YouTube’s annoying Premium spam • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#171

Post by aquadrop » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 1:19 AM UTC

monkeyfacebag wrote: post #41

I pay for YouTube premium but I'm still subjected to ads in the majority of videos I watch: the kind that are embedded by the creator directly in the video, eg, a one minute sponsored by Squarespace segment. I don't know how Google is framing YouTube premium (I get it through my Google play music subscription) but it is most assuredly not an ad-free experience.

I pay for premium as well and those embedded ads bother me much less because I can always skip it manually and I understand the content creator needs to be rewarded. I much prefer embedded ads to some solution like paywalls that appeared on newspapers/news sites after growth of adblockers.

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#172

Post by cptskippy » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:34 AM UTC

lonelappde wrote: post #170

cptskippy wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> YouTube Premium is literally the service HN wants: honest payment to support a Google service costs and creators publishing on it Except that's not what it is. They've bundled Ad Free with YouTube Music and YouTube Originals, which I personally have no interest in. How much of that ridiculous price is going to the production of that original content and music licensing fees? $15 a month is a big ask when I see zero…

Why do you care how they spend your fare? You should care if you are getting a fair value for your fare.

> Why do you care how they spend your fare?

Because I want to ensure the content creators I watch are supported, not just Youtube and the content creators it wants to support.

> You should care if you are getting a fair value for your fare.

As I said, I don't think it's a fair value for how I use it.

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#173

Post by aesthethiccs » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 2:40 AM UTC

netsharc wrote: post #151

hddherman wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might be interested in using this extension: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/sponsorblock/ Doesn't work 100% of the time but seems to do the trick for most popular videos.

Hah, that's a cool hack. It reminds me of the folks who were editing pirated Mythbusters videos so each myth was its own continuous segment, without the recaps ("before the break, we were watching...") and.. precaps? ("Stay tuned to see what happens!")

/r/smyths is what your looking for, and it's way better than original mythbusters

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#174

Post by matheusmoreira » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 3:32 AM UTC

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #156

monkeyfacebag wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't dispute any of that. I'm saying that, as a YouTube premium subscriber, I'm not clear exactly what I'm paying for. I mean, I guess fewer ads is better than more ads but I think a paid service should be able to provide me with stronger guarantees.

For decades, people have accepted ads in television, though it's a paid service.

For decades, we did not have the means to fight back. Now we have the technology to fight this abuse: ad blockers, DVRs that automatically delete ads in recorded video, radio ad/chatter filters, sponsorship segment skippers, etc.

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#175

Post by Marsymars » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:04 AM UTC

CamelCaseName wrote: post #137

matheusmoreira wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's like demanding that music authors just send you MP3s for free without paying for it at all. That's exactly what should happen. Creators need to figure out how to get paid before the work is created. They need to get paid for the work of creating, not for the end result which should be public domain. They should also publish a lossless FLAC instead of an MP3. > I personally hope that more companies allow me to…

>Creators need to figure out how to get paid before the work is created. They need to get paid for the work of creating This has downsides too. After all, what are those paying for the creation getting in return? I imagine creators, such as musicians, already get paid for the work of creating... In the form of embedded advertising. Listen to any top song and you'll be barraged by the names of luxury brands. Is this r…

You could probably find people to make the argument that music went downhill after the end of the European patronage system.

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#176

Post by Marsymars » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:11 AM UTC

lucb1e wrote: post #136

jowsie wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No idea how common this is, but that particular case seems to most likely be fabricated.

While I was also under the impression that this is probably not true (since you can't actually log in with Newpipe), I've been waiting for them to crack down on it from the day I learned of it. Wouldn't surprise me if it stopped working when enough people start to use it. Related, a few weeks ago they cracked down on Yalp (a Play Store front-end: basically an open source implementation of their internal APIs). I'm no…

I would pay a monthly subscription fee to Google to have the Play Store be ad free.

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#177

Post by Marsymars » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:13 AM UTC

jsnell wrote: post #155

TacoToni wrote: post #154

I'm sure someone already mentioned this, but I would pay for YouTube premium at a lower price just to remove ads. I have no interest in their music service.

That's what YouTube Red was. Did you subscribe to it? If you did, why aren't you now grandfathered into YouTube Premium at that old price? If you didn't, why not? It was after all exactly the product you now claim to have wanted.

> If you didn't, why not?

Not the poster you asked the question to originally, but YouTube Red was never available in Canada.

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#178

Post by guu » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 6:39 AM UTC

For those annoyed by the YouTube app or website bloat: https://invidio.us is an AGPL alternative front end for YouTube that truly feels premium. It doesn’t have pop up ads and even plays videos without javascript.

Source is here: https://github.com/omarroth/invidious

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#179

Post by wazoox » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 9:39 AM UTC

perl4ever wrote: post #158

wazoox wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was quite common in the US . We Europeans always considered US TV as totally unwatchable, because of the horrible, constant ad interruption.

I'm not sure it was always common in the US, I'm sure I heard a rumor that in olden days, cable didn't have ads, or had fewer ads because you paid for it. Some places in Europe pay for OTA TV so that could be connected with the quantity of ads, rather than the inherent superiority of the citizenry in all respects.

I think this has more to do with inherent superiority of the consumer defence laws.

BTW ads are an almost unmitigated nuisance: when France banned ads after 8PM on its public channels, their audience numbers soared (so the project which was an obvious gift from Sarkozy to his media mogul friends, badly backfired).

Re: YouTube’s annoying Premium spam

#180

Post by wazoox » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 9:42 AM UTC

extropy wrote: post #133

wazoox wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal of the breakup is to end a monopoly and a undeserved power-grab. For democracy to thrive, nobody should have too much power. Particularly corporations.

Such nice fluffy words... How would that impact your daily life?

It would enhance my daily life by reducing my exposition to advertising, which I consider an unmitigated nuisance (a mix of freeriding, deceit and propaganda).