[YouTube/OCN] PSY- Gangnam Style view count 32bit integer overflow

[WolfDeville]

I saw this on OCN so I thought I'd share it with you guys.

[RH00D]

For those that can't read the comment from the YouTube account it says this:

 

We never thought a video would be watched in numbers greater than a 32-bit integer (=2,147,483,647 views), but that was before we met PSY. "Gangnam Style" has been viewed so many times we have to upgrade!

 

Hover over the counter in PSY's video to see a little math magic and stay tuned for bigger and bigger numbers on YouTube. 

 

It is pretty neat. But I do wonder if any other video will surpass the maximum 32-bit integer amount?

[Lord Pantaloons]

damn

[AlexStriz]

The next closest thing to hitting that is Justin Beiber's baby.. Oh god whats happened to humanity

[Wauthar]

Hot damn that's crazy!

Who would have thought...

[KakaoDj]

inb4 "faith in humanity" bullshit

[StingBull]

Isn't 2 billion like the half of the internet?

[Kevinkt]

inb4 "faith in humanity" bullshit

 too late.

[minibois]

It's already fixed now I guess.

[DuckDodgers]

#64BITMASTERRACE

[Victorious Secret]

Oh god whats happened to humanity

 

Oh yes, people watching a music video that was "the thing" at the time and known everywhere. Shame on them for watching a video on youtube. Watching that video on youtube is clearly a reflection of the state of humanity. 

 

Are you in drama class? If not, you should be. You're so fucking dramatic you could probably outdo Daniel Day Lewis as the most dramatic actor on Earth. 

[Electrostatik]

I have lost all faith in 32-bit intergers

[AlexStriz]

Oh yes, people watching a music video that was "the thing" at the time and known everywhere. Shame on them for watching a video on youtube. Watching that video on youtube is clearly a reflection of the state of humanity. 

 

Are you in drama class? If not, you should be. You're so fucking dramatic you could probably outdo Daniel Day Lewis as the most dramatic actor on Earth. 

Lol, are you ok? I didn't mean to hit your soft spot for Justin Beiber, as I apparently did with my joke. Yes, that was supposed to be a joke. However, sarcasm is hard to detect over the internet, so I don't blame you for not seeing it. 

 

I was not trying being dramatic at all. In my opinion, and what seems to be the opinion of MANY other human on the internet, Justin Beiber's music is probably some of the least talented music that has been produced in recent years. What I was implying when I said "what's happened to humanity" is that I was disappointed with the fact that a video with over 4 million dislikes has more views than some of the genuinely good videos made by skilled people on YouTube. I have nothing against watching music videos on YouTube in fact, I do it all the time. Just the fact that something so bad (in my opinion, along with more than 4 million other people) can become so viral, is kinda sad to me. "Mainstream" music in my opinion, has become progressively worse year by year. "Baby" having over 1 billion views just proves that point. 

 

I wasnt trying to outdo Daniel Day Lewis, whoever that is. I was just stating my disappointment on what I feel has become music. I have nothing against people who like JB, by the way, just I feel as though he should not get as much credit for his music as he has been getting, then again, everyone has their own taste in music.

 

No need to get vulgar over someone saying their opinion, either. That was a bit uncalled for. Sorry if I hurt you.

[Trik'Stari]

my reaction to gangnam style:

[Master Disaster]

Fookin hell

There are only 3,706,452,992 IP address in the wild, it saddens me to think two thirds of people globally on the internet have clicked on that shit, I mean c'mon. I am in my 30s and still love happy hardcore so my tastes are broad but even I cant get my head around gangnam style, plus I work at a school and had it crammed down my throat daily for months.

[wpirobotbuilder]

Why couldn't they just have used an unsigned integer (although 64-bit is the proper solution)? Then this problem would probably be delayed by many more years. Also, why would you need support for a negative number of views?

 

The comments on the blog post are awesome.

Fookin hell

There are only 3,706,452,992 IP address in the wild, it saddens me to think two thirds of people globally on the internet have clicked on that shit, I mean c'mon. I am in my 30s and still love happy hardcore so my tastes are broad but even I cant get my head around gangnam style, plus I work at a school and had it crammed down my throat daily for months.

There are far more IP addresses than that. We've already broken the IPv4 space, but thankfully NAT has allowed us to keep on going.

 

Also, multiple views from the same person are counted (I think).

[Cyroclipse]

https://plus.google.com/+youtube/posts/BUXfdWqu86Q

(Aim at the view count:)They threw in a nice script, which shows what would've been shown as a number if it had not been fixed.

[Master Disaster]

There are far more IP addresses than that. We've already broken the IPv4 space, but thankfully NAT has allowed us to keep on going.

Also, multiple views from the same person are counted (I think).

Taken from Stack Overvlow - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2437169/what-is-the-total-amount-of-public-ipv4-addresses

Only the ones that can be access through the internet. According to Reserved IP addresses there are 588,514,304 reserved addresses and since there are 4,294,967,296 (2^32) IPv4 addressess in total, there are 3,706,452,992 public addresses.

And no, YouTube does not count the same people multiple times.

[wpirobotbuilder]

Taken from Stack Overvlow - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2437169/what-is-the-total-amount-of-public-ipv4-addresses

Should have clarified -- there are far more devices connected to the internet than IP addresses available. NAT allows us to do that.

[Master Disaster]

Should have clarified -- there are far more devices connected to the internet than IP addresses available. NAT allows us to do that.

True but multiple devices behind a nat router would only count as one hit anyway as they share the same IP address.

[zacRupnow]

#64BITMASTERRACE

128bit

[IdeaStormer]

True but multiple devices behind a nat router would only count as one hit anyway as they share the same IP address.

 

Major Nopes on that Master Disaster, you vote with your account not your IP and you or any individual can put it on repeat for multiple view counts, hence why that number is total BS and the thumbs up or thumbs down vote is more representative of the real human vote count, which can also be off because we have trolls who use multiple accounts to alter those votes.

 

Basically that number is total BS but is high and the video is well liked hence why so many people knows what it is. Its the freaking internet, if you don't know its pitfalls then its time to get out.

[Thony]

That youtube money daaaaamn.

Right in PiewDiePies face can only dream about such viewcount on single video.

[Master Disaster]

Major Nopes on that Master Disaster, you vote with your account not your IP and you or any individual can put it on repeat for multiple view counts, hence why that number is total BS and the thumbs up or thumbs down vote is more representative of the real human vote count, which can also be off because we have trolls who use multiple accounts to alter those votes.

 

Basically that number is total BS but is high and the video is well liked hence why so many people knows what it is. Its the freaking internet, if you don't know its pitfalls then its time to get out.

That cannot be true, I uploaded a video to YT, listened to it that day. Next day I listened again while hit count was 1, next day the hit count still said 1 and actually remained on one for over 2 weeks despite me listening to the song multiple times (over 10 I'd say).

[Ren]

The next closest thing to hitting that is Justin Beiber's baby.. Oh god whats happened to humanity

Heh. That video had like 700,000,000 views when this first went up. This hit 1.2B views in far less than a year and 1.8 another 8-10 months later.