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

YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

bleepingcomputer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#151

Post by bagacrap »

karaterobot wrote: post #67

Is it weird that this makes me want to subscribe to YouTube premium less than before? Feels like I've been poised to give them money for a while, since so many people seem to like the service. Now I feel like they're challenging me to a duel.

I mean, either way, Youtube comes out ahead. If you're blocking all their ads and not paying a sub, you're just a cost. They're cutting you.

What I don't understand is why you feel entitled to benefit from this resource without supporting it in any way.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#152

Post by grogenaut »

beardedwizard wrote: post #145
crop_rotation wrote: post #126

YouTube premium perfectly showcases why ads dominate the internet, because even when there is a paid option for a service much cheaper than any alternative, people do not want to pay (And I am not talking about too broke to pay cases). Serving an infinite video catalog is very expensive in terms of all resources (And yes Netflix is not comparable, unlike YouTube, Netflix can highly leverage cache boxes at ISPs). Vime…

people are paying for the content with patreon, bypassing YouTube entirely. Why cant YouTube figure out how to get that money people are clearly willing to part with? Why blame the users for YouTube failure?

Because people get real mad if YouTube tries to collect the patron money themselves and obviously takes a cut. Aka memberships.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#153

Post by esprehn »

crop_rotation wrote: post #126

YouTube premium perfectly showcases why ads dominate the internet, because even when there is a paid option for a service much cheaper than any alternative, people do not want to pay (And I am not talking about too broke to pay cases). Serving an infinite video catalog is very expensive in terms of all resources (And yes Netflix is not comparable, unlike YouTube, Netflix can highly leverage cache boxes at ISPs). Vime…

YouTube has caching like that too, see:

https://peering.google.com/#/

And

https://peering.google.com/#/learn-more/faq

And specifically the section on: "What content can Google serve from an edge node?"

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#154

Post by prawn »

deltree7 wrote: post #78
wnevets wrote: post #4

On a related note as someone who uses YouTube constantly YouTube Premium is absolutely worth it.

HN/Reddit : For years, "I'm happy to pay for services that has no/few ads". Companies: Here's a ad-free version. Subscribe HN/Reddit: Why are you asking me to subscribe? I hate this

Keep in mind that HN/Reddit is comprised of thousands or millions of people and there may or may not be overlap between those saying the first thing and later the second.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#155

Post by userbinator »

What's next, "YouTube tests pausing videos when you look away from ads"?

This is a slippery slope that I definitely do not want to be going down. At that rate, "drink verification can" is not far off.

When I used to watch the actual TV I changed the channel, muted, or left the room during ads. My eyes, my ears, my brain. I will not be forced to consume.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#156

Post by PragmaticPulp »

karaterobot wrote: post #67

Is it weird that this makes me want to subscribe to YouTube premium less than before? Feels like I've been poised to give them money for a while, since so many people seem to like the service. Now I feel like they're challenging me to a duel.

If you weren’t a paying customer, refuse to become a paying customer, and refuse to watch the ads, they don’t gain anything by having you as a user. It only costs them to retain you.

If doing something as simple as asking you to hold up your end of the deal of using their website (letting ads load for the ad-supported content) is too much to ask but paying for the website is also too much to ask, you have to be honest that you just want a free experience.

I don’t buy the argument that you were going to pay them in the future but you decided against it because they wouldn’t let you have it for free.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#158

Post by afraca »

KomoD wrote: post #83
systemtest wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it possible to get YouTube Premium without a credit-card? That is what stopped me from subscribing before.

If you don't pay with a card then what would you pay with?

In Europe there are a few options which let you pay with your bank account without a credit card. I tried to look up all the things Wise supports, found part of the list:

Trustly, Sofort, IDEAL

IDEAL is huge in the Netherlands for example.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#159

Post by bagacrap »

yawpitch wrote: post #130
AuthError wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

consuming content for free where creators expect to get paid is polite way of stealing if you really think about it

No, if you really think about it, that’s not remotely true here. A creator — myself included — is paid by Google for their content, which Google uses to attract the eyeballs that the advertisers are paying them to serve ads to… the creator doesn’t actually have any interest (financial or otherwise) in whether or not those ads are actually being watched (as opposed to being served). Since virtually all creators rely o…

This is some truly incredible mental gymnastics.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#160

Post by mths »

beardedwizard wrote: post #145
crop_rotation wrote: post #126

YouTube premium perfectly showcases why ads dominate the internet, because even when there is a paid option for a service much cheaper than any alternative, people do not want to pay (And I am not talking about too broke to pay cases). Serving an infinite video catalog is very expensive in terms of all resources (And yes Netflix is not comparable, unlike YouTube, Netflix can highly leverage cache boxes at ISPs). Vime…

people are paying for the content with patreon, bypassing YouTube entirely. Why cant YouTube figure out how to get that money people are clearly willing to part with? Why blame the users for YouTube failure?

Isn't YouTube already doing that with channel memberships? I think people can also pay to comment on live streams or something.. They're definitely already letting you support creators directly, while taking their cut of course.
Post reply on HN