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

371–380 of 486 posts

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

#371

Post by sandyarmstrong »

kmlx wrote: post #189
paulryanrogers wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paid services that still show ads? Cable, Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, Amazon Prime Video, etc.

i never got any ads on netflix, disney+, prime video or youtube premium.

* Some of these platforms have cheaper tiers that are ad-supported.

* All of these platforms favor algorithmic recommendations (which are ads) over your personal content queue.

* A lot of content on Prime forces you to watch an ad of new Prime content before your show starts.

* Some of these platforms have auto-playing previews that distract you while you are navigating. Sometimes you can disable them, sometimes you can't. Sometimes the setting resets itself. These are ads.

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

#372

Post by octacat »

acdha wrote: post #318
alemanek wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a bit of a different take on this. If we win the war against Ads lots of content won’t get made. But, the content that thrives in an Ad driven world is mostly toxic rage bait. I would argue that losing this content and instead only being left with content that people will actually pay for is a big net win for humanity. Likely we will never see a world without Ads but I can dream.

There’s no winning a war against ads. There are too many people who can’t or won’t pay for services directly, and there are too many people looking to promote products or viewpoints who’ll keep offering money to anyone with an audience. What I’d like would be focusing on the downsides: ad networks should have legal restrictions on how they collect and share data, liability for any malware they distribute, and every a…

We have legal restrictions now. Companies just figured out that they would show a form with buttons: "Accept All", "Accept essential". And said tracking cookies are now "essential". I don't believe "Accept essential" would not share your data - so, just using as privacy oriented browser as possible is the only solution.

Youtube is full of clickbait, get rich quick and unhealthy influencers (how to work 80 hours a week and buy my book btw). Same with fb/ig.

Maybe we have just too much content now.

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

#373

Post by u320 »

hunter2_ wrote: post #114
colpabar wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is clever and I'm definitely using it. Website idea: a downdetector-like site that uses reddit's "here now" numbers to give insight into whether something is going on with a certain thing. edit: Has anyone else not really been affected by the new youtube adblock policy at all? I think I have seen the warning a single time, and I use youtube all the time . I only use ublock origin and privacy badger... on chrome.…

> Has anyone else not really been affected by the new youtube adblock policy at all? The megathread addresses this: > I've never seen this message. Is this because of my browser being X or Y? No, YouTube didn't roll this out to everybody yet. [0] https://old.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/184fivk/youtu...

I have it rolled out to one of my two computers. Same IP, same google account (logged in). So it seems very random.

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

#374

Post by ddalex »

ranting-moth wrote: post #20

Yes, but YT seems to be doing a lot of A/B testing so what works for others doesn't mean it works for you. If I see an ad I just close YT for the rest of the day.

> If I see an ad I just close YT for the rest of the day.

I'm sure that's exactly the behavior YT wants here.

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

#375

Post by ddalex »

account42 wrote: post #324
SiempreViernes wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, ad revenue is an important method of funding media, but that is a very different claim from saying that YouTube's implementation of ad delivery is anything close to good. The simple fact is that the ad ecosystem YouTube directs has produced lots of low effort "content" farming, enterprises focused on raw output at the expense of quality, truth, and frequently the intellectual property of others.

> Sure, ad revenue is an important method of funding media No it isn't. It's a horrible method of funding media because as you correctly realized it ends up lowering the quality of that media. This isn't just a problem with YouTube's implementation, it is an inherent aspect of ad-based funding.

I mean, the other well known way is to pay with money directly. YT offers that. But certain people don't want to pay, either directly or with their attention.

What other avenue is there to pay for stuff you consume ?

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

#377

Post by guerrilla »

Saris wrote: post #339
guerrilla wrote: post #296

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. Nope. PeerTube and the like is an alternative.

Peertube is just self hosted video hosting. You either need to pay someone a lot of money to host it for you, or do it yourself with the constant maintenance that comes with it.

The claim was not that video needs to be hosted but that video hosting is expensive. It's not, because we can easily distribute the cost now.

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

#378

Post by amoss »

miki123211 wrote: post #138
CrzyLngPwd wrote: post #57

Youtube seems to me to be a bullshit test platform. They will work around ad blockers and continue to pile on repetitive and banal adverts that have nothing to do with the user until they reach breaking point (where people flee and seek alternatives), and then they will relax their system to show marginally less bullshit. The confusing part of this battle is the app users, who do not agree with the avalanche of adver…

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…

I used to host video on a custom site, mainly lecture material for an audience of about 100-200 people so there were no economies of scale involved. A VPS with 2TB of transfer was about 10eur/m. Video was encoded for about 500MB/hr (encoders have improved, but hosting prices have probably increased so figures are just ballpark).

As a (very) small scale provider video was costing me about 0.25 cents / hour. It is certainly cheaper for a larger provider. Ad rates are not that low, the margins involved are huge.

For a premium server I would take a heavy user as a model, say 8hr/day, giving a cost of 60 cents per month. Assume processing fees and overheads are about 30%, and a user is willing to pay $10/m for a service. That still leaves $6.40 to be split between platform and content creator.

Yes, video is expensive compared to text. But in absolute terms the costs are not that expensive.

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

#379

Post by traveler1 »

ddalex wrote: post #374
ranting-moth wrote: post #20

Yes, but YT seems to be doing a lot of A/B testing so what works for others doesn't mean it works for you. If I see an ad I just close YT for the rest of the day.

> If I see an ad I just close YT for the rest of the day. I'm sure that's exactly the behavior YT wants here.

Their whole business is based on retention, so I don’t think that’s true.
Post reply on HN