Youtube is trash now. I could move on pretty easily. If anything I might be better off watching actual content instead of youtube.
YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
281–290 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#282This doesn't really affect me since I subscribe to premium, but something that a lot of ad-based services don't seem to grasp is why people block ads. It's because they've become increasingly obnoxious. Nobody blocked ads when they were a simple column of links in the gutter or maybe an animated GIF banner with 3 frames. No, adblockers became popular because ads kept getting more loud (both visually and audibly), in…
Let's not forget that so many advertisements are for things that are objectively damaging to you. "It's good for the economy and OK for you" school of advertising.
High interest loans, fast foods, cable channels (with more advertising), sports gambling, et cetra.
I still cannot understand why I paid to get a specific streaming service (Sportsnet) and had to sit through Wayne Gretzsky ruining his legacy by selling sports gambling to my 3 children.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#283I mean they want you to subscribe to YouTube premium. At least they’re being honest about this and give you the option. I have a few issues with google but this isn’t one (After being forced to spend many hours upgrading to google analytics rev 4….) It’s expensive, but I’ve done it, but it also includes YouTube music which I like.
You can pay a overly expensive fee, but you still won't have an ad free experience, since in-video ads aren't removed. ReVanced is the only option I know so far.
Were in-video ads put there by the entity that you're paying?
I don't see in-video ads, but I don't watch "content creators" with sponsors.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#284That's what happens in monopolies. Until we find a way to move most useful YT content to another platform (e.g., Vimeo), we'll have to deal with YT's greedy policies.
YT is monopoly, yea. But them trying to fight people using costly service for free isn’t big monopoly concern.
A little too much spin there. They don’t have to offer a free service, they choose to. YT can do whatever they want with their platform as far as I’m concerned, but implying that people are stealing is disingenuous. YT got popular in the first place by offering a free service, and they are still offering a free service with ads that I’m not obligated to watch. They could, if they wanted, charge admission for all viewers, and skip the ads, they could choose to not offer free service. They’re intentionally not doing that so that they can have their cake and eat it too by offering a free service but inserting ads into it. It’s YT’s choice alone to offer the costly service for free, their wish is that people watch the ads, but fortunately whether we watch them is our choice. Note that YT’s testing here isn’t primarily to punish people, in part it’s to do an experiment to find out if they’ll lose viewers by demanding they watch the ads, precisely so that they can continue to choose to offer a ‘free’ service, and in part it’s to normalize the kind of spin you’re repeating here, to get people to believe they should submit to ad-watching and that they’re obligated to participate. They have been turning the screw on this for years and they will continue to, because it statistically works, but by participating in their narrative, by suggesting people are grifting when ad-blocking, you’re helping them normalize this concept.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#285If Google had the power to implement a device that forced your eyelids open to look at ads they would do it. Their company is user hostile and we should move as far as possible away from their services.
How are they user hostile? It's people who do not want to pay for the service and do not want to watch ads to use the service who are the problem. How else should Youtube make money from those users? They must literally lose money on those users.
> How else should Youtube make money from those users? They must literally lose money on those users.
For example, YouTube could increase the price of advertising on their platform to make up for the fact that a certain fraction of users never see the ads, thus keeping everyone who matters happy.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#286I have YouTube Red so I'm not affected, but I really hate how it's implemented for Google accounts with your own domain. Bringing your own domain and paying Google for the privilege makes you a second-class citizen with Google services. I oppose this because paying Google is not enough, and often makes for a worse customer experience.
Not yet. See Netflix. They will push ads on paying customers and then add a higher tier that is ad free (saying nothing about you, you might just pay more to stay add free, no judgment about you here)
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#287That's what happens in monopolies. Until we find a way to move most useful YT content to another platform (e.g., Vimeo), we'll have to deal with YT's greedy policies.
Right because I'm sure other platforms would love to have users who don't want to pay or watch ads.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#288My Browser My Rights. I don't allow ads because no matter how good you are, someone will figure out how to get malware into ads. Once a system is compromised, best to burn it and start over. And now there are UEFI viruses that can reinstall malware even after the OS is wiped. And then there is the recent Gigabyte Motherboard discovery they were loading EXEs silently without approval. So no, I will not lower my protec…
"I don't allow ads" because ads are malware for the human brain. An ad is explicitly designed to hack our minds/emotions, and I, for one, won't go there (as far as I am able).
Exactly. They are designed to do exactly that. I remember ads for companies that no longer exist. I remember ad campaigns that the companies abandoned decades ago. That was designed to be in my brain. To be the 'first choice' on products when equivalents exist. Some of this stuff was so effective it literally changed the way people buy things and why they buy them (mmmm bacon).
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#289[deleted]
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#290I do think this:
Youtube has excellent content form people who put a lot of effort into it, but do not have a lot of subscribers, don't earn a lot and don't produce a lot of traffic.
Then there are millions of low effort videos that produce millions of clicks.
Youtube should have a model that adapts to this.