131–140 of 282 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But Google is going to use my data for advertising, with or without premium. An adblocker gives me the luxury of not seeing ads while keeping my data private.
I don't think any adblocker could realistically stop Google from tracking what you do on YouTube.
The battle between ad platforms and users is going to be never ending. For YouTube, the _right_ thing to do is to pay for the premium option which removes ads. Otherwise as difficult as it is to say, you are getting something for nothing and people do make a living from YouTube videos. Ok, maybe you can contribute to a patreon outside of YouTube, but you’re not going to do that for everyone and those videos are not s…
I watch YouTube on my TV and the ads are annoying enough that I actually looked into subscribing to YouTube Premium to make the ads go away (and better support the content creators I follow). But I'm not ready to pay YouTube $12/month just to make ads go away. I would probably pay $5/month. Netflix's basic plan only costs $9/month.
Despite the title being about YouTube, this is fundamentally about Safari's declarative Content Blocker API being totally inadequate in the face of modern ad delivery technologies. Yes, it's fast and relatively more secure compared to old ad blocking techniques (which requires granting full access to effectively arbitrary JS), but ad tech has evolved since 2015 and Safari's Content Blocking API has not evolved with i…
I use Wipr as a content blocker on both macOS and iOS. I never see ads on YouTube. But I've always felt that it might not be enough some day. Perhaps that day is nearly here.
Removing whatever Ublock Origin needed to exist in Safari is one of the dumbest moves Apple has made. To get most of the battery advantages of Macs you're forced to use Safari. But when it comes down to having to see YouTube ads I'm willing to make the tradeoff and switch to Chrome.
Frankly I just hate the idea of YouTube creators getting paid for their work. /s
Unfortunately, the web gets everyday closer to some kind of "interactive TV". Computations are moving to the server side and clients are merely there to get input and display information. An illustration is the very controversial Mighty browser. As a result, programs will shortly become dependent on having an internet connection. Today, people use more Google Docs than Notepad. This removes a lot of freedom because c…
I just switched from Android and I love iOS (iPhone 12 mini). But man do I miss Firefox (the real one, not the Safari skin) and man do I miss f-droid (specifically gems like GadgetBridge). If only I could have those 2 things.
There's Cydia: https://cydia-app.com/ And if you have a Mac, you can build and install apps on your own device with Xcode. No Apple developer paid account required. AltStore does something similar by signing IPA files with your personal key: https://altstore.io/ .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Couldn't they just be proxied through a first party server?
Some trackers are having people setup CNAME records on their domains, so the tracker cookies appear to be first party: https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.09301
At some point, YouTube is just going to stich these into the main video.
Server-side dynamic ad inclusion is relatively not new tech. I’m surprised they don’t do it already tbh
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would require delivering ads from first-party servers, right? So third-party ad and tracking networks would die a painful death.
I wonder if Google’s Web Packaging standard was intended to eventually make it possible to deliver both the page and the ads from the same server without enabling one party to tamper with the other.
It _does_ potentially allow performance gains, insofar as you're then able to send a single bundle containing both first and third party content, but it isn't a gain from the point-of-view of avoiding adblockers (aside from the most primitive DNS/IP level ones).
A friend sent me a youtube link, I opened it on Firefox for Android (with the latest ublock lists), it immediately served me an ad.
This had never happened to me before, I actually assumed I opened it by mistake on Android's youtube app.
The only way I found that I could block it was using the older embedded videos url (www.youtube.com/embed/)
Anyone has more info on what are they doing exactly? I found a reddit post with similar complaints but everyone was equally clueless. Seems like they decided to point artillery at ublock.