YouTube Channel Underway

For readers of this website, the YouTube channel is now underway.  Remember that at first, YouTube is about churning out videos with an emphasis on quantity rather than quality, as is the advice of almost every high-traffic YouTube channel, even for business-related topics.  Hence, the initial quality is not going to be that high.  Over time, the quality will rise as traffic begins to emerge. 

But I would like to invite all long-term readers here to subscribe to the channel, view the videos, upvote them, and comment.  If you want to unsubscribe later after there are more new subscribers, no worries.  The 2021 videos are distinct from the old, grainy videos from before the channel was being built.  

The channel is here :

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuRX67CJhaOT98Jdjh85CEQ/featured

 

 

Comments

[AL Villalobos]

Glad things are working out! I subscribed - I'm subscriber#88 commenting as LeeYork1936

See you over there

[Kartik Gada]

Thanks, AL. Every subscriber from here who goes on over there is very valuable.

[Drew]

Hi KG, I'm seeing that most of the videos are in the 10 minute range - is that because that is what the data indicates works best for channels or what you are looking for to explain your ideas? I'm not a typical video watcher, but if I'm looking for some quick hits, I'd be looking for more in the five minute range. Cheers, Drew (also a subscriber)

[Kartik Gada]

Hello Drew,

Some of the related channels that have been successful often have 12-15 minute videos. Other studies show 6-8 minutes as optimal. I am aiming for 8-12. We shall see what works.

Overall, the average view time I have gotten is 40% of the video, but slightly higher for the shorter ones. This is a good percentage by YouTube medians.

It may emerge that 8 minutes turns out to be better than 10-11, we shall see.

The quality boost is also a future upgrade, as the universal advice is that startup YouTube channels should focus on quantity instead of quality, until 100 videos or so.

[Scott]

As someone currently working on a youtube channel, I would recommend that you zoom in on everything. For instance, your videos sometimes show this website. But its zoomed at a size so that you can read it well on your computer. Not so that I can read it well while watching it on youtube.

Also, since the website is static most of the time, and much of the action is you talking, I'd recommend making your webcam image bigger if you can

Finally, as you invest in quality, I think all of your thumbnails could use work. For the most part they are hard to read when viewed thumbnail size. So they could use bigger font, more contrast, less clutter if possible. If you're seeing click through rates of more than say 5-7% on your videos you can disregard this, but my guess is you are seeing lowish 1-3% click through rates.

Basically, all this is pointing out that 60% or more of youtube viewership is on a smartphone, with small screens.

Cheers!

[Kartik Gada]

Hello Scott,

All true.

i) My click-through rates are about 4.0% at the moment, and I am getting 40% viewership percentage. But these higher-than-average numbers for a new channel like this one is due to the familiar audience here being the bulk of the viewers at the moment.

ii) Eventually, there will be videos of just me talking in front of the camera with a greenscreen. I have a $1000 camera too, that my employer gave me (tripods and studio lights too). But I haven't spent the time to get good with it yet, and the backlog of screenshare-only videos is enough that those will still be the norm for a while longer.

iii) Thumbnails - yes. But the good news is that I can improve some of those retroactively, unlike the videos themselves. Most of the early videos will be quasi-repeated as v2.0 videos at a later time with different titles and slightly different takes. I am actually surprised how much repetition that many successful channels get away with.

It is all a learning curve.

[T]

You should create a LBRY/Odysee account as well and grow traffic on both simultaneously (preventing work later). I am increasingly going to LBRY over Youtube.

[Kartik Gada]

Some more recent stats as more videos settle into a greater amount of cumulative time active :

i) Impressions click-through rates start out at well over 10% for the first 48 hours, even if there are two videos newer than the one that is under 48 hours old. But after two weeks, the click-through rate falls to 3% or lower. I don't know if that is normal. It can't be because of the thumbnail since then the early rate would not be high.

ii) Watch time is well above 40%. It is higher for shorter videos than longer ones, as is to be expected. But there does seem to be an indication that 7-8 minutes would be better than anything above 12 minutes, in terms of a return on my effort.

I haven't spent time with the fancy camera yet to do monologues in front of it, so the video style is still of a screenshare nature. This will change as I get used to the fancy camera.

It is unclear if I have many subscribers other than the 100+ that originated from the audience here.

[Fatcat]

Hi Kartik,
regarding your newest video on brain evolution.
1)You said the chimps are our closest relatives. I would phrase it as our closest living relatives.
2) Neanderthals had bigger brains then the modern humans, albeit comparable.
3) The average human brain size has shrunk over the last few millennia. What probably has happened even back then that we have started outsourcing mental functions outside of the brain itself.
a) invention of the language and passing/keeping knowledge by other tribe members
b) invention of mnemonic tools like writing , tallies, etc…
c) invention of calculation aids (abacus, logarithmic tables, slide-rulers and finally computers)

For the video itself:
the voice is too quiet compared to other youtube videos.

[Kartik Gada]

Hello Fatcat,

It is good to know that you are watching.

Little can be changed about a video itself once it is posted (although thumbnails and titles can be changed easily).

The chart shows Neanderthals as a tiny bit smaller than Homo Sapiens' brains (about 1% smaller). But whatever.

The current interface between the brain and tools, while improving, is very weak. The advances that will happen in the future are much more profound.

[Fatcat]

Hi Kartik,
finally I have got to the you review of "Retro Futurism Book Review : 'The Age of Spiritual Machines' by Ray Kurzweil". I think it would nice if you make a video of your revised timeline of his(and oothers') predictions

[Scott]

I've been watching your stats a little bit on Youtube. It does seem like you're seeing an uptick in views & subscribers. i.e. no real breakout videos yet but incremental successes building on each other.

You expressing this plan so clearly, and it evidently working to at least some level has led me to change my approach. I'm trying to get out more videos faster even at the expense of quality.

Thanks for the advice!
Scott

[Kartik Gada]

Scott,

Yes, the quantity over quality strategy is recommended by multiple people. The practice itself makes quality better. I already am able to do much better than the first videos, even though I only started on March 7.

But my traffic increase so far is linear, rather than exponential. On the flip side, I haven't released the best ideas yet.

What is your channel, if you care to share it here? I wouldn't mind making a visit.

[Scott]

Thanks Kartik! At this time I'm not tieing my channel in with my real life identity, which my comments here are loosely connected to.

If that changes, I'll post it here.

[prasoon gupta]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YJLfPEkRBqUMXLO82sRXAEha0_EniypF/view?usp=drivesdk

You might be wondering what I am sending. Well, A guy named Gerald Hawkins predicted singularity independent of kurzweil. The kicker? He did it in 1983.

Kindly read only chapter 14 of his book and look at the math. He predicted the singularity at 2053.

[Kartik Gada]

Thanks, Prasoon.