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

171–180 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#171

Post by kenhwang »

crtasm wrote: post #27
haunter wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet. Twitch has some pretty hardcore ad system that even uBlock can't block straight up and you have to use a combination of tools/scripts https://github.com/pixeltris/TwitchAdSolutions https://old.reddit.com/r/Adblock/comments/10fgy9y/twitch_adb...

I only have uBlock Origin and never see ads on Twitch. Downvoting does not change this fact (and if I knew exactly why my experience is different, I would provide details).

It's rare to see Twitch ads because they don't have very much ad inventory. But if you happen to be a rare match for one of the few ads they have, you'll see that same ad over and over and over again.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#172

Post by hamandcheese »

crop_rotation wrote: post #167
esprehn wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?"

This is not comparable to Netflix et al. YouTube catalog is effectively infinite, and people watch all kinds of random content. Storing 10k movies and 20k TV episodes is a cakewalk compared to this.

I don't disagree that YouTube has a much longer (and fatter) tail, but that doesn't mean they can't benefit from edge caching.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#173

Post by TeMPOraL »

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 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

There's also a factor of quality and trust. I don't trust YouTube Premium enough to even try it. This is mostly colored by their constant, invasive disruption of my YouTube experience (particularly apparent on mobile) with YT Premium ads. Yes, I know it exist. No, I don't want it - the more you try to trick me into activating the trial, the less I want it.

> So what is the alternative? (Peer to Peer for streaming doesn't seem a reasonable alternative at any scale, since most people own phones and then laptops, and much fewer desktops).

Proper ad blocker on the desktop. yt-dlp for archiving/off-line playing. NewPipe or some other alternative YouTube players for mobile.

Yes, I know you meant a non-free-riding alternative, but hey - I have no problem paying for services, even for premium tiers when free tier is available. But I'm not getting bullied into subscribing.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#174

Post by nitemice »

dylan604 wrote: post #131
candiddevmike wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try youtube-dl or one of the clones.

How does this work for users that are not using a desktop OS/browser? Is there a mobile app that does this and holds the content for local viewing?

On Android, there are a number of solutions, like NewPipe (YT client) and Seal (downloader).

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#175

Post by bagacrap »

gonzo41 wrote: post #133

Gosh I hope Youtube doesn't shoot it's unicorn in the face. With the number of adds that the youtubers themselves sell, it's just a bit too much. I'd be happy for this if I knew it wasn't going to just be google raking in all the money to themselves but instead had some form of payment partnership with the creators that was fair and equitable. All I see happening here is more adds overall.

Content creators receive approximately 55% of the revenue generated on their channels. What is fair and equitable to you? Bear in mind that the other 45% is not pure profit for YT as most of it pays for hosting, development etc.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#176

Post by ruthie_cohen »

Mistletoe wrote: post #127
everdrive wrote: post #89

I'm pretty torn here. I don't believe I deserve access to free content, and there's _nothing_ wrong with any site blocking access if you don't want to see ads. I've done a lot of digital curtailing in my life, but Youtube has been hard to avoid. It's both good and bad, as they have some of the most amazing content in the whole world, but also some of the most addictive trash that I can't stop watching. Because the se…

Can you list some of the amazing content you like?

Not OP, but off the top of my head:

- Vlad Vexler

- Reporting from Ukraine

- Real Engineering

- Mustard

- Half as Interesting

- Coffeezilla

I mean the reality is that YT has high quality content for almost any subject matter you can think of. That’s the beauty of the platform, you can find your niche. Hell, it’s even good for most things that pop into your head, podcast clips, old commercials, instruction manuals, DIY etc etc.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#177

Post by [deleted] »

mertd wrote: post #148
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…

I have YT premium and it is easily the best money I spend most months. I'll just play devil's advocate. Maybe people are imagining a pay per view type of experience?

[deleted]

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#178

Post by thirteenfingers »

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…

What I don't understand (speaking of Vimeo) is why doesn't YouTube offer a plan where individual content creators can choose to pay a monthly fee to keep ads off of their own videos for all viewers. Speaking for myself I would happily pay for that.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#179

Post by kenhwang »

I hope this leads to a viable competitor to Youtube. Youtube being the de-facto video host for medium length content has pretty noticeable effects on how content is created to tailor to Youtube's algorithms and users.

I would love to see a BitTorrent-style solution to video hosting. If your video is popular, there's more seeders, but also you can just seed it yourself. Then you can have an ecosystem where there's different indexers with different recommendation algorithms but the content is the same.

Re: YouTube tests blocking videos unless you disable ad blockers

#180

Post by Waterluvian »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #156
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 hones…

I don’t do the ads on desktop but tolerate them on mobile. If they push me off the habit altogether, they’ll lose that second half of ads.

I used to be fine with the ads. But two breaks for a five minute video is unacceptable. I hope they fail if this is what they think is okay.

They also advertise fraudulent stuff all the time now. They don’t care. They’re just desperate for money.

It would be silly to assign some sort of morality argument to the other half of it when they behave so poorly with the ads.

Post reply on HN