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

YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

andadinosaur.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 781 posts

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#761

Post by hellojesus »

intended wrote: post #751
hellojesus wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just look at Twitter, it completely spit in everyone's faces and even still people cannot get out of its grips on them. People can get out of them. People refuse to get out of them. Likely this is because YouTube and Twitter are still the most efficient platforms regardless of their regressions. I used to have FB. Now I don't. I used to have Twitter. Now I don't. I used to have Android. Now I have Grapheneos. I use…

“You” a market does not make. People refuse to get out of them is the market. That is the point of their growth and dominance model.

> People refuse to get out of them is the market.

People refuse to get out of them because they are still the most efficient providers. Regardless of the user experience degradation, YouTube still offers the best product. For example, Rumble doesnt let me start looking for ve events from the beginning. YouTube does. Better experience.

My hypothesis: if YouTube only worked on Web Integrity browsers and forced a four hour ad before content was played, people woulf move elsewhere. They havent yet because YT is still the best.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#762

Post by brnt »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #759
dartharva wrote: post #755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adblockers run within the browser's space, they don't intrude into any servers by any means whatsoever. Your statement is completely wrong and misguided.

The current implementation sends YouTube false information about whether the ad was run. That absolutely intrudes on the server. Really it's no different from telling a cashier you already paid online or something like that.

I guess we're even then, since they do not respect DNT.

[Edit] can't reply to below, but since I am not violating any law, I don't see how I need to admit to anything. I'll admit to using my user agent as intended.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#763

Post by HDThoreaun »

brnt wrote: post #762
HDThoreaun wrote: post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current implementation sends YouTube false information about whether the ad was run. That absolutely intrudes on the server. Really it's no different from telling a cashier you already paid online or something like that.

I guess we're even then, since they do not respect DNT. [Edit] can't reply to below, but since I am not violating any law, I don't see how I need to admit to anything. I'll admit to using my user agent as intended.

Hey I've got no qualms about stealing from youtube. I'm just willing to admit that that's what I'm doing.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#764

Post by ddalex »

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…

There was a point in the past where various empires were competing, and by no means was it clear that The Roman Empire would end up dominating the world close to being a monopoly.

The Roman Empire is moving away from the parameters of their implicit win, including the kind and amount of victories they score. Had they "competed" in world domination with the current policies, maybe everybody would speak Persian by now.

No, I won't be subject to the Byzantine Empire - because that was not part of the deal either. The empire was build on Rome. So until the Byzantines can figure out how to win _reasonable_ amount of _military victories_ - I won't pay taxes.

Do you realize how shallow your argument sounds ? :)) Of course Youtube is turning the screws now that they have the lock-in. Ethics have nothing to do with it. And they will turn the screws until you either pay up or stop going there all together.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#765

Post by jamielife »

bluish29 wrote: post #282
jamielife wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a ridiculous take. The Internet isn't just free infrastructure that anyone can use. The data has to live somewhere. 2,500 people work at YT. They pay salaries, have offices, manage servers to store the videos, pay their content creators, etc. So nobody is allowed to start an internet company and make money from it? Uber is a business using roads that people pay for, should they not make money? Should those dri…

>That's a ridiculous take Please chill up and don't forget the HN guidelines [1] "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." That is not the point of my comment, you misinterpreted the meaning of my comments and then built an assumption that it says that "nobody is allowed to start an internet company and make money f…

Hey man, sorry forgot about this thread. Anyway, calling something ridiculous, as in it's easily open to ridicule, is not necessarily an insult when the specific thing is exactly that. Try not to be so easily offended. Especially online.

Also, I responded to every example you had with clarifying questions that were designed to get you to think about your points and back them up or (hopefully) change them. Reading comprehension is important. Saying things like "that wasn't my point" then not realizing what you implied nor clarifying what your point actually is a prime example of why. You don't have to say something directly to make an implication, which is exactly what you did on multiple points.

Gaslighting me into "not acting in good faith," so you don't have to actually think about the strength of your point (or lack thereof) is however the very thing you claim I'm doing. I just wanted to say that I hope you get more confidence in debate so that you aren't so quick to play the victim when your argument is held to the tiniest bit of scrutiny and try to take some imaginary moral high ground that isn't there.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#766

Post by gmerc »

uncletammy wrote: post #644
gmerc wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VCs don’t invest because your business has a bright future as a valuable, sustainable operation . Not anymore. The crypto dynamics have shifted the expectations so far to cheap, quick moment they most VCs, especially the a16z kind are more about “Can I juice this business and it’s metrics enough to sell it to someone to hold the bag”. Ironically I think the large numbers involved are basically part of that PR game -…

> The crypto dynamics have shifted the expectations so far to cheap, quick moment they most VCs, especially the a16z kind are more about “Can I juice this business and it’s metrics enough to sell it to someone to hold the bag”. This strategy existed long before "crypto"

And crypto is just tulips 2.0.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#767

Post by JohnTHaller »

firexcy wrote: post #739
JohnTHaller wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's unfortunately been this way for a long, long time. Though it does seem to have gotten more frequent in recent years. I've been running PortableApps.com for nearly 2 decades and, in that time, I've been sworn at, harassed, doxxed, received death and rape threats, etc. My personal favorite was a user who accused me of donating a kidney to my father because I thought I was better than everyone else and to try to ga…

Thank you for your work at PortableApps. Windows isn’t my daily OS but when I get my hands on it from time to time, the apps you pack are what keep me sane.

You're welcome! I'm glad it's been helpful for you.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#768

Post by trimethylpurine »

carlosjobim wrote: post #758
trimethylpurine wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It allows all of those channels to join a competing platform that's better suited for education, rather than piggy backing on a platform built for watching nonstop cat videos. Education and YT are not remotely good for each other. Imagine that college is free, and you're studying to become a doctor. Every seven minutes during your O. Chem lecture, Kanye West jumps in front of the professor to tell you how much he lik…

> a platform built for watching nonstop cat videos. And who are you to decide that YouTube should be for cat videos and not high quality educational and documentary videos? On our family TV we have YouTube subscribed to a lot of documentary and educational channels. Recommendations are consistently of the highest quality. On my FreeTube I have other subscriptions to more immersive quality scientific and crafts videos…

>Who are you to come and say that these videos shouldn't be on YouTube and that these creators shouldn't get paid from me watching their videos? How does our use infringe on yours?

I'm me. I'm the world's leading expert on my own opinion. If you watch enough YouTube, you might become an expert on someone's opinion, but likely not on mine.

Your use doesn't infringe anything. Please check that you've responded to a comment relevant to your defensive take on the situation. My comment, again, is in regards to Khan Academy, a 501c venture.

Residents of third world countries can use it in place of a university education, since they don't have one.

In short, I don't think you're on topic. But, maybe I'm the one that didn't understand.

Does your family use YouTube in place of a university education, but you'd prefer to watch ads than to have donors from wealthier nations pay to remove them for you?

If you answered yes, I'm intrigued. Please continue. If not, you're probably off topic and needlessly defending against a point I'm not making.

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#769

Post by collaborative »

notthemessiah wrote: post #617
collaborative wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know if Rumble is sustainable? Just curious

No way in hell, it's currently just a vanity project financed by untrustworthy billionaires (the main financier is literally a snitch for the FBI https://www.businessinsider.com/peter-thiel-fbi-informant-ch... ).

Thx.. Almost didn't want to know. One step closer to wearing a tin hat now

Ps. Now I am curious why you are getting downvoted. Are people here in favor of this type of thing? I wouldn't be surprised either at this point

Re: YouTube's Anti-Adblock and uBlock Origin

#770

Post by jackdh »

undersuit wrote: post #511
saltminer wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a really good point about Twitch ads. I leave Twitch ads enabled for channels I regularly watch and I cannot recall seeing any malware or scam ads. Some can be annoying (especially if it queues the same ad 3 times in a row), but they're all from legitimate companies offering legitimate products and services.

Twitch ads have no chill, not that others do either but ... They run at different volumes than streamers. They run over streamer's content. They run pre-roll ads so you can't "flip channels". If I accidentally reload the page or the Twitch video player crashes, pre-roll ad. The ads aren't related to the steamers and streamers don't get to tell Twitch to not play a certain ad during their stream. I can pay $10 a month…

The pre-roll has basically stopped me using Twitch entirely now. Just last week I checked out an sub I used to subscribe to, immediate pre-roll for 1 minute and I was out.
Post reply on HN