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

Post by carlosjobim » Wed, Dec 06, 2023, 2:57 PM UTC

coldpie wrote: post #353

carlosjobim wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and the uploaders need all the viewers Not at all. Non-paying viewers are worth less than zero. > Or rather, sure they'd happily collect a subscription from everyone AND still show ads and collect data. > Which is pretty much what they do actually. What are you talking about? There are no ads with premium.

> What are you talking about? There are no ads with premium. These threads always have a bunch of this weird type of person who doesn't understand that ads from YouTube and ads that content creators put in their videos are different things. I can't tell if they're being intentionally obtuse, or just legitimately do not understand how financial transactions work. Maybe they're teenagers who haven't worked a job before…

Post by ryanjshaw » Wed, Dec 06, 2023, 3:00 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #279

dageshi wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Youtube premium is £12.99 / month or £19.99/month for a family plan. That really doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

To know whether that is unreasonable or not you'd have to compare it to the cost of providing you that service, taking into account that youtube is just a delivery mechanism and so is infrastructure , not content. And what is or is not affordable is really dependent on where you live and that kind of money is a very large amount in some places. And especially in those places access to youtube for educational purposes…

Post by dncornholio » Wed, Dec 06, 2023, 3:03 PM UTC

davedx wrote: post #190

kmlx wrote: post #30

what i’m reading from these comments: we will do anything, including leaving youtube, but for sure we will not be either watching ads or paying for content.

The problem is, how these things sometimes go is: you are fed up of ads so you start paying them. Then a year or two later you get ads as a paying user too. There’s a long history of paid products doing this. Look at Windows, Smart TVs, etc…

Post by jhbadger » Wed, Dec 06, 2023, 3:07 PM UTC

kiba wrote: post #330

godzillabrennus wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay for YouTube to support the platform and creators. If you don't pay for a service, you aren't the customer you are the product. Google may need to shut down the free viewership of most YouTube videos unless the creator pays for them to be hosted or the viewers sign up for a subscription. The ad model is clearly failing.

Just because you are paying for a service doesn't mean that companies won't double dip or triple dip by either showing you ads or selling your data.

Post by jonathanstrange » Wed, Dec 06, 2023, 3:12 PM UTC

dncornholio wrote: post #338

jonathanstrange wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? Why would it be immoral? I'm producing free content myself, e.g. my open source repositories have permissive licenses like MIT, I run a blog, have put some of my music online, etc. Seriously, chances are almost 100% percent that you are massively benefiting right now from completely free of charge software that some guys developed for free in their spare time (perhaps even decades ago) - how immoral of you!

What are these mental gymnastics? You're practically saying nobody is allowed to make money for their content because you don't. Where is the logic in this?