They've become increasingly hostile about ads in general. I sometimes watch youtube on my TV via Roku, which sadly doesn't have ad blockers, and there's been a noticeable rise in long ads that can't be skipped. It's pretty routine now to get 30s long ads that are unskippable, and just a few days ago I got one that was nearly 90s.
YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
371–380 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#372Strange move, people use adblockers for a reason, 2-3 unskipable bs ads. Instead better limit quality to 480/720p. This way they'll save money for traffic. No adblocker?, Can go up to 1080p. Yt premium?, Welkome to 4k. Yt premium+?, Welcome to >8k
> This way they'll save money for traffic
If people leave because of this that cuts their costs to zero. What's their incentive not to do this ?
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#373This 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…
TV/Cable/Radio ads are regulated I think. You can't play more than some N minutes of Ads per hour of content.
But the fucking Internet ad world there doesn't seem any upper limit to how much of someone's time you can waste.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#374I 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…
HN readers massively overestimate the willingness of the average person to "fight the power" or whatever. When Netflix cracked down on password sharing, I was fully expecting people to realize how bad Netflix has become and to move on to other platforms. Everyone here thought they were shooting themselves in the foot. But no, the password sharing fix did exactly what they wanted it to do, and subscriptions actually increased. The truth is that no one but a couple of techies know or care what NewPipe or yt-dl are. This move by YouTube will work and there's not really anything we can do about it.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#375I hate ads so much that I'm actually paying for Youtube premium. I work in IT, I build systems, I know there are various solutions, but none of them guarantee that I can travel freely with my cellphone and connect it to any smart TV and get an AD-free experience. So I'll gladly pay for that freedom. Freedom is very important to me, not just that it's open source, or that I have power over ads, but also freedom of tim…
The only trick I know of is to use a VPN provider to connect to Argentina or Turkey and buy YouTube Premium from there. Works with your normal account. Showed this trick to my dad and he now pays $2 per month instead of $16. In India you can buy a whole year for $16, but our credit cards didn't work. I'm happy with uBlock Origin :D
That's wild, if true. I mean I pay about 11 USD/month for my Youtube premium, but 2 dollars sounds insane. And I think youtube music is included in that.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#376If 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…
Here's a much simpler approach: use the Brave browser on iOS and use the YouTube website.
It blocks all YouTube ads, allows background playback and picture-in-picture, etc.
You also get all of your regular YouTube features, like recommendations, etc.
I haven't used the official YouTube app since.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#377Honestly, seeing an old spice ad isn't going to make me buy old spice. And seeing a 1 hour ad for some guy telling me to stop eating what I'm eating to have no-wipe bowel movements isn't going to make me buy the stuff. There have been studies done about plumbers. The ones that pay money to get on top in the White Pages have worse reviews than the ones that work by word of mouth. I go by the same thing. If you feel th…
it's been about mindshare for awhile now, you just mentioned so you're inadvertently advertising for them for free on hn
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#378I 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…
[flagged]
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#379I 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…
> because it could be "three strikes and you lose your Google account", which is kinda big fraking deal.
Google accounts are fragile like people; they can suddenly cease operation, for no known reason.
I keep everything Google isolated. It's all in it's own browser or container. As for youtube, it ~only gets watched on a dedicated device attached to a TV.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#380I 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…
Do you pay for ad-free experiences when available?