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

Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 433 posts

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#201

Post by worewood »

brucethemoose2 wrote: post #51
_huayra_ wrote: post #14

Maybe it's just A/B testing, but I got the "3 strikes and no more video playback" thing, which this DOM element blocking doesn't work around it seems :( After years of procrastinating, I'm finally gonna get around to setting up a basic homelab to run pihole. Thanks, youtube execs and bean counters, for kicking my lazy ass into gear on this! In a way, I kinda wish that ads worked as well as youtube suggestions. If one…

This sounds like Valve's "piracy is a service problem" ethos, butvfor ads, where YouTube is crossing the threshold of making the ads so inconvenient their efforts will be counterproductive (but not quantifiably counterproductive to bean counters... Yet.)

I agree. I used to watch youtube with ads, no problem. But then there was the infamous update that made ads really annoying, usually it was 5s before a video and then it became two unskippable ads in the star plus an ad every 10 minutes or so. That's when I started using an ad block.

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#202

Post by Spivak »

gruez wrote: post #133
Spivak wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it is, you're not even involved in the transaction. Just because someone pays Google to show an ad doesn't mean you have to look at it. USPS is funded by ads going through the mail and I throw them straight in the trash without remorse. I bet you do too. Bet you don't feel guilt about going to the bathroom or fast-forwarding your DVR during commercials either. Ad space is sold on the possibility that someone wil…

> Just because someone pays Google to show an ad doesn't mean you have to look at it Just because someone has an internet connection doesn't mean google has to serve them videos, either.

Such is their prerogative. You'll notice that nowhere are people saying "Google should have to give you a switch to turn off ads for free."

You act like that's a gotcha when "I owe you nothing, you owe me nothing" is the state I'm arguing for.

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#203

Post by travoc »

epgui wrote: post #182
neoneye2 wrote: post #107

If one were to make the ideal alternative to YouTube. What should the specs be like?

Here’s a crazy idea… I don’t want to give any money to Google, but I would happily pay double the amount in taxes to get public infrastructure of comparable quality.

You want a government-run YouTube?

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#204

Post by Dylan16807 »

jamiequint wrote: post #188
NietTim wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Principled.

What's the principle? I should get anything I want for free as long as I can get away with it? I shouldn't have to pay for anything if I don't want to? Genuinely curious what the principled argument is here.

I don't see any mention of getting anything in that comment, I just see a refusal to give google money.

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#205

Post by travoc »

acdha wrote: post #194
travoc wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube has no problem serving content to my yt-dlp client without ads, payment, authentication or terms of service.

That doesn’t mean it’s allowed, only that they haven’t blocked it again. You can’t use your neighbors’ pool without permission just because they don’t have a guard checking IDs, either.

Turns out, I can.

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#206

Post by steelframe »

Lots of people here who seem to think that the only viable options are to pay what they view is an exorbitant subscription fee, watch ads, or block ads. There is, of course, a third option. Nobody is forcing you to watch YouTube. You can just not do that.

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#207

Post by Dylan16807 »

gruez wrote: post #158
wardedVibe wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wait ~5 years when they have to show more growth by adding newer tiers of subscription, and making the current one ad-lite.

Unless they totally remove the ad-free tier, I don't see how this is different than any other price hike. Or do you think that companies shouldn't have the right to hike prices?

A price hike on the ad removal option takes us further away from the goal of few ads. Regardless of rights. And especially when it's already pricey.

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#208

Post by nabilhat »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #34
_huayra_ wrote: post #14

Maybe it's just A/B testing, but I got the "3 strikes and no more video playback" thing, which this DOM element blocking doesn't work around it seems :( After years of procrastinating, I'm finally gonna get around to setting up a basic homelab to run pihole. Thanks, youtube execs and bean counters, for kicking my lazy ass into gear on this! In a way, I kinda wish that ads worked as well as youtube suggestions. If one…

Open the video in an incognito tab, the limit is probably linked to your youtube/google account.

That's the footgun in google's strategy. In the all-stick no-carrot spirit of modern marketing incentives, they made their unpaid access worse without improving Premium. That only works if the garden has walls, and logging in to youtube is optional. Now youtube use falls into three options:

1) Don't log in to google, block ads. Data collected by google is lower value, resulting in less targeted internet-wide marketing, including on youtube itself when you clear your browsing session.

2) Log in. Lose time to ads. Trying to avoid this may put your entire google account at risk. Also, you gain highly targeted marketing thanks to higher quality data collection. Youtube's viewing suggestions are targeted, limiting discovery, and may become highly pigeonholed over time.

3) Pay for Premium. All the same as 2) but with less ads.

As a consumer, logging out of google and blocking youtube ads has been made by google a better experience than their own premium product. Only the producers of the majority of youtube's product are required to consume what google is doing.

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#209

Post by [deleted] »

thehappypm wrote: post #193
alwayslikethis wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, I consider blocking ads to be a moral obligation. By giving in, you enable Youtube to abuse users further

I think this is a bad take, because YouTube is a rare web service that allows you to just pay them directly. Then you aren’t the product anymore

[deleted]

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#210

Post by nodja »

Diti wrote: post #165
mvdtnz wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mate if you get so much value from YouTube that you'll jump through these hoops just to use it without ads, why not just subscribe to premium? Personally it's by far my most bang-for-buck service.

I don’t know about OP, but, personally, the reason I don’t subscribe to premium is because they get aggressive on ads on purpose (waves of unskippable ads followed by a YouTube Premium subscription request the day after), which I believe is a dark pattern. I would have been okay with paying for a subscription if it was to support the website or its creators – but I take manipulation attempts very badly.

I have a tiny channel that posts long (3-4 hours) gameplay videos and premium is 80% of my revenue. I do have mid-rolls and unskippable ads turned off, but in my experience those would only increase my ad revenue by 10-20%, i.e. premium would still be ~77% of my revenue. For reference the average view duration for my videos is ~25 minutes (premium pays by total watch time).

https://i.imgur.com/wqE2QJ2.png

Post reply on HN