What is your YouTube Number? Does Steemit Tend to Attract Low YT Number Users?

Source

Mine is roughly 134,000. And, yes, I know that this is a meaningless number to you and that my question is nonsensical.

Please, sirs and madames... will you...

Allow me to elaborate?

I had an idea today when pondering about the Pareto principle and sociological tendencies of various demographies; specifically, regarding YouTube (YT) and its user's viewing habits.

While I'm aware it's not a novel idea that the bulk majority of the population, or, in this case, YT users, have similar interests and, therefore, tend to spend their time similarly (have similar YT watching habits) - what some will call "mainstream" interests - I don't know if many have ever given much thought to what our viewing habits say about us, when compared to the average, and how much information may be gleaned from those habits.

I suspect that most people haven't given this type of thought even a little consideration. I also suspect that a large percentage of people on Steemit have thought about such things, compared to the average YT viewer, which is where my hypothesis comes in.

Speaking of which...

A little background to my hypothesis...

Most of us are aware of YT's "recommended" video feed and that it's determined by a back-end algorithm that considers our viewing history on their servers. Regardless, we all have enough common sense to infer that the more "average" you are in your viewing interests/ habits, the higher the average number of views in the videos that you watch.

In my estimation, YT is good at predicting what I would enjoy watching. If I had to put a number on it, I'd say that roughly 2/3's of the videos in my YT account's "recommended" feed interest me, sometimes a bit more and sometimes a bit less. If that's true of all YT users, or even most users, then the contents of individual recommended video feeds are suitable to data mining.

Another way of saying that: we can gain useful information about people's tendencies and perhaps even make fairly accurate predictions about (seemingly) unrelated topics (to YT viewing tendencies), by distinguishing statistically significant "demographies" that are useful in predicting present, and projecting future, behaviors (of whatever "groups" we can discern in the database's of all YT user's data).

And this is where my "YouTube number" comes in.

The YouTube Number:

Assuming that a relatively high accuracy is achieved in providing enjoyable videos within one's recommended feed in the case of most YT users, I believe that significant inferences can be made about a person, based primarily on the average number of views that are in the video's that he/she watches and enjoys, but also (given my previously stated assumption) in the tally of views between all suggested videos in one's recommended feed at any given time (which should come out to roughly the same average, irrespective of when the calculation is made, give or take a few percent points).

That number - adding the total views of all videos in one's recommended video feed and dividing it by the total number of suggested videos in that feed, supplying us with the mean average - is what I have, quite uncreatively, called the "YouTube number".

If everything that I've said, and assumed, is true, then, the higher that number is, the more in-line with the average are one's interests and, by extension (due to certain demographies tending to share similar habits beyond simple viewing tendencies), their ways of thinking/ behaving. It should go without saying, the lower that number is, the more likely you aren't "mainstream", not just in your viewing habits, but in your general behaviors and topics of thought.

How does this relate to my theory that Steemit users are more likely to contemplate this type of hypothesis than the average TY user?

If my hypothesis is correct, then people who score relatively low on the TY number, which translates into likely being "non-mainstream", are more likely to find themselves on a (currently) niche social media platform like Steemit than your average Joe.

And it's these "non-mainstreamers"; these "outliers"; those with an "early adopter" tendency; those who tend towards a higher than average "outside-the-box" way of thinking (all on the assumption that I've accurately pegged the demography that a low YT number would suggest, which, I admit could be missing a few filters to get really accurate, targeted, statistically useful data), who are more likely to give these types of ideas any thought.

So, whaddaya think?

Is this all just rubbish? Is there something to it?

Do I need to seriously take some meds? Where are you in this debate?

If there's something to this, what, in your estimation, can we "mine" from this number and what (supplemental data), if anything, could help us to get a more accurate or useful insight into people's tendencies (outside of what type of videos that they're likely to watch in the future)?

Rubbish or not...

I'm curious. What is your YouTube number?

My recommended video feed had 24 videos (of which about 67% interested me), with a total number of views at about 3.2 million, averaging out to about 134K per video. I calculated this by rounding each to the nearest thousand and adding them together, giving a close estimate.

My guess is that most people would score much higher than this, maybe even in the millions (particularly if they tend to watch trendy music videos), but that the average Steemit user would tend to be close to this figure, maybe a bit more or a bit less, depending on how nerdy they are ;)

Share your YT number in the comments along with about what percent of the videos in your feed actually interest you, for a 5% upvote from this here account!

Yessirs and madames :)

I'm in a giv'n mood, despite being ridiculously lewd and generally rude :-o

Alright, it's officially time to take my meds....

Thanks for reading :)

Bye bye, now :p