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

YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

adguard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 282 posts

Re: YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

#251

Post by wooger »

twobitshifter wrote: post #93
heavyset_go wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For YouTube, the _right_ thing to do is to pay for the premium option which removes ads. Even if you pay for premium, you'll still get sponsored ads in the content.

There are some programs/videos that are only available on premium and do not include sponsored content.

There are? Name some.

I know Cobra Kai started out that way, but has now been solved off to Youtube as they abandoned that model.

They certainly don't mention exclusive content as a region to pay for Premium.

Re: YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

#252

Post by adamcstephens »

SpelingBeeChamp wrote: post #155
adamcstephens wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do I find out what portion of a subscription goes to a creator?

It's not clear to me what you are asking, but if your question has a definite answer and it relates to Youtube as a business, I can probably help answer. Youtube has been my full-time job for years. About Premium generally, if you can afford it and you are considering it, there is no reason to hesitate. I say that both as a channel owner and as someone who pays for Premium every month. You never see an AdSense ad aga…

The subscription costs me $12/month. If my goal is to support creators, I’d like to understand what portion of that subscription is actually going to the creators, versus Google.

It sounds like the answer to that is “very little” since you mentioned fractions of a cent per view. So if I watch a few dozen videos from a single creator in a month, can I safely assume they’ll get a couple cents that month from me?

I get that it adds up, otherwise the creators wouldn’t bother creating for the platform, but I’m not sure that helps me justify paying Google another $11.96 a month.

Re: YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

#253

Post by teekert »

kolom wrote: post #240
teekert wrote: post #75

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.

As a long time AdAway (with Root) user on on my daily driver, I am struggling with ads after moving to iPhone (12 mini). Most Games (I have tried) are barely playable for ads. And I miss "NewPipe" sooo much :( I am keeping an old android device around just for using NewPipe.

I also kept my OnePlus3 and flashed it with lineageOS with MicroG. Specifically for NewPipe and GadgetBridge indeed.

Re: YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

#254

Post by 411111111111111 »

sangnoir wrote: post #113
_Algernon_ wrote: post #92

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.

More likely, they'd get upgraded to "first-party" tracking by acting as a CDN-layer where the ad networks do the proxying/caching to get the actual content upstream before merging it with the ads and serving whole thing in a single request. How would you block ads from Cloudflare if it became an ad network?

The same way you do now with ublock origin. By removing specific elements which match a rule.

The networks will still be able to track you, but ads will be blockable until pages discard the DOM and switch to canvas rendering the whole page

Re: YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

#255

Post by shultays »

cpeterso wrote: post #74
twobitshifter wrote: post #2

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.

I am using https://github.com/yuliskov/SmartTubeNext and it is pretty good.

Re: YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

#256

Post by zamadatix »

leokennis wrote: post #227
google234123 wrote: post #82

If you don't want ads get Youtube Premium.

Ok, I always dismissed the nag screens for this without even looking at them. But your comment made me curious. It's friggin €15,99 per month! I pay less for Netflix + Apple TV combined!

Stop buying subscriptions via things from the App store and many will be 25% cheaper. Still a rip off at 11.99 EUR though as it's 11.99 USD which should be something like 10 EUR not the same number.

Re: YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

#257

Post by acdha »

benhurmarcel wrote: post #222
acdha wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re right from the short-term perspective but largely irrelevant long-term. If Safari allowed arbitrary code execution, it’d be a little better for as long as it took publishers to deploy first-party ad injection. We’d still get the security problems, though. You can already see what that’s like with podcasts where local ads are spliced right into the audio file. You’re not stopping that short of doing som…

> where local ads are spliced right into the audio file. You’re not stopping that short of doing something like buffering the content and running it through an AI This can be solved by crowdsourcing it: https://sponsor.ajay.app/

Currently, to some extent. Again, my point is that there’s a ton of money at stake and it’s not like companies are going to say “welp, someone blocked our ads, time to close up shop”. Each time blockers have gotten better, all that’s happened has been the ad delivery systems getting more sophisticated — and since the providers can run the same tools I don’t think that’s going to change. Containing some of the damage by, for example, continuing to restrict JavaScript at least has some benefits but things like YouTube ads are the same format and delivery path.

Re: YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

#259

Post by Dah00n »

dwaite wrote: post #236
Dah00n wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The number of rules limit is a non-issue The big controversy some time back when Chrome wanted to implement a limit just like this with Manifest v3 says otherwise. This was both from users and adblock developers and it is exactly as bad as people said it would be. Saying it is a good idea because of privacy risks is completely off the rails. Sure you might run a tiny risk but without a proper adblocker like uBlock y…

> Sure you might run a tiny risk. Having a third party monitor and inject code into every page I visit on the internet or intranet means you are trusting the browser extension as much as you are trusting the browser manufacturer themselves. The popularity of content blocking means the evaluation of lists of hundreds of thousands of rules on every page request becomes a significant source of slower page load speed. It…

>Having a third party monitor

If you install an extension that shares your browsing habits then that is on you of course but good ad-blocking extensions doesn't do that and if the data doesn't leave the extension it isn't really monitoring you. I would personally trust the author of uBlock Origin and the in-built uBO made lists over Safari and Chrome any day. Both Apple and Google are running advertisement services so I don't see any reason to ever put any trust in them doing what is best for the user in blocking ads. I wouldn't really trust Mozilla that much either come to think of it.

>hundreds of thousands of rules on every page request becomes a significant source of slower page load speed

This is a myth really. Almost all websites the average user visit have some form of advertisement and/or tracking. Such sites load much faster with any good and modern ad-blocker installed. Besides, it is not like any developer worth his salt would run through hundreds of thousands of URLs looking for a match. The only time it does add any overhead is on a site with nothing to block at all and the amount is tiny compared to the time wasted on all the other sites.

Re: YouTube ads in Safari: you see them now, will you see them in the future?

#260

Post by VRay »

manigandham wrote: post #203
VRay wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd pay half a cent per video or whatever it works out to be, but I'm not going to pay by letting Google or any other corporations track my every move and action

There is Youtube Premium which is a flat fee: https://www.youtube.com/premium

yeah, I pay for it for my nephews, since there's no stopping them from using YouTube..
Post reply on HN