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

351–360 of 1001 posts

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

#351

Post by throwaway290 »

_gabe_ wrote: post #313

This is just so funny to me. Google has to have the absolute worst PR for any company I've ever seen to make this happen. Somehow, they've duped the general public (at least on HN) into believing they insert the ads into videos. All they need to do is run a marketing campaign about how as a content creator you get to decide when ads play, whether they're unskippable, and how many ads to place in your video. Blast tha…

Correct mostly.

But keep in mind it would kill YT business model. Youtubers disabling ads means fewer ad views and clicks, so less profit for YT. Less reach also means advertisers agree to pay less, so even less profit. And finally there is no reason to sub to premium, so even less profit.

YT doesn't want to be just a free hosting because transcoding and serving petabytes is expensive I guess, and it does not want to be a paid hosting because it would make YT a commodity and no one wants to be a commodity.

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

#352

Post by dceddia »

miki123211 wrote: post #324

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-prese…

This seems great, and it's open source, too: https://github.com/yattee/yattee

And there's a native Mac app! And tvOS!

Maybe I'm just getting old, but as I was reading through the list of features this doesn't have, I just got more and more excited. My watch pattern is pretty much watching videos to solve problems or research some particular thing, and I feel like I find most of them through Google or YouTube search. The recommendations can be pretty good, but there's always those clickbaity, completely unrelated ones mixed in, trying to pull me into a totally separate rabbit hole.

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

#353

Post by Khaine »

Youtube ads are bad in several ways: 1) they have these ads that pop-over and hide the content 2) there ad breaks are cut into content at in-opportune moments. At least on TV, the content is designed around the ad breaks 3) I have recently seen ads for gambling powered by cryptocurrencies, how can Google allow these ads baffles me

Collectively, these things make the ads on YouTube infuriating. It's then made worse by the ramp up in the volume of ads. Either work with content creators on when ads are displayed to make the content and ad experience better (a la tv) or come up with a different method. And for the love go god, git rid of those stupid ads that pop over the content.

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

#354

Post by naikrovek »

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…

I watched this happen over the last 2-3 decades.

when click rates go down, advertisers always choose to make the ad more noticeable by making it more obnoxious. at first it was a very small movement every few seconds. then two. then more movement more frequently until there were full games in the space of an ad. sounds and video came. interstitial ads came, and full page ads which covered what you were reading as you scrolled.

so, ad blockers were developed. at first they blocked simple URL patterns and that was enough to completely block ads from those who serve them. advertisers caught on and changed how they serve ads. rapidly. adblockers had to advance to keep up.

where does it end? it can't end, because one side or the other will win and there are enough people who don't want that outcome so they keep fighting for their own side.

things that are bad often follow this pattern, it seems. if you are in an arms race of any kind you are either someone or something who wants money or authority more than anything else, or you are fighting against that force. both sides feel 100% justified in their actions. everyone nearby suffers.

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

#355

Post by kgwxd »

RandomBK wrote: post #105

I feel this was the inevitable outcome of the increased availability/popularity/awareness of ad blockers - a tragedy of the commons scenario that's set us on an escalating feedback loop that won't end well for anyone involved. EDIT: I do wonder if the price point of youtube premium is too high to capture an audience that simply doesn't want ads but doesn't care about any other features. $6/mo feels higher than the ty…

All Google has to do is remove the dependency on the users browser from the "advertising" system. No other form of advertising in history required users to partake in the process of displaying the ad. The only reason we can block them is because they're forcing us into the process. Calling them "ads" is a euphemism, they're tracking mechanisms first and foremost.

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

#356

Post by crazygringo »

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…

[flagged]

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

#357

Post by lolinder »

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…

> It is really not so repulsive to see the poor asking for money as to see the rich asking for more money. And advertisement is the rich asking for more money. A man would be annoyed if he found himself in a mob of millionaires, all holding out their silk hats for a penny; or all shouting with one voice, “Give me money.” Yet advertisement does really assault the eye very much as such a shout would assault the ear. “Budge’s Boots are the Best” simply means “Give me money”; “Use Seraphic Soap” simply means “Give me money.” It is a complete mistake to suppose that common people make our towns commonplace, with unsightly things like advertisements. Most of those whose wares are thus placarded everywhere are very wealthy gentlemen with coronets and country seats, men who are probably very particular about the artistic adornment of their own homes. They disfigure their towns in order to decorate their houses.

— G.K. Chesterton, The New Jersusalem

http://www.gkc.org.uk/gkc/books/GKC_New_Jerusalem.html

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

#358

Post by wahnfrieden »

_gabe_ wrote: post #313

This is just so funny to me. Google has to have the absolute worst PR for any company I've ever seen to make this happen. Somehow, they've duped the general public (at least on HN) into believing they insert the ads into videos. All they need to do is run a marketing campaign about how as a content creator you get to decide when ads play, whether they're unskippable, and how many ads to place in your video. Blast tha…

Sounds like an absolutely terrible business strategy for YouTube. You can't fix this problem through product decisions when the problem is that they are an advertising company with a profit motive.

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

#359

Post by Cyder »

the real issue, is that when enough people consume a service, it becomes a 'utility', and you are penalized if you don't use it. As such, if a percentage of the population uses something, it should be regulated as a 'utility'. Copyright laws should reflect this also.

Most jobs I've seen (even outside of tech ) require familiarity with Windows and Office, ie. basic skills linked to one platform.

Google is used enough and thus influential enough, it should be classified a public utility and forced to comply with strict utility laws ( which requires government approval to modify prices ).

IANAL, but I'm sure there are layers that could contrive the social penalties of not using Google service.

People make this logical leap in their brains without recognizing it when they use a service for years and rely on it for their daily information, then turn on the high paid exec's who are trying to squeeze a dollar from every user. Red Hat, Reddit, Google, Microsoft, Comcast, all need reigning in because of their necessarily high required utility in civilization.

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

#360

Post by SCdF »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #294
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…

Compare it with TV though, which is what youtube is; nobody blocked ads because they couldn't, there was no escaping them unless you physically exit the room. In my country that worked, because ads were neat 5 minute blocks every 15 odd minutes, but in the US it seems every few minutes there's an ad interrupting - but they're too short to tune out / do something else. The news channels are even worse, where the energ…

>there was no escaping them unless you physically exit the room.

I have no idea what you did when TV was still relevant, but when ads came on my family used to either change channel or mute the tv and talk about stuff until the show came back on. You got very good at feeling out how long ad blocks were and switching back at the right time.

Regardless though, there were strict laws on the ads that you could put on TV, the claims you could make, how you could master them (ie sound volume), and in what timeslots.

Based on the scams you endlessly see in YouTube ads, I'm pretty sure they don't bother with any of that.

Post reply on HN