• YouTube is testing server-side ad injection to counter ad blockers, integrating ads directly into videos to make them indistinguishable from the main content.
  • This new method complicates ad blocking, including tools like SponsorBlock, which now face challenges in accurately identifying and skipping sponsored segments.
  • The feature is currently in testing and not widely rolled out, with YouTube encouraging users to subscribe to YouTube Premium for an ad-free experience.
  • michael_palmer@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    It seems that Youtube’s IT department has decided to utilize the budget and show investors that they are not getting paid for nothing. After all, Youtube is only testing a new type of advertising, and there are already a dozen solutions to the problem in the comments.

  • smnwcj@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    With the state of AI and computer vision, and legal requirements to disclose ads, i wonder if a ytdl + editing script will he the nicest way to watch at some point

    • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      I have a ytdl script download my “subscriptions” automatically to my jellyfin media server and an invidious server for everything else.

      Its already is a much nicer way to watch content right now.

  • monobot@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 days ago

    I always wondered why they haven’t been doing it from the start, seams like it is not as simple as I imagine.

    People will take it, there is no other option and G is working hard not to allow another video platform.

    Problem is ads they are playing are awful and loud. We will make way to silent them and black them out, it is not hard.

    Bigger problem is content they are pushing is getting bad and is pushing creators into burnout. And I don’t want to see videos companies are creating, but want individual contributions.

    • GreatDong3000@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      They probably had thos ready to go a long time ago. It is just heavier on their servers so it costs more. Likely they had a number in mind about how many users would have to be using ad-blockers before rolling this out, to balance costs.

  • MudMan@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 days ago

    OK, can I be real about this for a second?

    I’m torn about Youtube ad stuff. Genuinely.

    On the one hand the ads suck, we have a good way to bypass them and I certainly don’t want to watch Youtube videos if the ads are unskippable.

    On the other hand, if I’m being honest I watch more Youtube than Netflix or Amazon Prime and I sure give those guys money for a subscription. If I counted the cost per watched minute, Youtube Premium would make way more sense than a bunch of subs I do pay.

    But I also don’t want to watch a Youtube that is a paid service. That was never the point. The reason I engage with it so much is it’s supposed to be UGC, not TV.

    So yeah, torn. Youtube is very weird and the relationship we all have with it is super dysfunctional, creators and viewers alike. We made a very strange future and now we have to deal with it.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      The problem is that user generated content still takes time. Which means money. Also, people don’t want vlogs with a drywall background anymore and the number of creators who can get away with simple prop free skits are double digit, at best. So making the videos also cost money.

      People make up this fantaasy land where art should be done with no compensation to be pure. Which ignores that the vast majority of art in human history was either made by the independently wealthy or as a “patron” system where… an independently wealthy person paid an artist to make them look good.

      And that even extends to the modern day. People get angry about “nepo babies” but… it takes a lot of time and money to refine your music to a meaningful degree. The garage bands that get discovered playing at a local bar are VERY much the exception and almost everyone universally considers their best albums to be the first couple after they got signed by a label and could drill down and refine it.

      Youtube and the like are basically the first time that “the everyperson” could make art for a living. Unfortunately… that means they need to get paid. Ads are of very questionable use. Youtube Premium is almost universally praised by any creator who is willing to talk about it. But we need some way of paying those mid tier creators who are popular enough to do it for a living but not popular enough to get 120 bucks a year from their fans to upload MAYBE one video (looking at you Michael Reeves).

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        The problem is that user generated content still takes time. Which means money. Also, people don’t want vlogs with a drywall background anymore and the number of creators who can get away with simple prop free skits are double digit, at best. So making the videos also cost money.

        That’s why I don’t use Sponsorblock: it hurts the wrong people.

        But I’ll still block the ads because to hell with Google and their monopoly. I’m only interested in supporting the artists directly, Google can get fucked.

      • snooggums@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        Early youtube with the drywall backgrounds in skits or just random bits of life were what made it fun. The fact that the majority of the content now means it is just another streaming service with an expected income for someone instead of being something they did in their spare time. The switch from amateur to professional content ruined youtube.

    • untilyouarrived@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      I pay for YouTube Premium. I get a lot of value from it, and streaming video isn’t cheap. I don’t think it’s reasonable for anyone to think they should provide it for free.

      • MudMan@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        Yeeeah, but my issue with that is they generated the expectation that it’d be free by using their investment money to muscle out smaller competitors. There was a time where Youtube was the biggest of a set of UGC video sites and some of the others were competitive. Now it’s the only real alternative.

        So from that perspective they made their bed, now they sleep in it.

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          19 days ago

          Yeeeah, but my issue with that is they generated the expectation that it’d be free by using their investment money to muscle out smaller competitors.

          All of YouTube’s competitors were doing the same thing, use ads to subsidize free video hosting. It just happened to be that YouTube was the survivor. If there was competition, it would likely have the same business model that YouTube has. Spotify may be building a YouTube competitor based on the same model.

          • MudMan@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            19 days ago

            Yep, that’s also fair. Google is the leftovers from the “let them fight” approach to venture capital. Now we have a monopoly on many areas and nobody’s left to do anything when Godzilla comes to visit.

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        I don’t give a shit if it’s reasonable anymore.

        Google has done enough shit over the years, ruined enough services, some of them paid services, and continually harmed content creators with their trash algorithm, all the while hosting hate on their platform, that I don’t give a damn what’s fair to them anymore.

        They won’t get a penny from me ever again. I’ll continue to find every way of accessing any content on that platform that I choose, without ads, and without paying them, and it has absolutely nothing to do with ethics or reason. It is entirely, 100%, because fuck Google.

        • InternetUser2012@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          19 days ago

          If needed, I would spend 40 times the time and effort to watch one of their videos without a single ad than it would take to just watch their ads with the video I want to see sprinkled in.

        • undefined@links.hackliberty.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          If you’re not actively blocking connections to their servers (by any number of means) it doesn’t matter whether you consciously give them money or not.

          There is so much third party tracking in apps and websites that it’s really got to be at the network level. They make bank by tracking you and selling that data for profit.

          I’ve been Google-free for months now and so far the only inconvenience has been ReCAPTCHAs not loading, but that’s limited to just a handful of websites that I don’t care enough to use in the first place.

    • RandomStickman@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      I used to whitelist yt on my ad block because a I know portion of it goes to the creators. Then yt took advantage of me by adding more and more intrusive ads. Now I support creators directly whenever I can.

      • MudMan@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        That’s a fair point, I do pay for subs in some smaller sites. A lot of the time I still watch the Youtube version because… well, that way the creators get paid twice and I’m probably already on YT, but still.

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        19 days ago

        The problem is that the patreon model inherently only supports the big creators. Many of whom only BECAME big because they had alternative funding sources for so long.

        For example: Giant Bomb more or less imploded a few years back. Nextlander (Alex, Brad, and Vinny), Remap (Formerly Waypoint but Patrick Klepek, Rob Zachny, Cado Contreras) , and Jeff Gerstmann (hmmm? I wonder who that could be) and even Giant Bomb (Fandom) are doing great. But people like Abby Russel or Renata Price very much immediately fell into that “Well, I like her but she is one person and I am already blowing 20 or 30 bucks a month on patreons…” hole.

        And we see that on youtube/twitch. Creators will mostly not care and then suddenly do a year long subathon because they understand… they are in that threshold where they make just enough off of ad and sponsor revenue that they can just keep their resume updated but are fucked if Youtube/twitch change ANYTHING. They need to get to that threshold where people will subscribe to a patreon.

        And the “Well, I will just subscribe to the creators I think are worth it” inherently fucks them over.


        I’ll add on that, for all his many flaws, Ludwig Ahlgren (?) has done a lot of good discussion on this topic. Because as twitch and youtube stop giving streamers giant signing bonuses, it gets harder and harder for the next crop of big streamers to come into existence. Because if there isn’t money to get people out of that O(100) concurrents mid-tier… yeah.

      • Maeve@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        19 days ago

        100% agree. I follow a few content creators who include a Cash App or Paypal information in the description box. They don’t demand cash** because they do it for the love of what they do, and don’t demand subscriptions or anything else. If I have an extra dollar, I send it. I’m guessing this either isn’t their only revenue stream or do well enough that it is. If everyone who is appreciative would do a dollar or few donations, maybe it is a livble wage, with or without youtube’s payment?

    • Jordan117@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      I do try to block ads, but tbh it’s impossible to be mad at Google for pushing them. YouTube is a modern miracle of engineering – no other platform on the planet hosts the scale of video it does, indefinitely, with instant access, for free. It is more than fair for them to recoup the massive cost. Personally, if they had a cheaper version of Premium without the music features, I’d pay for it in a heartbeat.

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        YouTube is a modern miracle of engineering – no other platform on the planet hosts the scale of video it does, indefinitely, with instant access, for free

        Because Google chokes the market. There could be plenty of other competitors if Google charged for it like other companies would. Google subsidized YouTube with the rest of their company’s profits, not to provide us a free platform because they’re so nice, but to prevent competition. As long as YouTube was free, no other companies would be able to keep up with the costs, therefore no one else would enter the market.

        If this shit is so expensive, and they want money, they can gate the content like every other streaming service, and then deal with the competition that would swell up.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          19 days ago

          If google “charged for it like other companies would” then youtube would not exist. The ONLY companies that can handle that volume of data are Google, Amazon, and Microsoft: The three big cloud service providers. And Microsoft noped the fuck out and Amazon have some strong purges on most streams.

          And… there were other sites that tried to compete with youtube. Those of us who are old enough will remember subscribing to Rooster Teeth or Giant Bomb but watching the videos on youtube because “the site player is shit”. Let alone all the general purpose video sites that either became dirtier than a truck stop lizard who barebacks constantly or became liveleak and was all about Faces of Death and revenge porn… and then went out of business.

          Videos is INCREDIBLY expensive. That is why the current rise of sites like Nebula and Gun Jesus’s site and Corridor Crew’s site all paywall watching anything. Because free video would cost way too much.

          If this shit is so expensive, and they want money, they can gate the content like every other streaming service, and then deal with the competition that would swell up.

          So… you actively dislike a model where you can choose to watch videos in exchange for watching an ad and instead insist upon paying to watch anything. AND still don’t want to pay to watch anything because Youtube Premium lets you do that anyway.

    • GreatDong3000@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      19 days ago

      I think Google created a model that is unsustainable from the get go, because they have infinite money glitches and used this to monopolize the market and lure in creators.

      It could be sustainable for non-premium users if the amount of ads was similar to what it was, idk, 10 years ago, 14 years ago. However back then they were not making nearly enough to cover their costs and pay creators handsomely.

      I like to support creators but I also liked youtube better when it was mostly common people doing their thing however the fuck they wanted, instead of this hyper-profissionalized tv-wannabe corporate channels that grow to be mammoths.

      Problem is, we accepted the weird assumption that successful content creators on the internet are entitled to be millionaires, or to make a lot more money per month than say, a successful person in a common profession. If content creators got into youtube with the mindset that at best they’d live a life that is middle class instead of trying to become rich, then youtube would need a lot less money than it needs today, and content would go back to being more relaxed not mega professional and extremely polished videos from channels that employ dozens of people.

      But alas, I guess successful video creators on youtube are supposed to be rich and deserve to earn more money than a doctor, and youtube is supposed to be a viable source of income for mega corporations that used to be mainly TV and other traditional media but then freaked out about losing people to the internet.

      That’s what I thought at first but who am I kidding, if content creators got paid less youtube would still be very popular and google would still do whatever the fuck they want and shove more ads in it anyways. And also, paying top creators so much money is another way to prevent competition, creators won’t choose another platform if they can’t match the pay.

    • cwg1231@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      The deciding factor for me is how little of the money goes to creators, and how arbitrarily Google twiddles the content guidelines. If I’m going to pay a subscription for the category of content on YouTube, I’ll pay for Nebula and Dropout so that I know my money is actually making it to the people I like.

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

    In theory this could be beaten by using a link to a timestamp at 1 second in. If it starts at 0, it’s an ad.

    • viking@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      That would work for ads before the content, but not if they are spliced into the running video.

  • umami_wasabi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    How likely we can defeat it with something similar to YT’s own ContentID system? We download a tons of ads, process it with feature extraction, and match it on the fly to carve out those ads. A similar system to SB can be used to let people mark where the ads is, process, and share.

    • doodledup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago
      1. They don’t care because you aren’t watching ads anyways.
      2. Where are you going to watch videos now?
    • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      I don’t know why you’d go with a crypto scheme if what you actually need is video.

      Peertube is federated just like lemmy, so it doesn’t have to cook the planet to achieve decentralisation.

      • androogee (they/she)@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        I’ve heard that some versions of the Blockchain are not based on computing power and therefore are not nearly as awful re: emissions. But I don’t really know much about it so I decided to look into Odysee.

        Instead I found out all about how the company that created the protocol was blasted out of existence by the SEC for selling unregistered securities & the website is full of Nazis because they don’t do anything about fucking Nazis.

        Never did reach a conclusion about the blockchain thing. Kinda stopped caring. Sounds like a clusterfuck.

        • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          Proof of stake is what it’s called, but then it’s even more of a ponzi scheme because you have to buy in. Like they’re literally recreating coconut island.

          Also nobody seems to actually be doing it, possibly for exactly that reason. It’s just a green-washing promise of an idea.

          Federation and crypto are two completely opposite philosophies of decentralisation.

          Crypto is based on zero-trust, which sounds cool and edgy if you’re 15, but in practice it turns out that the people drawn to a zero trust system are untrustworthy. It’s not surprising that it’s full of Nazis.

          Federation is designed around trust, which is the way our meatspace social networks actually work, and I think it’s the only reasonable way forward.

      • hornedfiend@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        Fair enough. I completely forgot about peertube. Been using newpipe predominantly and odysee was the first alternative that came to mind.

        Thanks for reminding me about peer tube. A client recommendation would be great. I’ve used p2play.

  • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 days ago

    Go right ahead. If they actually manage to do it, that will be the end of my YouTube watching. Except on extremely rare occasions. I don’t need it badly enough to deal with that.

    • wagoner@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      As we learned from the reddit app changes, the ending of Netflix account sharing, etc etc the people who will take this action are few enough not to matter. Regretfully.

      • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        That doesn’t matter to me. When a company does shit like this, I won’t use it and will actively avoid it. People can do what they want and if they want to be abused constantly that’s on them. I don’t really care. I make my choice and I stick with it. Change will never happen with companies, they don’t care unless they actually get charged more then the money they make from their abuse and we all know that will never happen .

      • 9point6@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        19 days ago

        Well I don’t know about the Reddit stuff not mattering—I occasionally still check on it for a couple of niche communities and the Reddit I used to enjoy has basically died, it’s like the place is filled with angry idiots now. Those people were always there before but usually buried under a load of downvotes where you could mostly ignore them; they now seem to be a majority of those left contributing over there.

        They killed the golden goose in scaring off enough of the people contributing most interesting posts and comments (who were doing it entirely for free!) that the lunatics have taken over and shat on everything

        • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          19 days ago

          Everyone I’ve spoken to about it has noted that it’s become a very different place. I’ll still use it for reviews and getting tips for serious things like privacy and some basic DIY. But a lot of that advice will be obsolete in a couple years and very few people are replenishing it. Who’s going to give a shit about the best home theater setups of 2023 in two years?

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      Same.

      I’m excited for YouTube to end my YouTube addiction lol.

      Please, Google. Do it. Dare ya.

      • pizzaboi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        I genuinely spend too much time on that site, but I haven’t seen an ad in years. If that changes, then I guess I’ll have to change, too.

        • InternetUser2012@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          19 days ago

          I went to watch a diy video at work with chrome and was like WTF is this shit, the ads were so bad I walked back across the shop to get my phone and pull up the same video and started watching it before the video even started on the computer. Who in the hell can actually watch shit like that? It’s insane.

    • Goronmon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      Go right ahead. If they actually manage to do it, that will be the end of my YouTube watching.

      Except on extremely rare occasions.

      I’m sorry, I just find it funny that you walked back the “I’m done with Youtube” claim in the very next sentence.

      • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        I don’t think it can be completely avoided, but it can definitely be trimmed down a hell of a lot. As an example, if you watch YouTube for an hour a day and they make a change like this and you start watching it for 10 minutes a week, that’s a serious reduction.

    • kakes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      Ngl, I’m torn on this because I’m honestly not sure I could stop using YouTube.

      I hate ads with a burning passion, though, so we’ll see which wolf wins out there.

      If i can’t get around this using something like SponsorBlock, I feel like I’ll probably just set up some kind of pipeline to download videos and remove the ads myself (maybe using AI if it’s that bad) and just serve them over Jellyfin or something. Gonna be a pain, though.

      • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        I wouldn’t particularly like it, that’s for sure. But I would ultimately just bite the bullet and do it. At some point, you’re just pushed too far and it’s just not worth dealing with.

    • hightrix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      I’ll just use I and stop using YouTube. I won’t purposefully poison my mind with ads.

      • Bogasse@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        You could still go for a premium subscription, but I don’t trust Google with my money either.

        I hope this would make some quality content creators to move to another platform, but I don’t really believe in this.

      • Desistance@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        They’re trying. Give them some time. Users will lap it up like idiots instead of just saying no.

      • xcjs@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        Google was working on a feature that would do just that, but I can’t recall the name of it.

        They backed down for now due to public outcry, but I expect they’re just biding their time.

  • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Now here’s a thought - what if the real workaround Google are using here is targeting only non manifest V3 users?

    That would reduce the cost of doing this, since chrome users are already forced to swallow ads and could just be served as normal.