YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#551

Post by matheusmoreira » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:45 AM UTC

raincole wrote: post #492

leventonportera wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is false logic. Youtube is free to not show anyone anything - once they send me data and it leaves their system, they have no claim to it. When I shout on a public street "sing me the Francoise Hardy version of I'll Be Seeing You," no one has to reply. If they do reply, but they decide to sing a 2 minute ad for a pyramid scheme first, I am free to cover my ears till the song comes on. Google's servers have a pub…

> they are free to ignore any request I shout at them Exactly . That's why they're blocking ad-blocker users now. You're describing the exact thing they are doing and going to do more. Guess you're actually supporting Youtuber's policy.

We'll just block their blocker instead.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#552

Post by chii » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:45 AM UTC

kerkeslager wrote: post #512

caconym_ wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> doing so elsewhere would deservedly be criticized. I suggest that these people express their criticism by not using the software in question. I doubt the typical purveyor of free-as-in-* software who's stuck between a rock and a hard place re: monetization particularly cares what somebody who doesn't understand the personal specifics of their dilemma thinks about their chosen solution to it.

> I suggest that these people express their criticism by not using the software in question. As with most "love it or leave it" arguments, this is a transparent attempt to silence critics without actually bothering to engage with criticism, even if it's constructive. Anything you put in front of a significant number of people will be criticized, and rightly so , because it's not perfect. Admitting things aren't perfe…

> Admitting things aren't perfect is the first step to making things better.

the implied assumption being made here with this train of thought is that it is the author's imperative duty to make things better.

It is not. The author has zero obligation to make it better for anyone; they do it at their leisure and at their convenience.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#553

Post by throwaway5959 » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:45 AM UTC

kahnclusions wrote: post #544

throwaway5959 wrote: post #526

Look, just say you’re a cheapskate if you use Adblock and don’t pay for Premium. Just say “I want to get something for nothing”. There are people that refuse to tip because they think the tipping system in the US is immoral. No, they’re just cheap. People are here writing tomes on why they don’t want to pay with attention or $$$ when they’re really just cheap. Edit: Look if you’re going to downvote, at least provide…

Google freely sends a bunch of video content to my computer. Why don’t I have the right to decide which parts of that content I want to watch? Which parts are permitted to execute on my computer? My computer, my home, my rules. Google has their policies, I have mine. It’s none of Google’s business whether I watched the ads or not.

Surely you must understand that if everyone took that view and ran Adblock on YouTube that eventually the site would be shut down and all of that content would be lost.

I just don’t get it. The casual “theft” here that’s socially tolerated (like say the theft of product from retail stores that’s so common now) just seems wild to me. Why shouldn’t creators be compensated for their work?

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#554

Post by chii » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:47 AM UTC

blooalien wrote: post #408

matheusmoreira wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope the people developing uBlock Origin and all the filter lists are alright. They're my heroes. No one deserves this treatment, least of all them. I like to take a moment to publicly thank them whenever the opportunity to do so arises. Thank you so much!

Every single time I meet one of the developers of an open source project that has benefited me in some way, I always make it a point to tell them "Thank you" and let them know how (and how much) their generosity benefited me, and how much I really appreciate it. I also make efforts to help out in any ways I'm able. Sometimes that's cash (when I've got some available to spare), and sometimes it's just helping out in s…

Thank you for making the world a better place!

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#555

Post by skyyler » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:48 AM UTC

hotnfresh wrote: post #410

zymhan wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're arguing against a straw man.

I don’t follow. “Not a lot of people use ad blockers” “quite a few telemetry enabled Firefox users do” “but Firefox users are a tiny share of total users and probably way more likely to ad block than most web users” Where’s the straw man?

Do you see how you used the word “probably” to signify that the thing you’re claiming is just your opinion and not based on fact?

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#556

Post by inemesitaffia » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:48 AM UTC

Gazoche wrote: post #486

I'd feel more guilty adblocking Youtube if I was certain a fair share the advertising money was going to the creators producing the content. But from their own testimonies, Youtube keeps demonetizing videos for absurd reasons, or allows bad actors to file false copyright claims and outright steal their revenue. It's gotten to the point where I've seen a couple creators give up on the Youtube monetization and go "I do…

I believe video costs around $.1 per TB to deliver above 100PB. Is the provider making that much?

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#557

Post by amlib » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:49 AM UTC

raincole wrote: post #496

Zuiii wrote: post #442

Youtube is entitled to the technical shenanigans it uses to force people to watch ads and I am entitled to the technical shenanigans I use to avoid them on my own device. If youtube blocks off access completely, people will stop considering it a reliable video host and another "default" website will take its place.

Good luck for that "default" website to survive financially :)

There are many reasons why youtube reigns supreme but I wonder if newer, extremely efficient video codecs designed with AI inference (as shown in some demos for the last 2 years) would help in breaking up youtube's moat. It's very clear to me that the cost of hosting video content is one of the main things keeping alternatives from popping up, and maybe a codec 50x more efficient than what we have now will finally help us break free from google...

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#558

Post by kahnclusions » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:49 AM UTC

belltaco wrote: post #452

garciansmith wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's your issue with having to watch ads if you watch less than 1 hour of video content a month? Moral issues, security issues, etc. These have been discussed in pretty much every thread about adblocking ever, really. I get that you might disagree with them, of course, but no need to rehash the here. I don't even like company logos displayed on my clothing, so you can guess which side of the "how much do you hate…

> Moral issues, security issues, etc. How is blocking ads not a moral issue? Video creators also get hurt by ad blockers, not just YT, which does have costs associated with serving you video. > So on those you never see ads? I think they started showing ads on them, just fewer. They do cost storage and bandwidth, so what's wrong with that? > Well, I can't speak for anyone else but I'm a middle-aged historian, so star…

> Video creators also get hurt by ad blockers

I don’t have any kind of business relationship or agreement with content creators. This is their problem and YouTube’s problem.

I only deal with YouTube, which sends video streams to my computer for free, and I’m exercising my right to decide what I want to play on my own computer that I own.

More and more content creators are getting their income through sponsorships and referrals, anyways, as they feel the squeeze of YouTube’s exploitative and predatory behaviour.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#559

Post by chii » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:49 AM UTC

esrauch wrote: post #122

deadmutex wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have seen this becoming more and more common on open source projects and totally free services, where people act as if they are entitled to something as if it is their god given right. Do you count YouTube as a "free service" (with ads) in this case? I wonder if there is an overlap with people that expect free stuff and people that use uBO on YouTube. YT does offer most users YT premium, which gives users an ad f…

I pay for YT premium and Ads are still my #1 complaint about YT. Partly this is by design, where it seems to decide that a creator having a "merch" ad integration doesn't count as an ad. Which might be understandable (but still not what I want) if merch meant creator's face on a mug, but it also includes products where a home fix it channel will have an overlay of products from Home Depot which is literally just an a…

> a creator having a "merch" ad integration doesn't count as an ad.

this is why you also install sponsorblock (https://sponsor.ajay.app/). Only whitelist the channels you want to "support", if you really want to make sure to eyeball the sponsorship (which doesn't really help unless it happens to be a product you actually are interested in buying).

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#560

Post by matheusmoreira » Mon, Oct 30, 2023, 7:49 AM UTC

brnt wrote: post #520

eqvinox wrote: post #427

This is of course bringing up the discussion on the "morality" of Adblocking. I'd like to point out something that I don't think is getting enough attention. There was a point in the past where video platforms were competing, and by no means was it clear that YouTube would end up dominating this area to the point of being close to a monopoly. When YouTube won that race, they won it with a given set of parameters, inc…

What is the morality of thinking anyone is allowed to fully control my machine? I guess I'm showing my age, but browsers were _user_ agents, once.

Yeah. The audacity of these corporations. It's offensive that they even think they can dictate what our computers do or don't do.