Live data from Hacker News

Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

jayd.ml

161–170 of 728 posts

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which adblocker are you currently using? The arms race is getting pretty tiring...

> Which adblocker are you currently using? I’m really shooting myself in the foot right now aren’t I. 1Blocker and Wipr on mobile. Plain old Orion by Kagi on my Mac.

Thank you very much for taking that risk I just updated to this setup

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I have the right to pay someone to watch the ads + videos for me, and then summarize me the video minus ads. Just like I have the right to hand my ad-full newspaper to someone, have them cut out the ads and hand me back the now ad-free one. If both of those are legal and ethical (I’d be curious what argument someone would make against this), then offloading this work to a machine should be just as ethical.

You can rationalize this any way you want, but at the end of the day you're screwing over not a faceless corporation - but the very people who put out videos on YouTube. It's fine if you're OK with it, but don't pretend that you're not doing that.

I’m totally cool with “screwing over” people who make their income screwing gullible people into falling for scams or buying useless, overpriced junk they don’t need. I don’t need to rationalize it for myself, I’m just trying to show some people the error in their ways, but maybe their portfolio of ad-related stocks is clouding their vision?

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried to explain this to people repeatedly and they don't get it. They're always like "oh no the AI scraper is slamming my website it's ruining everything". Um, maybe configure your web browser to not send me data if you don't want me 'scraping' your website. It's literally your server's choice to send me data. I'm just asking from a few IPs. If you want to send data to all of them that's your server's choice. B…

And what is the surefire way to stop AI scrapers from accessing your website? If there is no way, how can this be an acceptable ask? It already sounds like you're using several IPs to access sites, which seems like a work around to someone somewhere trying to limit the use of one IP (or just lack of desire to host and distribute the data yourself to your various hosts). Just because you can do something doesn't mean…

The answer is right there: use authentication with cost per load, or an IP whitelist.

GP is absolutely right. If your server is just going to send me traffic when I ask I’m just going to ask and do what I want with the response.

Your server will respond fine if I click through with different IPs and it’s just a menial task to have this distribution of requests to IPs, which is what we made computers for.

Yeah, you’re right of course that no one has to like the “piracy” or “scraping” or whatever other name you’re giving to a completely normal request-response interaction between machines. They can complain. And I can say they’re silly for complaining. No one has to like anything. Heck you could hate ice cream.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#164
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but ad blocking is definitely piracy This is a huge escalation of an already over-stuffed term. Equating piracy to theft was bad enough, now choosing to not view ads is also piracy, which is theft? I try to be chill here but no, foot down, absolutely not. Blocking ads is nothing more than determing what content comes in on the wire to the computer you own, or what content is rendered in your web browser. That's it.…

If we're going with bad analogies I have an opposite one - you're walking past the Nike store and the store has a promotion on "Watch 5 minutes of ads and get a free pair of shoes", but you instead kick the TV with the ads over, grab the shoes and run away. Or are you going to pretend that there's no agreement between you and YouTube that you're going to watch ads in exchange for the free content?

I will not be pretending that. I am _asserting_ it. I made no such agreement with YouTube. I am very confused why you think I did

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#166

I used to pay for YouTube premium. I stopped doing that, uninstalled the apps, and now use it through the browser with adblockers. (Yes, on my phone and iPad.) It works so well I’ve gotten at least half a dozen neighbours to do the same. If you haven’t tried it, it’s a definitive step up in UX.

I mean I pay for Youtube Premium because I use Youtube Music instead of Spotify. I get a very unopinionated but effective music player that has all the music I need, and it doesn't try very hard to "upsell" itself to me unlike Spotify because to Google YouTube is the real money driver. So to me getting no YouTube ads as well is well worth it.

And I pay for Premium, because each premium view is more valuable to the creators than the ad supported one.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I have the right to pay someone to watch the ads + videos for me, and then summarize me the video minus ads. Just like I have the right to hand my ad-full newspaper to someone, have them cut out the ads and hand me back the now ad-free one. If both of those are legal and ethical (I’d be curious what argument someone would make against this), then offloading this work to a machine should be just as ethical.

But in those cases someone is still seeing the ads. It's when no one is seeing the ads that it becomes piracy, in my opinion. A summary is not the same as the content either, that's a fairly well tested concept (fair use, etc).

There's an "if a tree falls in the forest" version of "if the viewer leaves the room" at which point has a theft still been visited upon the broadcaster? The business that paid for the ad?

In a newspaper if I skip over ads with my eyes do you think I've marginalized/pirated/stolen from the business that paid for the ad? They paid for placement and not an impression. I'd argue that if YouTube presents the ad and my browser/app/whatever skips it then YouTube satisfied its obligation and that's where it ends. The advertiser, knowing full well the limitations of the access mechanism, made a choice to throw money into this version of the attention economy. It's obviously worth it to them or they wouldn't do it, or haven't made as careful of an economic decision as I would imagine I suppose.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm gonna try, thanks.

Oh shit https://itc.ua/en/news/ublock-origin-lite-ad-blocker-has-bee...

Parent should include text not just a link.

UBlock Origin Lite pulled from the Firefox extensions after being flagged for policy violation, now only available from GitHub.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#169
There are 0 videos on my YouTube homepage, just a screen asking me to turn on history. Just the way I like it. Here’s what I did:

Go into the YouTube app, settings, manage all history, under the history tab hit Delete -> delete all time.

Then go to controls (still in the manage all history dialog box under settings), under YouTube history hit Turn off. It says “pausing…” Hit Pause, and Got it.

It’s been exactly 3 months since I did that. I still watch stuff from my subscriptions and when I search for something I want to watch. There are still recommended videos when you’re watching a video but they are a lot less enticing since they are not personally targeted. I curated my subscriptions so it’s more what I would want to spend time watching instead of reaction videos for instance. My actual time watching YouTube has dropped a lot.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#170
post #89

It’s crazy you can pay for premium, which is not cheap, and you can’t disable shorts. The number of times I clicked “show less” and it has zero effect on the number of shorts.

I don't even see any shorts, unless I click the shorts tab on the web.

In the Android app it's literally just one line, which I have to scroll down to... like two pages.

Post reply on HN