YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

Post by sanswork » Sat, Aug 23, 2025, 11:48 PM UTC

estimator7292 wrote: post #41

sanswork wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should you have the right to dictate that no one is allowed to pay for their services by watching ads? You're suggesting cutting off services for the majority of the planet because you are in a financial position to pay for what you want.

Why should private corporations have unlimitied license to propagandize and intentionally psychologically manipulate the entire populace? Why should private corporations with no oversight or meaningful consequences have the unlimited and unchallenged right to market drugs to kids? Why should they be allowed to post enormous flashing billboards on our roads? Why do these corporations have more right to common public s…

Post by ndriscoll » Sun, Aug 24, 2025, 12:01 AM UTC

sanswork wrote: post #47

ndriscoll wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the "price" to load a webpage were that you run a crypto miner or give a site access to upload whatever files it feels from your computer, would you do it? Or would blocking such malware make you a free loader?

I wouldn't use the site but yes using the site and not doing that would make you a free loader.

Post by inferiorhuman » Sun, Aug 24, 2025, 12:04 AM UTC

sanswork wrote: post #50

inferiorhuman wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You talk about Google exploiting creators while at the same time talking about removing their income. You talk about Google as if that's their primary source of income. Most of the folks I watch on Youtube hype up the other platforms e.g. Patreon they use for income. Judging by the outro credits it looks like there are plenty of people happy to throw money at these folks via other platform as well. Clear your cookies…

It's a lot of creators only income from creating. Once you get some scale there are certainly better ways depending on your niche. Again justification for why your free loading is actually a moral act.

Post by aspenmayer » Sun, Aug 24, 2025, 12:14 AM UTC

1over137 wrote: post #15

mu53 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

increasing friction for ad blockers will increase ad views will increase revenue. It is pretty easy for a company whose existence depends on ads to see people that use ad blockers as leeches or freeloaders or other derogatory terms to justify making their lives more difficult. Youtube premium is around $15, and depending on people's video usage, it pays for itself

But thats even less private. If you log in, they know exactly who you are.

Post by sanswork » Sun, Aug 24, 2025, 12:39 AM UTC

ndriscoll wrote: post #53

sanswork wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't use the site but yes using the site and not doing that would make you a free loader.

So I presume you browse with a vulnerable webp library or something in case sites you do browse would like to use that functionality? You can't know whether they wanted to use it if your browser silently blocks their attempts.