Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

vancedapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 360 posts

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#291

Post by gaius_baltar »

toastercat wrote: post #181
wbobeirne wrote: post #18

Asking this question in good faith and in the interest of a productive discussion: Can someone give me their reasoning for why to use this over just paying for YouTube premium? They're providing a service that you value and spend enough time on to warrant looking for a way to not have to view ads, and if everyone were to start using Vanced overnight, YouTube wouldn't be able to justify staying up indefinitely. It fee…

Everytime* we have a thread about third-party YouTube clients, there are comments like yours by folks who fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of these third-party tools. The same happened year(s) ago with a thread about NewPipe. The purpose of these apps (including Vanced) is not solely to get past ad-block; Vanced (and NewPipe, and Piped, and Invidious) do far more than just give an ad-free viewing experience --…

> being more privacy-friendly.

That's exactly the point! YT Premium just give more data points to Google to track (by thing to your IRL identity) and don't get rid of all ads.

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#292

Post by eulerian »

matt74827289 wrote: post #268
chmod775 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's disingenuous because you're omitting the other half of the transaction: You are choosing, voluntarily, to consume the content that they are offering on their website. The implied arrangement is that you watch the ads (at least the first five seconds until the skip button appears) in exchange for them doing all the work of collecting, hosting, and delivering that content to you. Yet Google, like Microsoft bac…

Physical stores have the means to make it close-to impossible to shoplift goods from their store by investing in security, but they chose not to. Clearly they believe that shoplifters still provide net-positive value to them. Which is obviously bs, just because they don't stop you from doing it doesn't make it a net positive from them. It could just as likely mean that the time and effort to stop it is more expensive…

I'm also paying them with my user data. They use this data to generate insights and make more products that make them more money. It's very easy to overlook how much you are paying through your user behaviour.

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#293

Post by DetroitThrow »

BbzzbB wrote: post #263
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe your parent poster was just poking fun at the "if everybody started to do X" construct. If all humans started to use EVs (or any other type of vehicles) at the same time, the traffic jams would indeed be horrific. At any given time perhaps <5% of people are on the roads, so how would you even fit 100% of people onto roads at the same time?

Oh, didn't cross my mind. I think you are right and I probably misinterpreted the comment. My brain went straight to it being about running out of power and causing jams, probably because it was such a common fear with regards to EVs (and still is to an extent, CC Bill Gates and Porsche/Tesla in 2020). I'm sorry, GGP.

It was just a teasing comment about these devil's advocate style of comments being non-sensical and counter productive, and often in favor of some incumbent which normally receives pretty fair criticisms.

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#294

Post by coryfklein »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #126
leetcrew wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if everyone were to start using Vanced overnight, YouTube wouldn't be able to justify staying up indefinitely. I personally find categorical imperative arguments to be ridiculous. almost anything could be bad if everyone did them all the time. the reality is that adblocking, torrenting, and similar workarounds are used by a small subset of technically savvy users. most people just don't care enough to configure any…

> I don't feel any obligation to allow Google to use my own device and internet connection to serve me ad content that I don't wish to see. That's disingenuous because you're omitting the other half of the transaction: You are choosing, voluntarily, to consume the content that they are offering on their website. The implied arrangement is that you watch the ads (at least the first five seconds until the skip button a…

> That's disingenuous because you're omitting the other half of the transaction

1. The parent commenter seems to be quite candid and sincere, so I don't think the word disingenuous applies here.

2. YouTube has decided NOT to obligate all users to view ads in order to retrieve content from their servers. The public needs to accept NO Terms of Service to curl a video down from their servers.

3. There is no such "implied arrangement" when it comes to YouTube's servers which YouTube provides to the public. Yes, some such arrangement is clear when using youtube.com or the official YouTube application. That distinction is critical here.

Also as some side-commentary from a utilitarian perspective, since this discussion seems to have a distinct moral slant. If one opts to view YouTube with ads – instead of without them – is that action increasing or decreasing the net human well-being in the world? Given that no laws are broken and no crime has occurred, this seems to be the last remaining question we must answer.

And it seems quite clear to me that the alternate world where video-bandwidth is NOT purchased with human attention spent on advertisements seems to be, in nearly all ways, an improvement on what we have today.

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#295

Post by BLKNSLVR »

datagram wrote: post #267
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #165

My "killer use case" for Vanced or NewPipe isn't even the ad removal, it's being able to continue playing the audio while the app is minimised or the phone is locked. That is such a basic restriction that free YouTube places upon itself that ruins my main use case - listening to a couple of videos on my commute to and from work.

You can easily get all of these features in the official YouTube app by subscribing to YouTube Premium, which also provides revenue to content creators.

> all of these features

I don't want "all of the these features", I want background play, like it used to have.

I don't consume a lot, and a couple of the creators who are my "dailys" don't monetise with ads anyway. I also watch occasional YT on my TV via chromecast with the "full advertising experience" enabled.

The thing that irks me is that background play used to be part of the standard Youtube app (as far as I recall anyway), and now it's been taken away in what feels like a strong shepherding hand towards subscription - which annoys me enough to look for alternatives. (eg. I'm working towards migrating off gmail having been on the grandfathered free custom domain thing long enough to take free for granted).

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#296

Post by gaius_baltar »

datagram wrote: post #267
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #165

My "killer use case" for Vanced or NewPipe isn't even the ad removal, it's being able to continue playing the audio while the app is minimised or the phone is locked. That is such a basic restriction that free YouTube places upon itself that ruins my main use case - listening to a couple of videos on my commute to and from work.

You can easily get all of these features in the official YouTube app by subscribing to YouTube Premium, which also provides revenue to content creators.

... and giving more data points to Google to track (by linking it to your IRL identity). Also, you won't get rid of native ads.

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#297

Post by coryfklein »

wbobeirne wrote: post #18

Asking this question in good faith and in the interest of a productive discussion: Can someone give me their reasoning for why to use this over just paying for YouTube premium? They're providing a service that you value and spend enough time on to warrant looking for a way to not have to view ads, and if everyone were to start using Vanced overnight, YouTube wouldn't be able to justify staying up indefinitely. It fee…

> YouTube wouldn't be able to justify staying up indefinitely. It feels heavy on negative externalities.

"YouTube files bankruptcy and closes it's doors because people aren't willing to watch advertisements and executives could think of no other source of revenue to keep the doors open."

That's never going to happen, because the executives would be fired for incompetency. If advertising suddenly becomes a non-viable revenue stream, YouTube (and internet video hosting in general) is not going to disappear.

In fact, I ACTIVELY WISH we would drop the advertising model, and I will not support it if I have any alternative. It is a poison on the world and a giant economic waste. The world would be much the better place if YouTube (and the internet in general) gave up on advertising entirely.

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#298

Post by AniseAbyss »

wbobeirne wrote: post #18

Asking this question in good faith and in the interest of a productive discussion: Can someone give me their reasoning for why to use this over just paying for YouTube premium? They're providing a service that you value and spend enough time on to warrant looking for a way to not have to view ads, and if everyone were to start using Vanced overnight, YouTube wouldn't be able to justify staying up indefinitely. It fee…

Only use YT for about an hour a week for some background music while working out. I really do not give a shit about the service beyond that.

Honestly if YT goes kaput I'll just use digital radio. No skin off my back.

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#299

Post by coryfklein »

datagram wrote: post #267
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #165

My "killer use case" for Vanced or NewPipe isn't even the ad removal, it's being able to continue playing the audio while the app is minimised or the phone is locked. That is such a basic restriction that free YouTube places upon itself that ruins my main use case - listening to a couple of videos on my commute to and from work.

You can easily get all of these features in the official YouTube app by subscribing to YouTube Premium, which also provides revenue to content creators.

But why, when YouTube has chosen to provide the content ad-free?

If I see content I appreciate and then – for whatever reason – decide I'd like to support the creator, I'll probably just donate to their Patreon where they'll actually see most of the money I send their way.

If I pay for YouTube Premium and then I watch a video that wastes my time, I definitely do not want to send money to that creator but Premium will unavoidably do just that.

Re: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android

#300

Post by [deleted] »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #209
generalizations wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like a really condescending take on the people you disagree with. Why do you assume it's entitlement? Netflix thrives because they're worth paying for. People have the right to not be watched, no matter how "anonymous" it is. Why do you have a problem with that?

You can, today, pay for youtube premium and receive an ad free viewing experience. >Why do you have a problem with that? Why do you have the problem with simply paying? Or simply not using any websites that have ads? Speak with you 'wallet' (in this case, view impression) if you will.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN