Live data from Hacker News

Google Chrome to stop autoplaying content with sound

venturebeat.com

181–188 of 188 posts

Re: Google Chrome to stop autoplaying content with sound

#181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The latest craziness is "news" websites that have an autoplay video + an autoplay ad, and their actual content is just another video, because apparently reading 10 lines of text is harder than sitting through a two minute slideshow with the same ten lines of text and some pretty pictures. It's getting ridiculous.

They do it because video preroll CPM is waayyy higher than display advertising. Like up to $15/cpm.. Multiples of that if you can get the right deals in place (not remnant).

Ohhhh, I see. I always wondered what the point was. Thanks for the clarification!

Re: Google Chrome to stop autoplaying content with sound

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's even more complicated because I only want YouTube to autoplay when I open it in a foreground tab.

That is how YouTube behaves today. It doesn't play until you foreground the tab. I don't see why that would change.

It might if you implement a new system for how autoplay is decided. Not every browser avoids autoplaying YouTube in background tabs.

Re: Google Chrome to stop autoplaying content with sound

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only you could somehow enable users to make decisions for themselves we could solve this....

Not really a solution. It works for repeat visits to sites users visit often, it doesn't really work at scale. Users want sane defaults; most of them will never change them. A world where sites are by default as malicious as users allow them to be is not a world where the internet is a friendly and powerful resource for everyone.

Making this a setting doesn't preclude sane defaults, like disabling autoplay everywhere except youtube.

Re: Google Chrome to stop autoplaying content with sound

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this one: "What's interesting here is how what this really demonstrates is that Flash really was exactly what we wanted". With HTML5, who didn't see annoying JavaScript popups and autoplay videos coming? Seriously. If you think about the web, think about 2 things: 1. Text content 2. Multimedia content People complaining about Flash always used arguments for nr 1. For me, I want my text content to be really static…

Annoying stuff is always annoying, but the major complaints about flash were centered on security holes and excessive CPU utilization.

Sure, I'm willing to accept that, including that Flash is not a web standard.

But another solution might have been to make a Flash web standard, with open implementations, instead of HTML5.

This is really an architectural choice that was made, not so much the blocking of a plugin.

They chose to integrate all in 1 big pile, instead of keeping web content and multimedia separate. And now you end up with a washed out version of both.

Re: Google Chrome to stop autoplaying content with sound

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A site's bandwidth bills are not more important than my annoyance.

That's fair. I just feel like the cat is out of the bag on gifs. If all browsers rolled out something that blocked autoplay on every mp4 or webm regardless of audio being enabled or present, I imagine a good amount of users would feel like things had "broken even if they'd appreciate that videos on news articles don't autoplay at all (although they'd still be able to follow you around the page).

What cat? In what way would .gifs make a site appear broken?

Re: Google Chrome to stop autoplaying content with sound

#187
post #94
post #12

I'm not sure why all these websites decided that auto-playing video is a good thing. It's annoying as hell. I click on an article for reading, I'm not clicking on a youtube playlist. The latest craze among web designers being videos that follow the reader even when they are scrolling down the page! Enough! Can we have a designer here explaining why they do this? If it's about engagement, i'm not going back to your we…

If the video follows you down the page in a paused state, with thumbnail and "play" icon, would this be okay? The video that follows you down the page is trying to help you, not annoy you. It gives you the chance to read the article while having the vision there too. It's only a problem if the video autoplays, which unfortunately is all of the time on all sites that do this.

There's literally nothing I've ever lost by blocking any element that follows me down the page, ever. Video or not.

Re: Google Chrome to stop autoplaying content with sound

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fair. I just feel like the cat is out of the bag on gifs. If all browsers rolled out something that blocked autoplay on every mp4 or webm regardless of audio being enabled or present, I imagine a good amount of users would feel like things had "broken even if they'd appreciate that videos on news articles don't autoplay at all (although they'd still be able to follow you around the page).

What cat? In what way would .gifs make a site appear broken?

.gifs wouldn't make a site feel broken. We can't go back to actual .gifs (distinct from the layman's "gif") because they're an inappropriate format for the kind of gifs that people make today.

I think people might feel like the browser has "regressed" or "broken" if they have to press "play" on silent, looping videos that they used to expect to autoplay. Maybe broken isn't the right word. I'm just saying that I think many people expect silent .mp4s to work the way that .gifs work: autoplaying.

Post reply on HN