For the past five years, I’ve been immersed in the world of streaming and YouTube. It’s been a journey of skill development, practice, and fun, but it’s also been a constant battle with the effort required and the costs involved. Streaming isn’t just about the content; there’s a significant financial burden, from subscriptions to hardware, not to mention the opportunity cost of the time invested.
Recently, I’ve been questioning the value of continuing. I feel obligated to maintain the channel, but I’m also worn out and trying to determine what this channel means to me and if it’s worth the effort. When I started, it was a way to overcome my anxiety on camera. Live streaming forced me to push through without the need for scripts or intense editing. But after five years, I’ve hit a plateau, partly because I refuse to engage in culture wars content and have withdrawn from the YouTube Partner Program. This decision, driven by a desire to avoid certain contractual obligations and penalties, has resulted in reduced visibility due to algorithmic penalties.
Despite these challenges, I’m working on new strategies. I’m compiling old content, revisiting topics, and using AI tools like OpenAI’s ChatGPT for transcription and summarisation. While AI can be a dumpster fire when it fails, it’s quite effective for automating processes and extracting key points from my extensive content library.
However, my relationship with AI is complicated, especially in the academic sphere. Last year, I was falsely accused of using AI for my university assignments. This experience highlighted the flaws in AI detection tools like Turnitin, which claims 99% accuracy but often results in false positives. Despite my clean record, the shadow of that accusation looms large, influencing how I approach my studies.
My university uses invasive proctoring software for exams, which I find deeply problematic. This software tracks eye movements, records audio and video, and monitors screen activity, creating a hostile and stressful environment. As someone with ADHD, this setup is particularly challenging. The anxiety and time pressure led to a poor performance in a recent test, despite my efforts to ensure my work wouldn’t be falsely flagged as AI-generated.
This situation has made me reconsider my academic path. The intrusive policies and lack of accommodations for neurodiverse students are pushing me to think about transferring to a different university or attending in person to avoid these issues. The legal implications of these policies are concerning, especially for a law school that should understand the importance of consent and privacy.
On a personal note, I’ve been focusing on slower, more considered activities. I’ve been baking, gardening, and even chopping wood, which has become a meditative process for me. These activities provide a much-needed escape from the frustrations of online life and the constant negativity on platforms like Twitter.
Despite the challenges, I’m committed to improving my content and engaging with my community. I’m working on pre-recorded material, refining my writing, and exploring new platforms like LinkedIn, which has been more rewarding than Twitter. I’m also considering monetising my content, not for profit, but to reach a wider audience and counteract the limitations imposed by algorithms.
In conclusion, the journey of streaming and content creation is fraught with challenges, from financial burdens to algorithmic penalties and invasive academic policies. Yet, through perseverance and adaptation, I continue to seek ways to make it worthwhile, both for myself and my audience. Thank you for your continued support and patience as I navigate these complexities.