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

Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

drhyperion451.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 486 posts

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#301

Post by CubsFan1060 »

smallerfish wrote: post #289
CubsFan1060 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does winning mean in this context? If we take this to an extreme, doesn't content just not get made? Do you think Google is going to go to a model where things are freely accessible without ads? Feels like even when a company provides a way to get rid of ads, many people still won't pay. They _say_ they will, but I find often people will want to substitute their own terms (Well, youtube premium is $x, but I thin…

> If we take this to an extreme, doesn't content just not get made? I'd argue that _content_ is a fairly gross word that we've all come to use because we're in the industry -- "I need some _content_ around my ads so that we get some impressions". There are plenty of other words that are less marketing associated and more clearly connotative with creatively produced material - article, report, essay, story, paper, pro…

> You can still make money on the internet without ads.

Now that in and of itself is a fascinating statement that I kind of agree with? What kind of things are you thinking? The only thing I can really think of is trying to get people to pay for physical objects. Or, perhaps, providing a service that can't be copied (i.e. Video tutoring)

Ads? There are ad-blockers. Subscriptions? People will just use archive so that they don't have to pay you. Donations like Pateron? Maybe viable? I don't know exactly how the business models there work.

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#302

Post by Moldoteck »

acdha wrote: post #272
Moldoteck wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i pay for premium. But funny thing, this will not disable the tracking, so I still use the ublock. I've also had problems when visiting my parents in another country and background play was blocked bc yt premium was not available there, even if i was a paying customer. At that time I was using yt in firefox mobile with background play. I also still get sponsored ads and need to use the sponsorblock extension, that do…

uBlock does not prevent tracking. The only way to keep Google from tracking you is to stop connecting to Google’s servers.

It prevents some of it, better than nothing

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#303

Post by account42 »

bko wrote: post #287
jacquesm wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we take this to an extreme, doesn't content just not get made? I can't speak for anybody else but my content will still get made. > Do you think Google is going to go to a model where things are freely accessible without ads? Maybe, maybe not, whose to say what Google will do. Maybe they will value the influence or the goodwill more than the lack of income. Maybe some of the content will be free and other bits w…

YouTube is incredibly expensive to run which explains why there's such little competition. Think about it, anyone can host gigs of videos perpetually indexed for free. What percentage of videos have fewer than 100 views? Google has killed off profitable projects. If you think they'll dump tens of billions every year hosting videos that no one watches, you're kidding yourself. And what we noticed with paying is that p…

> YouTube is incredibly expensive to run which explains why there's such little competition.

So? That's their problem.

> Google has killed off profitable projects. If you think they'll dump tens of billions every year hosting videos that no one watches, you're kidding yourself.

Can't wait for YouTube to die. Hopefully the replacement will be less centralized and not beholden to a single american company.

> And what we noticed with paying is that people are very unwilling to pay even a small amount for a service.

Most "services" are not worth the effort needed to pay them, the amount doesn't even come into it. This is also a self-created issue. Google et al have trained people to not pay by dumping money into these "free" services to kill the competition. Now they are upset that people don't want to pay them? I can't find a violin tiny enough to express my compassion for them.

> For instance FB makes around over $50 per user in North America. What percentage of users do you think would pay $50 a year to use Facebook?

So? They make $0 off of me. I don't care how much they can or cannot make with ads, that doesn't make ads acceptable.

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#304

Post by acdha »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #277
acdha wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you could provide at least some details? Have you personally seen ads on those services, for example?

I have seen ads on those services when paying for their cheapest paid tier.

Yes, if you pick the ad supported discount you see ads. Choosing to get a discount is not the same as the original claim that you’d still get ads even if you paid.

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#305

Post by acdha »

Moldoteck wrote: post #302
acdha wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uBlock does not prevent tracking. The only way to keep Google from tracking you is to stop connecting to Google’s servers.

It prevents some of it, better than nothing

It doesn’t prevent Google from tracking you in any way. The most you could say is that if YouTube is loading third-party ad network it’ll prevent those services from tracking you, but that’s not especially useful when Google can resell your data to the same company.

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#306

Post by idiotsecant »

guerrilla wrote: post #296
miki123211 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Video hosting is expensive and needs to be paid for somehow. Any competitor will have the same problems as Youtube does. You can go the Nebula route and require users to pay (which means far fewer users) or require creators to pay (which means far fewer creators). You could also require creators to host the videos themselves, but that also requires money, expertise and causes downtime when a video goes viral. There's…

> Video hosting is expensive and needs to be paid for somehow. Any competitor will have the same problems as Youtube does. Nope. PeerTube and the like is an alternative.

Peertube is literally just self hosting.

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#307

Post by carlosjobim »

Teachez wrote: post #168
carlosjobim wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>As humans, we... "We" as in those other guys have to create all the videos without compensation and I watch them without giving any compensation. What a nice "we" we have, I wonder how long the other guys will stick around?

There's a lot of double think around here that resolves around the call to do your bit and support Google's model. I should know better but I still find it breathtaking. Capitalism's benefits are brought to fruition through competition, and hard nosed decisions on all sides. I was raised by a capitalist believer. That is what he instilled in me. The willingness of the consumer to exercise choice is paramount. As such…

> The obvious call concern is that Google are emotionally exploiting you. As the services are addictive by nature, that is par for the course.

I think this part is how our views differ. YouTube is a whole lot different than it used to be, and it's a whole lot deeper than what it looks on the surface. There's a ton of videos there that aren't made to be addictive. For example world class instructional videos, educational videos, and such.

You can rant at me for going to the super market, claiming they're exploiting me by putting addictive sugar and other crap in the candy bars and potato chips. That is what you go to the supermarket for and the only thing you see. But I go to the back to buy vegetables and a steak.

> I think it's important to remember life was fine for everyone long before Google, and would be just fine if they vanished in the next two decades.

The same can be said of any technology, or just in general anything. But information can have immense value. Today if you have a car problem you can go on YouTube and find a video with an expert showing you exactly what to do. Just one of many examples. There was no business model for independent video creators before YouTube. Now the consumer can choose freely, instead of the capitalist or communist scumbag executives deciding what should be seen.

> This is all business.

Yes, and the product is incredibly cheap for the amount of value you can get from it.

One thing communists and capitalists have in common is that they can never enjoy life for a single moment. One for the obsession of making a dollar, the other for the obsession of saving a dollar. All beauty is sucked out of life by these materialistic faiths.

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#308

Post by chupapimunyenyo »

sureglymop wrote: post #227
CapstanRoller wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Won't using such third-party clients cause your account to get flagged?

It does not have a login functionality. It let's you subscribe to channels without an account.

Lets* https://youryoure.com/?apostrophe

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#309

Post by wruza »

CubsFan1060 wrote: post #259
jacquesm wrote: post #234

What is most interesting about this whole adblocking war: we're winning. If we weren't youtube/Google wouldn't be making such a fuss. So keep it up. I can also heartily recommend the 'unhook' browser extension, it takes care of all of those upsells and feeds.

What does winning mean in this context? If we take this to an extreme, doesn't content just not get made? Do you think Google is going to go to a model where things are freely accessible without ads? Feels like even when a company provides a way to get rid of ads, many people still won't pay. They _say_ they will, but I find often people will want to substitute their own terms (Well, youtube premium is $x, but I thin…

First they destroyed the old internet by “forgetting” sites from search and created “platforms”.

Then they abused adnetworks to take the biggest share and control over what users can do or will likely do with their user agents.

Then they degraded every site and product searchability into ads-favored keyword matching.

Then, when people started using their well-setup cardboard box traps to their taste, they demanded to either pay for that or to forcefully watch ads.

I’m not gonna play a reasonable guy here, because it’s not a logical issue. I never wanted or expected to live in an internet like that. Google can go cry in a corner and look miserable.

And everyone should install ublock origin. Think of it as Python 3 or ESM or Democracy. It’s much better, you all just have to figure out new life with it.

Re: Does uBlock Origin bypass the latest YouTube anti-adblock script?

#310

Post by account42 »

idiotsecant wrote: post #293
jonathanstrange wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally prefer free content made by volunteers and would like the whole web to be ad free. It would be fine for me if Youtube stopped operations and if all "income-oriented" content producers went away. I feel the same about websites. The Internet was fine before it became commercialized. I'm both creating and consuming free content (why not?) but I'm not willing to waste my time on watching ads or anything like…

The people that create the content you consume only have so many hours in the day, just like you. They need to pay the rent, buy groceries, get their kids braces, just like the test of us. It seems immoral and unrealistic to expect that for free. Consume it and support them or don't consume it and don't support them but the attitude that you're entitled to it is a little slimy.

No, making every human exchange a financial transaction is gross. Making that transaction indirect via psychological manipulation using intermediaries is even worse.

Discover better ways to support people who do useful work. Or rather, re-discover them since they are older than ads.

Post reply on HN