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

YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

androidpolice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

#321

Post by kurthr »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #286
techwizrd wrote: post #223

I 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)

Yep, see CNN!

Remember when you paid for cable so there weren't ads (yeah, I'm old)?

The best was a retrospective (20th or 25th) on CNN one NewYears in the early 2000s, which had old footage of CNN. In one of them, the anchors were bragging about how they didn't have ads that biased their coverage of events... Then it broke to an ad. I had to laugh, because the (unpaid?) intern who put that together had to know how it was going to look when actually viewed by the public.

Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

#323

Post by bitwize »

"Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing programming." --Jamie Kellner

Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

#324

Post by miki123211 »

If you're on iOS, I highly recommend Yattee[1], a free Youtube app with no ads, background playback and sponsor block built-in.

The way they get around App Store restrictions is by claiming that they aren't a Youtube app. They're technically a video-watching app which is supposed to be used with your own personal server. The server API they require, however, is supported by Invidious[2], an open-source, privacy-preserving Youtube front end. If you configure an Invidious instance in settings[3] (you don't have to host your own, there are plenty of them out there), you effectively get access to the entirety of Youtube.

It's not a replacement for the official app by any means, it doesn't have a recommendation feed, it doesn't let you log in with a Google account, so it doesn't sync watch history with your other devices, it doesn't let you cast to Youtube-enabled devices, post comments, scroll through shorts etc, but if you have a playlist or a specific, longer video in mind, it's quite good. It also supports Invidious accounts, which let you manage channel subscriptions.

[1] https://apps.apple.com/us/app/yattee/id1595136629 [2] https://invidious.io/ [3] https://gonzoknows.com/posts/yattee/

Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

#325

Post by kjs3 »

kitsunesoba wrote: post #226

This 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…

On this point, I realized recently is that at one time, auto-plying audio or video on a web site would have been a cause for torches and pitchforks. It was one of the most asshole things a site could do. Now a significant fraction of the websites I hit (esp anything 'news') immediately pop up an unrequested live video window with full audio, and even if I close it, as soon as you scroll over any media on the site, it auto-plays, and when you scroll past, the window pops back up playing video.

When did this become ok? Telling them to get off my lawn hasn't worked.

Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

#326

Post by [deleted] »

Verdex wrote: post #222

I don't really understand either side of the equation here. So, on the one hand you have people who use ad blockers. The first retort that comes to mind here is: Well, we'll take our business elsewhere. Which is odd because without ads they aren't paying and them leaving is the goal. Of course on the other hand ... when I read the title my thoughts weren't that I would be okay because I don't ad block youtube. My tho…

[deleted]

Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

#327

Post by judge2020 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #280
Verdex wrote: post #222

I don't really understand either side of the equation here. So, on the one hand you have people who use ad blockers. The first retort that comes to mind here is: Well, we'll take our business elsewhere. Which is odd because without ads they aren't paying and them leaving is the goal. Of course on the other hand ... when I read the title my thoughts weren't that I would be okay because I don't ad block youtube. My tho…

Good point. I don't know what were their expectations for audience reaction. It surely wasn't "oh I need to turn off my adblocker then" or "oh, YouTube Premium, that's neat, lemme get my credit card". For me, it was, in order: - "Three strikes" and... what? Red alert! Let me drop everything and read the damn article right now, because it could be "three strikes and you lose your Google account", which is kinda big fu…

YouTube Premium reached 50 Million subscribers in 2021, so they're doing pretty well: https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/50-million/

Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

#328

Post by blackbear_ »

JCharante wrote: post #258
user3939382 wrote: post #230

If 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.

This makes no sense. The fact that users don't want to pay and don't want to watch ads is a pretty clear indication that YouTube is user hostile.

And why are you assuming that YouTube should make money at all? It is YouTube'job to find a business model that works without coercing users. If users don't want to pay (money or attention) then YouTube is not offering anything worth paying. And it's their fault, not the users'

Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

#329

Post by OrvalWintermute »

mcpackieh wrote: post #309

I block ads because they're psychological warfare that corporations wage against me. I don't care how unobtrusive the ads are. I don't care if the ads don't track me. I grew up changing the channel on TV when ads came on, and ripping adverts out of magazines before sitting down to read them. I vote for billboard bans whenever I can. I have zero tolerance for ads of any sort. Advertisers have no morals, they're comple…

> Advertisers have no morals, they're completely depraved. They'll eagerly exploit a teenager's self-conscious body issues to sell useless beauty products. They sell sugar water to fat people and at every turn promote the rampant consumerist culture that is destroying our planet. They're lower than pond scum and I never want to see a single ad from them ever.

Well said. While I recognize the right of people to put out messaging, advertisers seem to put out some of the most disgusting messaging ever.

The recent pushing of incredibly obese people as all healthy and normal is a very dangerous phenom. Many of us could afford to lose a few pounds, but the idea that BMIs > 40 are healthy is going to get people killed for certain.

Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers

#330

Post by jasonlotito »

jbm wrote: post #282
kitsunesoba wrote: post #226

This 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 spo…

> 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.

Why did they do it?

Money.

They wanted more money and you wouldn't stop watching your sport.

It's not a surprise. If given the option, people will actively shop to get the best bang for their buck. Given two options, they will opt for the one that gets them the most of what they value.

Why did you do it?

Because you valued your viewing habits over other things.

It's all really simple.

Post reply on HN