net neutrality, and with it the Title 2 regulations that prevent the likes of Comcast and Verizon from giving certain websites and services priority over others and moving their data faster. The worry is that repealing net neutrality will create an uneven playing field. For you and me, it could mean paying Verizon extra to access Netflix. But, for artists, small business owners and musicians, it could lead to their work being disadvantaged, silenced or hidden behind a paywall.

That type of barricade may stifle creativity and drive more cultural homogeneity. FM radio isn’t a viable way to discover new music anymore because many stations have set playlists dictated by a few corporate overlords like iHeartRadio and Townsquare Media. Which is why the internet it is such a powerful tool for discovery. All someone needs is a cell phone and a YouTube account to get their name out there — not years of touring or approval from a panel of celebrity judges on America’s Got Talent. It’s that type of freedom many critics fear will vanish with Title 2.

“How hasn’t [an open internet] benefited me would be a more fitting question,” Martin Smith, a DJ and digital marketer told me. “Without an open internet, the music industry wouldn’t be where it is today.”

Smith runs the digital marketing firm Overflow, whose client list includes Coca Cola, T-Mobile and Universal Music Group. He realizes that many of the marketing tools he uses began life as dorm room projects that were then uploaded to the internet — like Facebook and Twitter. “If the major media behemoths of the time could have paid the right people to restrict those platforms from getting where they are, they surely would have.”

Mayer Hawthorne

For Andrew “Mayer Hawthorne” Cohen, it’s clear: “I wouldn’t have a career without net neutrality,” he said. “Reversing net neutrality gives already dominant mega-corporations like Apple, Ticketmaster, Live Nation, Clear Channel even more power to snuff out the little guy.”

Cohen is from Ann Arbor, Michigan a city known for being a college town with a gigantic football stadium — not launching recording careers. Had it not been for Soundcloud and Twitter, the chances of him making a living as a musician were slim. In 2005, Hawthorne moved to Los Angeles and started recording for legendary hip-hop label Stones Throw Records. “Those start-ups introduced my independent music to new listeners around the world and circumvented the keymasters/traditional modes of discovery like terrestrial radio.”

Frustrated by a lack of attention for heavy metal in Michigan, Jen Lorenski launched MoshPitNation, an online network that connects Michigan metalheads with the music they love. Lorenski also works as a digital marketer and is one of the driving forces behind TaxFormGals, a women-owned small business that, as the name suggests, supplies other small businesses with necessary tax forms, among other services. “The openness of the internet has been crucial for small businesses like mine,” she said. “If the costs of being online become too steep, I could see a point where other small businesses scale back their investment” and cause her to lose money.

For Rob Sheridan, an open internet launched a career he never thought possible. But before he served as Nine Inch Nails’ art director, he was “tragically, indirectly” responsible for what could be the internet’s first meme: the dancing baby. You know, the creepy CGI infant that busted a groove across the screen on Ally McBeal. Sheridan discovered the image file back when he was scouring bulletin boards and Usenet groups as a teenager.

“I just found this file of a CGI baby dancing to music, and it had no context,” he recalled. “It was just creepy as fuck.” After putting it on his personal homepage, he’d started getting a lot of messages about it. So, he gave the animation its own website on a server owned by his locally owned dial-up ISP in Seattle. The rest is history. “Before I know it, I’m getting contacted by USA Today to interview me about it because the baby had just been on Ally McBeal,” he said. “It’s kind of my fault.”

Beyond working on websites starring disturbing infants, Sheridan had a fansite dedicated to NIN. Someone from the industrial band’s camp stumbled upon it, reached out and by the end of his first year of art school at Pratt, Sheridan was designing NIN’s website. “[Net neutrality] changed my entire career,” he said. “I don’t know where I’d be because I didn’t even finish college.”

What’s worrisome about the upcoming deregulation is that no one really knows what will happen in its wake. When the government deregulated the airline industry in the ’70s, the result was dramatically lower fares but also delayed flights and overbooked planes. In 2017, the list of companies that favor deregulation are almost exclusively ISPs, which makes sense since they stand to make more money.

Net neutrality is about fostering fair competition. A kid in Iowa has the same access to upload her latest mixtape to SoundCloud as an established artist, and the small business down the block doesn’t have to worry about paying extra for the same level of service as a global conglomerate.

The FCC recently issued a “myth vs fact” press release stating that deregulation will be a boon for small businesses and startups. “They will continue to flourish with more opportunities to innovate once those regulations are repealed,” it said. “Companies like Google, Facebook, Netflix and Twitter all started and experienced tremendous growth under the previous light-touch rules.”

Lorenski disagreed. She said if ISPs started giving preference to huge conglomerations, like TaxFormGals’ direct competitor QuickBooks, she might need to change her business model.

“Anyone trying to spew some bullshit that this would benefit small businesses in anyway is completely up their own ass,” Sheridan admonished. “Imagine if Target was able to pay Comcast money to have their website load 10 times faster than people who hadn’t paid it.”

While you might not think of places like Reddit or Etsy as small businesses, they play host to countless creators and makers. Any change to how people access either site would cause serious ripple effects to the people who earn a living selling their stuff online.

You can’t overstate how many small businesses and creators have benefited from net neutrality. And in turn, how much culture has benefited from them.

Qualcomm has a new 4K HDR feature, but which devices support it?

There was a moment of confusion after Qualcomm announced that the new Snapdragon 845 chipset would enable mobile cameras to record videos in 4K HDR. The promise of smartphone videos with more colors, depth and greater dynamic range was tantalizing, but the question on everyone’s minds was obvious: Which screens are capable of rendering such content? This would be useless if no one could see all the extra information being captured. But Qualcomm didn’t have a clear answer for the audience.

To be fair, the answer is somewhat complicated, and has more to do with the way HDR video and displays are defined rather than the lack of capable screens.

While HDR photography has a clear-cut specification, when it comes to video the term ‘HDR’ serves as a sort of catch-all for various standards, according to Qualcomm’s marketing manager for camera and computer vision PJ Jacobowitz. “It’s understandable that consumers are confused,” he told Engadget.

What people want is a standard that lets them know which devices will work with the content, whether they be smartphones or giant TVs. It’s like when you see a gadget with the Bluetooth logo on it — you know it will pair with other Bluetooth devices.

In the high-res HDR space, though, there are myriad competing standards. There’s HDR10, which is a common, open specification, along with Dolby Vision, which is proprietary. Before I go into HDR10’s requirements, you need to understand what the Snapdragon 845 records. It uses the Rec 2020 color space, which has 70 percent more colors than the typical Rec 709 profile (which is similar to the sRGB gamut). The 845 also captures 10-bit footage (deeper colors than the usual 8-bit quality), as well as luminance (that’s the brightness of each hue) of up to 10,000 nits.

For a device to display HDR10 content, it’ll need to use the Rec 2020 color space and a bit-depth of 10 bits. But HDR10 doesn’t consider resolution, which is where other standards come in.

You’ll see logos from the UHD Alliance certifying devices as compatible with “Ultra HD Premium” or “Mobile HDR Premium,” which add resolution requirements to color profile criteria.

Devices certified as “Ultra HD Premium” compatible have to reproduce more than 90 percent of the P3 color space, which has a wider gamut than Rec 709 but smaller than Rec 2020. Candidates will also need to support at least 10-bit color depth, have a display resolution of at least 3,840 x 2,160 and brightness of between 540 and 1,000 nits, depending on their black levels.

Any device that bears either of the UHD Alliance logos will be able to display the 4K HDR content recorded on Snapdragon 845 devices. The caveat is that the Mobile HDR Premium standard, which was released earlier this year for things like smartphones and tablets, has a lower resolution requirement than bigger screens like TVs. So devices in this category may not render in 4K — they’ll most likely do so at 2K resolution instead. Still, you’ll see the increased colors on these panels.

If only it were as simple as looking for these two logos to determine if your phone, tablet or TV can display 4K HDR. But it isn’t. Not all companies with perfectly capable devices choose to get certified with the UHD Alliance, for a variety of reasons like preference for a different standard or desire to protect proprietary technology. Plus, most of the information you’ll need isn’t usually listed on a specs sheet on the product’s webpage. For example, the Apple TV and Sony Xperia XZ Premium can render 4K HDR, but it’s not clear from publicly available specs whether either meets all the requirements.

In the absence of a logo, one roundabout way you can check for compatibility is by seeing if your phone is on the Vimeo HDR list, which shows (mostly Apple) devices that meet the video network’s requirements. Vimeo has similar criteria to the UHD Alliance, so it provides a good test.

Until the industry agrees on a single, unified standard for high-res HDR video, it will be difficult to keep track of the recording and display devices that are compatible with this new, rich content. So while you may soon be able to record extremely colorful videos in future, finding a canvas to show it off might be a frustrating task. That doesn’t mean you should hold off on buying new TVs or displays altogether — you just have to scrutinize the specs to make sure what you’re getting supports the latest standards.

Images: Vimeo (Color space spectrum), UHD Alliance (logos)

Russian Twitter bots are reportedly helping #NoRussiaNoGames push

It’s both terrifying and fascinating how well Russia uses Twitter to influence the perception of world events. Operatives from the country have supported Trump and Brexit and positioned propaganda that was eventually shared by major news outlets. Now it seems that Russian propagandists are hard at work amplifying an actual hashtag campaign (#NoRussiaNoGames) against the ban of Russian athletes from the upcoming Olympic games.

Researcher Ben Nimmo of Washinton, DC-based Digital Forensic Research Lab analyzed the traffic around the issue and found that while initially genuine, the huge upswell in the number of posts with the hashtag is likely thanks to Russian state-sponsored bots and trolls. The hashtag first appeared on a Russian social network as an appeal by a St Petersburg boy protesting lifetime bans on his country’s cross-country skiers for alleged violations of Olympic doping policies. It exploded on Twitter after the International Olympic Committee banned Russia from the upcoming games this past week.

“What we’ve got here is a small but genuine hashtag campaign, which is being exaggerated and amplified by Russian state propaganda outlets to make it look like the campaign is huge and an upwelling of popular anger,” Nimmo told Reuters. “It’s a good human interest story, it’s an emotional boy saying how terrible unfairly Russia is being treated. It fits the state narrative perfectly.” We’ve reached out to Twitter for comment and will update this post when we hear back.

Source: Reuters

All the cool gifts are made for spying on you

It’s the gift-giving season, and high-tech gadgets are more exciting than ever. Alexa, Siri, Cortana, and even “Okay Google” are ready to come over for holiday ham, ready to help you turn on a light or play you some Spotify. Those always-on microphones, cameras, and WI-FI connected devices are cheaper, cooler, and more convenient than ever.

Yet, you still feel a little weird about their, you know, baser functions. Google and Amazon only record what they need to. Plus, you’ve read 1984, watched Big Brother (and thought the contestants were nuts for being watched 24-7), and you think spying on people’s everyday lives is generally bad.

And yet, look at us. We’re marinating in surveillance tech. We carry an always-on combination tracker and eavesdropping device everywhere we go (a smartphone). We agonize over picking out the best smart home microphone-speaker combination. We snarf up the latest in connected appliances. We say “yes” to all the apps, and surf the web looking for deals like it’s the pre-condom era of porn.

We know the connected devices, no matter how big the company they come from, are all bug-infested, insecure, preyed upon, and riddled with shady backroom data deals. And yet.

And yet.

The trend toward in-home surveillance devices is only continuing, with this year’s gift-giving aspirations. Here at Engadget, we’re modeling the trend: decrying privacy invasions, yet playing with privacy fire, indulging our lust for convenience and futurism with all the sexy gadgets on our 2017 best-of gift list.

We want the Echo, the Google Home, a Sonos One, and all the privacy-devouring spy tech we can cram into our voice-activated games console. I’m with you! Yet I know better than to let companies spy on me! Give me a new MacBook, a Chomebook, an iPad or a Surface, damn the easily-hackable onboard cameras and microphones, full speed ahead. I’d push grandpa into a mall fountain and jam his walker into Best Buy’s revolving doors to get my hands on the hottest new tracking devices, the iPhone, a Pixel, a Galaxy.

And that’s the thing: We all know the risks these days. It’s not like ten years ago when some of us were trying to raise the alarm about webcam hacking and data dealing, and everyone thought we were fringey conspiracy weirdos in tinfoil bras doing Flickr updates from our freaky internet-connected phones.

If anything, security and surveillance are even bigger concerns. Just in October, a woman’s new webcam was taken over practically the minute she plugged it in. In a Facebook post, she described the incident, going on to film the camera’s complete hijacking while in progress. But here’s the thing: The story didn’t surprise anyone, and didn’t compete with any headlines. We’re all like, yeah, that’s a thing that happens now, while in our heads we silently practice what we’ll do when it happens to us.

I know what you were thinking when your eyes traveled the wishlist above, with the Echos and the Homes, and the highly desirable appliances that make Inspector Gadget’s kit look like unimaginative stupidity. You’re thinking, “but Amazon will protect me from unlawful requests” and “Google Home wouldn’t do that on purpose, it would harm consumer trust.”

And in the instances we know of, you’d be right. When a man was murdered in November 2015, Amazon initially refused to hand over its Alexa data from the scene of the crime when prosecutors demanded the records. The company said that Alexa’s questions and answers are protected by the first amendment and Amazon “seeks to protect the privacy rights of its customers.” Amazon later relented and shared the data when the defendant, the Echo’s owner, gave permission. That a hacker had fun turning the Echo into a wiretap did not endeavor to reassure.

And that whole thing where Google Home was recording everything just this last October, well that was a “bug.” Never mind that “bug” is Facebook’s perennial catch-all term/excuse for getting caught doing something people don’t like (and that’s not a good look for anyone). Google said its little smart home speaker was having an “issue” that caused it “to behave incorrectly.” That probably wasn’t reassuring for journalist Artem Russokovskii, who discovered he was being recorded 24-7.

What can we do, but take Google and Amazon at their word? No one trusts these companies or their interests in serving us better ads or suggestions. They say they’ll protect us, they’re big companies and can afford to properly test everything, and they fix their mistakes when we find them.

Haven’t we learned anything from dystopian books and films? How is this now aspirational? Or is it just that we’re so miserable from politics that a little convenience-at-a-cost is our only salve to soothe our tortured souls?

Don’t feel bad. Everyone’s doing it, the gleeful self-surveillance. Even hackers, who know better than anyone, and I can tell you that they’re shopping for the same things and going home to strip down and roll in piles of connected crap like they hate privacy, too. We’re all going to privacy hell together.

I’m sure it’ll be fine. As long as we remember that it pays to be paranoid because we’re all so depressed and angry at the state of the state that we deserve a little fluff, a little fun, a little convenience.

Facebook may be insidious, Apple might’ve conditioned us, and everyone with a stake in the surveillance pie has tried to soothe us. But we still need to cover our webcams, turn off geotagging, drill into settings to fight the data creeping, and stay awake and alert to the ways that companies make us targets.

Take my advice for the holidays: Shop like no one’s watching, but never forget that someone might be listening.

Images: Brendan McDermid/Reuters (Amazon Echo); Shutterstock (Security camera).

Apple’s Jony Ive will return to his design management role

Apple’s chief design officer, Jony Ive, is picking his old management duties back up again, 9to5Mac reports. Back in 2015, Ive was upgraded to chief design officer from senior VP and day-to-day management was taken over by Alan Dye and Richard Howarth. Earlier today, 9to5Mac noted that Dye and Howarth were no longer listed on Apple’s leadership page and now word’s out that Ive is back at the management helm. In a statement to Bloomberg, an Apple spokesperson said, “With the completion of Apple Park, Apple’s design leaders and teams are again reporting directly to Jony Ive, who remains focused purely on design.”

*APPLE’S IVE RETAKES MANAGEMENT OF DESIGN TEAM AFTER 2 YEARS

— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) December 8, 2017

Apple has come under fire for some of its recent design choices, like the way its Pencil and Mouse charge, the lack of ports in the MacBook and, of course, that iPhone X notch. That may or may not have anything to do with Ive’s return, but as 9to5Mac notes, the writing may have been on the wall. Dye and Howarth haven’t really been in the spotlight much since becoming senior VPs while Ive has retained a fair amount of public exposure.

We’ve reached out to Apple for comment and we’ll update this post when we hear more.

Via: 9to5Mac

Source: Bloomberg

Apple is reportedly buying Shazam and its music identification tech

In a bit of Friday afternoon news, TechCrunch reports that Apple plans to buy Shazam, the company behind the popular audio identification software and app. Apparently, the site’s sources indicate the deal could be announced Monday, but it’s quick to note the timing on these things isn’t always solid. As you can imagine, rumored terms of the deal, including a sale price, aren’t reliable just yet. The acquisition would give Apple ownership of the music, TV and movie identifying tech and a group of features it could easily take advantage of with its own products.

Of course, Shazam already works on both iOS and OS X. The song ID feature was added to iPhones with iOS 8 and it hit the desktop back in 2014. Shazam also goes to work on much more than phones and PCs. Most recently, the music discovery tech was added to Samsung smart TVs. The company also has a background listening tool that’s always ready to recognize a song or audio clip. Sounds like a good feature for a smart speaker, eh?

Shazam does more than just audio identification, too. In 2015, the company began recognizing packaged goods, books, magazines and other merchandise — another area Apple would likely be interested in improving its own offerings. We’ve reached out to Apple for comment on the report and we’ll update this post if we hear back.

Source: TechCrunch

OKCupid unveils major overhaul to cull spam messages

OKCupid (OKC) realizes that it needs to evolve if it wants to stay relevant in the ever-changing online dating world. Specifically, it’ll start retooling how messaging works very soon. Starting next week the only way you’ll see messages from randoms is if you visit their profile page; the only messages that populate your inbox will be from people you’ve already liked or already responded to. Sure, there’s the risk that you might not see a message from someone special, but if you’ve been proactive on the site that really shouldn’t be an issue.

It’s a little like how Bumble (seemingly the only dating service OKC parent Match Group doesn’t own) handles messaging. To keep women’s inboxes clear of unsolicited and lewd messages, the lady has 24 hours to make the first move before the match expires. This new feature from OKC should be a boon for anyone on the site, regardless of gender.

Facebook adds a sound and music library you can use for video

Facebook has a bunch of new tools for video creators. First up, it has launched a community hub for 360 degree video (which isn’t live for everyone just yet) that gathers educational bits like how to use 360 degree cameras, how to edit said videos and a primer on spatial audio. Speaking of editing, the social network has also launched 360 Director, a page with tools for adding annotation, setting zoom level, and the ability to save a video as a draft, among others. Facebook will also loan out the pricey cameras, starting with the GoPro Fusion and ZCam S1 at launch.

Not into 360 video? Well, Zuckerberg and Co. have something for you too. Facebook Sound Collection is a gaggle of songs and sound effects you can use with your authored videos, 360-degree ones included. Meaning, you can use these without fear that your masterpiece will get muted because of a copyright violation. Will that stop people from uploading video with licensed music? Probably not. Facebook’s ambitions for video are pretty transparent at this point, but it’s good to see that the company is willing to invest in its users in addition to its original programming aspirations.

Via: TechCrunch

Source: Facebook (1), (2), (3)