• Kedly@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Since the initial push, I have not even had to reset my ublock… stop using Chrome

  • someguywithacomputer@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I kind of already hoarded so many videos from youtubes last failed adblock crusade that I barely even use the real youtube anymore. Guess I’ll show my disapproval by improving my offline video caching system even more.

    My search system doesn’t autosuggest results based on which videos have more boobs in the thumbnail but I’ll get over it.

  • kadu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    YouTube’s argument is the same as Linus’ from LTT: if you watch a video without ads, you’re failing to comply with your side of the transaction, thus essentially pirating that content and stealing the revenue source.

    Regardless if we agree or not with that statement, I’ll absolutely side with adblockers always for a deeper issue: it’s my screen, so I get the ultimate say on what content gets rendered. Quite literally. It’s my network, my cable, my screen, my graphics card, my web browser running JavaScript on my CPU - you do not, ever, get to overreach and decide what pixels show up or not. If I don’t want your obnoxious ad for an AI girlfriend to show up, there’s no moral argument to be had here.

    • wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I mean, the argument falls short when YT (or LTT) spew literal garbage. I might have a hint of sympathy if it wasn’t a dumpster fire of decaying babies.

      The few people I sub do and do yt as a monitory source, I support elsewhere. Fuck YouTube acting as a sleezy middle-man and simultaneously playing the victim.

      • vithigar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I mean, the argument falls short when YT (or LTT) spew literal garbage.

        The fact that you don’t like the product doesn’t really change that their expected transaction is “watch an ad to receive it”. Every argument against the idea of not watching the ads being piracy seems to be, essentially, either “the product isn’t good” or “the price is too high”, neither of which is relevant to the fact that they’ve put a “price” on it and you’re skipping the part where you “pay”.

        Quality of the videos is irrelevant. Intrusiveness of the ads is irrelevant. The ads are the price, the videos are the product. You’re getting the videos without seeing the ads.

        I agree that the “price” is too high, the ads are awful, and the videos are frequently bad. I will continue to block those ads as long as I am able, but I’m not going to delude myself into thinking that I’m not skipping out on the cheque, as it were, when I do so.

        I might have a hint of sympathy if it wasn’t a dumpster fire of decaying babies.

        Literally no one is asking you to have any sympathy. Why get so defensive when it’s pointed out that skipping ads is skipping on your side of the transaction when using an ad supported service?

        • wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          I liked the service up until ~2016 and was a yt red family subscriber. Then they upped the prices, then they started pushing more ads + more frequently, then they got butthurt about third-party apps, then they raised prices again…

          My “expected transaction” is to host decent-or-better content (not shovel clickbait disinformation nonsense) in a fashion that is palatable to me, and they are failing miserably on the first and are fighting to fail miserably on the second. If you go to a restaurant expecting decent food but are served actual shit, are you going to be like ‘thank you sir may I have some more’? We have been the frog in the pot of boiling water for the last 15+ years of bullshit like this, where a company makes a compelling product, then makes it shit but incrementally so ‘it’s not so bad compared to the last update’ but compared to a few years ago it’s completely garbage. And they want more money for a worse experience? Are for fucking shitting me?

          Quality of the content is relevant. I guarantee you aren’t going to the movies to watch something that scored a 4% on RT. Everyone wants to be like’ poor yt/alphabet, they only got 63 billion this quarter 'but if it was a real issue they’d be doing stuff like charging fees to upload content (goodbye 9 year-olds screaming about fortnite skins) or something else to curb the amount of content they host. Google knew what they were getting into when they bought yt - at least they sure as fuck should. Nobody has ever made a profitable video service afaik. There’s what, yt, vimeo, and… liveleak is dead, uh… crickets.

          I’m not even pretending to skip out on the bill. I’m screaming from my table “this is fucking terrible and you should all feel awful about it” before proudly walking out.

          Also I’m not asking for sympathy? I’m saying “this service has turned to shit”. Also none of my above comment, or this, is defensive; it’s being pissed off that a company is fucking people on both sides of the transaction and still complaining that they don’t get enough of a cut, while actively making their service worse for their customers and doing nothing to save it themselves. They are a sinking ship complaining that they need more help chucking buckets of water overboard, while they simultaneously poke additional holes in it.

          • vithigar@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            I don’t really disagree with any of that, and it’s all a great argument in favour of just not using YouTube. Hell, it might even be a good argument in favour of using it as much as possible while blocking ads just to consume bandwidth on their dime while denying them ad revenue.

            None of it really counters the idea that using it without viewing ads is skipping out on “paying” for that usage, which is the entire “argument” being presented, which you claimed falls short. The content being bad doesn’t change the fact that they expect you to view ads (or pay) to see that content, and we’re not paying.

      • SaltySalamander@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Fuck YouTube acting as a sleezy middle-man

        A sleezy middleman that happens to foot the substantial YT infrastructure bill.

    • warm@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I was happy with an ad at the side of the video. Then they started popping up over my video, then they started appearing before my video, then they started appearing throughout my video. Companies shot themselves in the foot with online advertising, banner ads and such weren’t much of a problem, but once ads start disrupting the content we visit a site for, then we look to block them ads. More people blocking ads is less revenue, so they make the ads more aggressive… and the cycle continues.

      And on a side note, Linus can fuck off.

      • Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        That and the large ad networks even on sites like YouTube and Facebook literally are advertising scams. Every time I browse shorts on either I get ads that are obvious scams of the “There’s a new $6400 monthly health credit see if you qualify.” variety. On one of Meta’s apps I got an ad that was for male enhancement that was straight up clips of uncensored hardcore porn. Not just nudity but full on PIV sex. If they can’t even do the work to properly screen their ads they can get fucked, I’m blocking all of it that I can.

        • forgotaboutlaye@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah I don’t mind ads if they’re relevant - I scroll through insta reels from time to time, and am always getting ads about concerts I’m interested in, restaurants I haven’t tried and sales at shops I go to.

          I honestly don’t mind so much, and if it’s not relevant to me I can scroll past without having to watch.

            • forgotaboutlaye@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              In order to use the platform in the EU, you either opt into personalised ads or pay a monthly subscription. So yes, I’m aware they’re using my data for the ads.

              Google does as well, but they don’t seem to be able to offer me even relatively relevant ads based on my interests.

      • OtherPetard@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, the pre-ads (unstoppable) and the massively increased loading times of the basic Youtube page makes it impossible to successfully Rickroll people

    • Kid_Thunder@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      The problem is that there is that ad networks and ad placements are just bad actors in the consumer space. Not only has malware been passed time and time again with ads but also false ads to malware. When that happens suddenly the content creator/website/whatever ‘isn’t responsible’ for it. Then there’s the issue of ads being placed everywhere slowing down websites but even worse, getting in the way with auto play audio and video, videos autoscrolling over the content you’re trying to read or whatever, etc.

      As a consumer, I should not and ethically do not need to worry about another’s business model. If the business model fails simply because I don’t allow something that model depends on to traverse my network then it is on them to figure it out. If the ads get in the way of the content, then I just want consume the content anyway.

      Some news websites use Ad Admiral or whatever it is called and I haven’t bothered trying to bypass the adblock wall for them. I just simply consume the content elsewhere.

      If ads were ever responsibly used or perhaps could be argued that there is compromise where consumers wouldn’t mind, then there’d probably be a lot less ad blocker usage. It’s like anything else. When it takes less effort to install an adblocker to have an OK experience, then ad blockers will be popular.

      I was around before ad blockers were very popular and even before pop-up blockers were around. Ads kept getting worse which is why ad blockers became more popular and more sophisticated. The Internet had ads for years before ad blockers were the norm.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah I wasn’t using an Adblock on YouTube when this all started. Then the ads got so intrusive it was seriously hindering content. These days I don’t watch much YouTube, but it’s with Adblock

    • Bookmeat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I hear you, buddy and I would 100% agree if not for the fact that they have a paid option where you can skip all the ads.

      Content creator gets paid. YouTube gets paid. You don’t get ads.

      It’s not rocket surgery.

      • kadu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I don’t see how that’s relevant. If you want to engage in the paid YouTube subscription, go for it, it’s an entirely different thing though.

        My computer requests from YouTube’s server a video, the server gives me a stream of data - I didn’t steal it, I didn’t hack it, the server provided me this because it wanted to - and this stream contains an ad and a video. What I do with this stream is only my concern, you can’t force me to watch the ad. That would be like walking in the street and somebody says you’re unethical because you didn’t look at an outdoor advertisement banner, and that you will be forced to either pay a fee or look at the ad.

        • Bookmeat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          But it is unethical because the ethics isn’t in the wires, it’s in the social contract.

          You didn’t have a social contract with anyone on the street walking past ads. I agree with you that those are annoying and are an eye sore, etc.

          But from YouTube you are getting a service for which you have not paid. The social contract is that you pay for services you consume regardless how they are presented. Whether it’s a TV show or groceries or online content doesn’t matter.

          They make the content available to you publicly just as a physical storefront would. You come into the shop and start loading your basket. They even have free samples. The staff are helpful and find things for you. Then you pay before leaving. That’s the contract. It’s not different because it’s on the Internet.

          • kadu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            I have no social contract with YouTube. The whole “if you access this site, you agree with this ToS” isn’t even legally valid here.

    • Aeri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      TBH I’m just so fucking tired of ads overstepping, back in the day there’s be a little banner on the side of a page advertising a truck or whatever, I’m sick of seeing like, enormous length ads.

      One day I had a 3 hour minecraft let’s play uploaded as an ad, you think I should have to watch all of that youtube?

      And the frequency is getting crazy.

      • JDPoZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        What’s worse is you have no idea how bad we’ve been propagandized to think that there is any amount of ads that is “normal.”

        The first time you are traveling through a European countryside and you don’t see any billboards on the side of roads, as Americans we are flabbergasted.

        It’s something that’s become so normalized here in the US that being somewhere without them feels almost like time-traveling now.

        Europeans don’t even realize how crazy it is here.

        You can be driving to the middle of fucking east Texas and you’ll see LITERALLY hundreds of billboards along just a 50 mile stretch, advertising everything from truck-driving scam schools to religious propaganda condemning you for presumptively not believing how God‘s going to smite you for thinking women should have a say in how to be in control of their bodies or some shit.

        I will never be convinced that any amount of ad blocking, pie hole installation, DNS sanitizing, VPN protection, device, third-party applications, etc. are not me just using my ability to fight back against an insane amount of their overreach.

        • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          First off, I couldn’t care less about ad blocking and I’m not here to moralise what anyone else does.

          I do however think your point is somewhat undermined by the fact YouTube have an ad free option. You can legitimately make the ads disappear and YouTube have no issue with it.

          • JDPoZ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Google makes literal hundreds of billions of dollars every year. You really think I give a shit that they supposedly operate YouTube at a “loss?” - Something I might add I hugely suspect is bullshit book-cooking the likes of which we usually more often associate with Hollywood production companies looking to steal from the creatives on every project they greenlight.

            I mean - I have a fucking cheap ass media server that delivers up a customized collection of videos anywhere I want at a quality higher than every other streaming platform that exists for less money per YEAR for even the cost of one of these “services” does… per MONTH.

            I find the idea that any of these shit platforms should be costing anybody $170 goddamn dollars a year per service to be completely absurd.

            I find it even more absurd, however, that there are actually people here of all platforms - not Facebook, not the shit stain that once was Twitter, not even the once hallowed “front page of the internet” Reddit, but the fediverse - whom will gleefully defend these stupid companies who could afford to let you watch everything they host for free just with the amount of ad revenue they rake in - let alone the data troves on me, you, your mom, your children and everyone else you know whether they use the platform or not that they gladly offer every shitmongering swindler.

            What’s next?

            You gonna tell me people are “thieves” for sneaking in an apple from their backyard tree, or hell, just a $0.10 bag of candy they bought from the local drugstore on the way to the theater instead of for $14.99 they are asked to fork over to the poor kid getting paid minimum wage to sweep up cumstains off the chairs at the top back row of the IMAX screen room after someone fucked their limited edition Dune 2 worm popcorn bucket?

            Give me a fucking break.

            Can’t believe you actually think these companies are sacrificing anything even remotely worth even considering let alone scolding others for mentioning their perfectly warranted distaste.

      • Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        When YouTube Red first dropped they were putting hour-long pilot episodes of their shows as pre-roll ads. Now I notice ads on shorts are full of obvious scams related to “new monthly health credits”. Still better than getting an ad on Facebook reels that was uncensored hardcore porn.

        • Aeri@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’m almost thinking of breaking down and buying YT premium because god, I watch a lot of youtube (I’d go so far as to say it’s my primary entertainment stream at times) but I’m already paying so fucking much for cable that I don’t even want.

          Cable’s 80, Internet’s 80, somehow extra fees bring it up to nearly 200, and I can’t convince other members of my household (who watch a grand total of four fucking channels, MSNBC, Weather channel, sports, etc) that we should ditch cable, absolutely miserable.

          • Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            For Android on phones and tablets look up Revanced. You have to download the YouTube .apk from somewhere like apkmirror, then use the Revanced manager to apply patches to block ads and change functionality. Then you log into your account with their own version of MicroG/gmscore. It was briefly affected by the issue in the main post but was working again in a few hours.

            For Android-based smart TVs and streaming devices there’s SmartTube (SmartTubeNext). Not sure how well they’ll do if YouTube goes cat and mouse though.

            And for a wider variety of devices (including Apple TV and now WebOS) there’s also Kodi which has a YouTube addon although logging in with it is kind of a pain as you need to get API keys, etc.

            & finally on a desktop browser uBlock Origin alone handles all the ads pretty well, and you can optionally add Sponsorblock.

            Oh. And check out some of the over the top TV services and see if there are any cheap ones that might meet your needs to replace cable. Though the way the cable companies do their bundling even that might not save you much as the net might jump up to more than $80 standalone.

    • MakePorkGreatAgain@lemmy.basedcount.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      if a content creator doesnt want people to be able to skip the ads/demonetize the content, then they should post on a platform that makes ads mandatory.

      problem is that no one will watch crap on that sort of platform

    • pop@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      My guy, that’s why there is DRM. Your screen are loading pixels, because they let you. Those third party apps and frontends work because they let the users have a little freedoms.

      If you steal something off the mall and bring it to your home, it doesn’t make it yours. People thinking all that code, infrastructure and labour to run something on the internet should be free because they have an internet connection are entitled as the sovcit bunch. Just cringe.

      Advertisers, Malwares and Ad blockers are all to blame for the current state of the internet. We’re heading for paywalled internet and entitled basement dwellers are going to complain you miss the “old internet”

      Seriously, I use adblockers but the rationale people make up for this like countless others are just plain stupid.

      • Eccitaze@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Fuck that victim-blaming nonsense. The entire reason ad blockers were invented in the first place were because ads in the 90s and early 2000s were somehow even worse than they are now. You would click on a website, and pop-up ads would literally open new windows under your mouse cursor and immediately load an ad that opened another pop-up ad, and then another, and another, until you had 30 windows open and 29 of them were pop-up ads, all of them hoping to trick you into clicking on them to take you to a website laden with more and more pop-up ads. Banner ads would use bright, flashing, two-tone colors (that were likely seizure-inducing, so have fun epileptics!) to demand your attention while taking up most of your relatively tiny, low-resolution screen.

        The worst offenders were the Flash-based ads. On top of all the other dirty tricks that regular ads did, they would do things like disguising themselves as games to trick you into clicking them. (“Punch the monkey and win a prize!” The prize was malware.) They would play sound and video–which were the equivalent of a jump scare back then, because of how rare audio/video was on the Internet in that day. They would exploit the poor security of Flash to try and download malware to your PC without you even interacting with them. And all this while hogging your limited dialup connection (or DSL if you were lucky), and dragging your PC to a crawl with horrible optimization. When Apple refused to support Flash on iOS way back in the day, it was a backdoor ad blocker because of how ubiquitous Flash was for advertising content at the time.

        The point of all this is that advertisers have always abused the Internet, practically from day one. Firefox first became popular because it was the first browser to introduce a pop-up blocker, which was another backdoor ad blocker. Half the reason why Google became the company it did is because it started out as a deliberate break from the abuses of everyone else and gave a simple, clean interface with to-the-point, unobtrusive, text-based advertisements.

        If advertisers and Google in particular had stuck to that bargain–clean, unobstrusive, simple advertisements that had no risk of malware and no interruption to user workflow, ad blockers would largely be a thing of the past. Instead, they decided to chase the profit dragon, and modern Google is no better than the very companies it originally replaced.

      • kadu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        My guy, that’s why there is DRM. Your screen are loading pixels, because they let you.

        When I ping YouTube’s server it provides me with a stream that contains an ad and a video. What I do with that stream is my problem, and if I want to chop it up it’s something I can freely decide.

        Your server can send any data it wants, but it can’t decide what I do with it, are you nuts?

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Advertisers, Malwares and Ad blockers are all to blame for the current state of the internet.

        So the thing that blocks the first two is equally to blame?

        I remember the day I started using an Ad blocker. I used to not care at all about ads on sites, “it’s how they make money. I can live with it.” And then I encountered a banner ad that screamed “HELOOOOOOO!” every time my mouse went over it. I couldn’t download an ad blocker fast enough.

        Advertisers and Malware are to blame for Ad blockers. Advertisers will get more and more annoying and intrusive until people reach the point that they won’t put up with them anymore. Seeing as the internet is one big bucket and I can’t block some ads, then I will block all ads.

      • TFO Winder@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        If something allows it then it’s morally justified. You can’t be naked intentionally and ask me to not look at same time.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      You know what, I actually agree with YouTube’s argument. Ad blocking is piracy. In fact, no, it’s worse than piracy. If I pirate a movie, Disney makes no money, but it costs them nothing at all. If I watch YouTube without an ad blocker, I’m depriving YouTube of its revenue source and I’m costing them money. Morally, ad blocking sits somewhere between piracy and actual theft.

      The thing is? I don’t care. I ad block YouTube all the time and feel not a lick of guilt. The reason: Google brought this on themselves. I used to happily pay for YouTube Red. But they have continuously, both before and after that point, been actively hostile to the people actually producing the content they make. Their willingness to bow down to copyright trolls and complete inability to properly apply fair use. They extremely harsh policies on acceptable content, stopping people talking about sex education or mediaeval weaponry being able to reliably makes money.

      And the straw that broke this camel’s back was when they changed the requirements to be in the Partner Program, locking out all the smaller creators from ever being able to make money on YouTube. I never considered myself a “creator”, but over the 5 years prior to that I occasionally uploaded stuff I was doing anyway. I had amassed almost $100 over those 5 years. Not an impressive amount, for sure, but having that taken away from me made me feel unwelcome. I don’t think I’ve uploaded anything public since, and I’ve been blocking ads on the site since then.

      Even worse, not long after this change, they decided to start showing ads even on videos from non-partnered videos, so you can get ads on my videos even though I don’t see a single cent.

      So fuck YouTube. Ad blocking is worse than piracy, and I say good.

      • JDPoZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        My god… are you… me? Same exact shit. Created my YT account 14 years ago. Made some vids… some got some views… eventually I got a few dollars deposited like for 3 years. Probably totaled the same $100 you mentioned then boom. Shut down.

        • Zagorath@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          I uploaded what I think was the first tutorial on how to use Photoshop’s then-new “Content-Aware Fill” to help create panoramas, and also a tutorial about…something, I forget what, to do with the music engraving software Sibelius. They were things I was doing all the time, but there didn’t seem to be any guide on how to do it, so I thought I’d help out. And I got rewarded with a little cash and a few tens of thousands of views. Felt good.

          There are much better, higher-polish videos that deal with those subjects now, I’m sure. But still, it didn’t feel good getting that ripped out from under me, and being told I was no longer welcome.

    • JDPoZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I don’t care.

      The social contract of this country was tossed out the window a long time ago, so I will try to get away with any personal victory against the overreach of billion dollar companies any way I easily and legally can.

      If I lived in a country where representation was actually democratic, if my tax dollars went towards public healthcare rather than paying for pharmacy billionaire’s 15th yacht, and providing actual better schools for kids rather than bulletproof windows because politicians won’t pass gun reform, and public transportation that was more bullet trains and less 25 mph rickety AmTraks covered in piss and graffiti, perhaps I would feel like I should be concerned with figuring out how to best provide for those that create in the marketplace within the hostile business environments they are forced to work within the constraints of… but there is far too much more important bullshit I have to worry about to concern myself with “pirating via skipping or blocking intrusive and constant ads” when they now will pour out of every possible layer of the media experience we have available to us as consumers.

      Telling me to concern myself with that puts too much responsibility on me as a consumer when we really have relatively very little power.

      I will pay for anything I think is of good value and pay directly to those who make the things I love and see work put into, but I will not suffer endless ads on behalf of anyone, nor will I force anyone in my home to suffer watching endless commercials for things like kids toy products like I was thanks to the Reagan era deregulation of kids’ TV programming.

  • SeventySeven@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    What they don’t realize is people are also using those third party apps because they are offering much more customization than the stock YouTube app ever offers. I had free premium and still used Revanced because it’s such a godsend. There’s so much useless crap in the youtube layout.

  • Brownian Motion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    If you are looking for a specific video, use DDG search, then click videos. No ad’s!

    Obviously not useful if you’re just randomly browsing content.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    YouTube is bringing its ad blocker fight to mobile.

    In an update on Monday, YouTube writes that users accessing videos through a third-party ad blocking app may encounter buffering issues or see an error message that reads, “The following content is not available on this app.”

    It also began disabling videos for users with an ad blocking extension enabled.

    But now, YouTube says its policies don’t allow “third-party apps to turn off ads because that prevents the creator from being rewarded for viewership.” This appears to target mobile ad blockers like AdGuard, which lets you open YouTube within the ad blocking app, where you’ll get to view videos interruption-free.

    “When we find an app that violates these terms, we will take appropriate action to protect our platform, creators, and viewers.”

    This likely won’t come as pleasant news to all the users who watch YouTube through ad blocking apps, but it doesn’t look like YouTube is backing down in its battle against ad blockers anytime soon.


    The original article contains 220 words, the summary contains 165 words. Saved 25%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • FrostKing@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Personally, I don’t think a service is in the wrong for trying to protect against ad block, especially when their revenue comes from ads. However I also don’t think there’s anything wrong with adblockers continuing to innovate to circumvent that. I’m rooting for Ublock Origin lol

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      they also fucked themselves over with the ad skill issues they’ve had over the years. Advertisers now find it to be more worthwhile to advertise directly with creators, though that also means they make a lot more money, so.

      They kinda dug their own grave, to be honest.

      • force@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        What made me and I imagine a large chunk of other people convert to revanced/similar apps is the super aggressive advertising, it’s impossible to use youtube when you get a double ad before and after every 5 second video and get 30 second midrolls every like 3 minutes. You can’t skip through a video to find the part you want to see because you’ll just get an ad. It’s extremely infuriating and time-consuming, it used to be whete I was willing to deal with it but they fucked it up. Now I can never go back to ad-riddled YouTube, even if it has a “reasonable” amount of advertising (I am now in the belief that no amount of advertising is reasonable anymore though).

        • Renorc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Exactly. They lost their minds and went too far. Now I’ll never go back either.

        • GCanuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yup. I was willing to watch one or two short ads before I watch a video, but the mid rolls and unskippable 30+second ads just made me say “well that’s enough of that”. Now I haven’t seen a YouTube ad in a long time.

      • bcron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Not only monetization but also the whole sorting/ranking algorithms. Youtube is a bit better than Facebook reels and instagram due to the thumbs down button, but some people go out of their way to make nonsensical garbage because viewers will then comment, and there’s no way to tell if a video is good or bad based solely on engagement. Those videos where people have some DIY hack to clean a toilet bowl and they just pour random condiments in the toilet for 3 minutes and cut the video before any conclusion, those types of videos

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Now? They’ve always been playing whack-a-mole against third party apps.

  • csm10495@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Makes me miss a time where they couldn’t tell if ads were actually watched or not.

    Sooner or later, ad blockers should just simulate the ad being played (in the background) with the real content going in the foreground to act as if the ad was watched.

    Kind of like going to the bathroom during commercials.

    Then again I wish we had a real alternative to YouTube. (Don’t point me to the fediverse video stuff … that’s not what I mean.) There is no real competition for a place to freely upload videos … or on the other side find all that content. No one wants to scale enough to compete. (Very few probably could considering the amount of new content per minute).

    If only there was real competition, then YouTube would have to fight over our attention/usage by lowering ad count.

    No competition means worse for all.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I wonder about this. Youtube is made so that videos has to be long (10 minutes at least, or you won’t get exposure, right?) so we get all those dragged out videos with long summaries.

      Also you are supposed to earn money with it, which combined makes videos, IMO, often not very interesting.

      Sure, I get it, everyone can’t make videos all day long for free, but isn’t that something that we shouldn’t maybe want?

      I prefer a genuine hobbyist making one video a year, than a sponsored person pushing one a day.

      Which brings me to hosting and bandwidth needs, youtube needs a lot of that because of its business model, but say Lemmy communities could probably host quality videos without large hassle (especially if small servers wasn’t defederated all the time).

      Thoughts?

    • fosstulate@iusearchlinux.fyi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      No one wants to scale enough to compete.

      I don’t consider scale important from the perspective of making and watching good videos. People get hung up on it when citing barriers to competition with Youtube, and while it’s certainly there, it only matters to Google itself (so it can continue to plausibly lie to its customers about ad impression numbers). In fact YT’s offering was at its creative peak when scale was lacking.

      It makes no difference to me whether a knowledgeable hobbyist has 20,000 subs or 250,000. I don’t care about their “content” suitability for advertisers (that creepy term can get nuked). I certainly couldn’t care less whether the algorithm promotes their work, deserving as it may be. This sort of creator operates on the assumption their viewers are intelligent, and is typically savvy enough to route around YT with alternate donation/support mechanisms. These people will continue on any platform. For them, quality is an end in itself rather than a feed-in to a metric. I would rather watch a badly filmed insightful critical appraisal of a new piece of hardware than Canadian/Black Technology Man’s 8K press release rehash full of slick cuts and pointless b-roll.

      Scale is the concern of middlemen.

    • derpgon@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Well, YT is literally getting petabytes uploaded to it. Every single day. Thats 1000 terabytes, and thats 1000000 gigabytes.

      I bet you haven’t even seen a petabyte of storage in one place (assuming you didn’t go to a data center yourself). How is a small company, or even fediverse, gonna handle that? Thats absolutely insane amount of data and, without moderation or curation, it is not feasible.

      It’s a giant waste of space and resources, to be honest. Most videos are seen once, and the rest is mostly spam or bad quality content.

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Well break it up “lemmy wise” or more? I mean nobody can replace youtube but it would be possible having your own fishing channel for example. If it gets wildly watched you probably have to figure out some sponsorship for sure.

        BTW no I haven’tseen a PB storage, but I did write visualisation and computation software for treating and seing datastructures up to PB size with hdf5.

    • lost_faith@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Sooner or later, ad blockers should just simulate the ad being played (in the background) with the real content going in the foreground to act as if the ad was watched.

      I wish adblockers did this, open the ad in a little silenced sandbox window. I don’t see the ad, creator gets their pay

      • reksas@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Even the advertisers don’t lose out because you wouldn’t have paid attention to the ad too. They might even win a little because now one doesn’t have to get annoyed by the ad and deliberately not buy the thing.

        • lost_faith@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Exactly, I don’t overly mind the “paid advertisements” the creators do, the guys I watch that do this are extremely funny in how they do it so if I don’t manually skip I get a good laugh, like the “Adstronaut”

      • gravitywell@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Adnaseum is a fork of unlock that fakes viewing ads. The thing is its banned from chromes app store because google is at its core an advertising company.

    • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s actually a really great deal at the old price I’m grandfathered into and none of you can get any more.

      Also if you pirate YT, Google won’t pay creators. If you watch ads, Google still won’t pay creators.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Who’s pirating YouTube? I’m just blocking content I don’t want to watch. :)

        And if you want to support creators, but something from their store or send them a donation or something. Doing that once is probably more money than they’d ever get from ads you watch.

    • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      …1!

      (Read as if this was as an from Google) (if your familer with Rodgers Honest Ads, this was inspired by the way those are written) (if that last sentence wasn’t clear…this whole post is a mockery or /s)

      Buy YouTube Premium with your hard earned money so you can feel good about a few extra pennies going towards your beloved creators. We’ll keep the rest of your precious money for ourselves to bring you new and exiting features you never asked for -

      • The ever growing library YouTube originals you’ve never heard of, because we felt it necessary to take the “You” out of YouTube and sponsor our own content for you to enjoy.
      • We’ll bring more pixels to you with real time 4K video streaming. Now you can enjoy one the 6 channels that actually record in 4k in beautiful life like quality on your tiny phone, the 13 year old computer screen you got free from work or your smart 4K TV that doesn’t have a WiFi card fast enough to get all the pixels for a buttery smooth expirence.
      • Next we’ll bring you Live TV straight to your eyes from across the globe. Ditch those pesky cable bills and pay for our ever growing selection of unwilling particpents as the affordability of streaming destroys traditional cable for the small monthly cost of $57.99 for the first 3 months. As a bonus, our website doesn’t bother to tell you if it includes any the other YouTube premium features - you might just end up paying for premium twice and we have no real obligation to tell you.
      • Finally, we’ve thought of the little ones with our special version of YouTube for Kids, called YouTube Kids. Here we use an advanced AI system of people who can find the report button to filter out any content we decide goes against our ever changing guidelines to allow your children to only watch the most mind numbing, cheaply made, addicitive garbage to keep them ocupied while you do more important things than raising your child.

      We know the real reason you’re here is YouTube Music. Access our huge library of every song that we haven’t been forced to take down because some studio decided they wanted their cut. We’ll entice you to spend a few more dollars than what you pay for just YouTube Music to get ad-free YouTube and the revolutionary ability to play music in the background on your mobile phone. That’s right, we’ve developed a method in which you can listen to music and read your texts at the same time. It’s revolutionary.

      Still not convinced, lastly we added in the amazing feature called offline viewing. This will download the videos you select to your device offline in an encrypted format so hackers can’t steal them from you, allowing you to watch them anywhere, provided you have an internet connection so we can verify you downloaded the videos.

  • gentooer@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I hope the YouTube Kodi plugin stays working, otherwise I’ll have to write a script to download all latest videos in my subscription to my home server.