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

Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 433 posts

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#61

Post by scarface_74 »

_huayra_ wrote: post #14

Maybe it's just A/B testing, but I got the "3 strikes and no more video playback" thing, which this DOM element blocking doesn't work around it seems :( After years of procrastinating, I'm finally gonna get around to setting up a basic homelab to run pihole. Thanks, youtube execs and bean counters, for kicking my lazy ass into gear on this! In a way, I kinda wish that ads worked as well as youtube suggestions. If one…

If only there were a premium version of YouTube that you could pay for to avoid seeing ads…

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#62

Post by scarface_74 »

sneak wrote: post #33
gruez wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"a place where there are fewer ads" requires some alternate form of monetization. If "paying for it" isn't acceptable to you, what's left?

I’m fine paying for content (I subscribe to Nebula and Spotify, for example); I am not fine paying to enrich organizations that engage in widespread surveillance and ad technology. Ads make the world worse. Creators make it better. Google’s problem is that their mission statement is fundamentally misleading. They aren’t here to organize the world’s information and make it accessible, they are here to maximize ad reve…

> I’m fine paying for content I subscribe to Nebula and Spotify,

> I am not fine paying to enrich organizations that engage in widespread surveillance and ad technology

And you don’t see an issue with these two statements?

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#63

Post by hh3k0 »

francislavoie wrote: post #56
NietTim wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it was 10 cents in some other country, I'll never pay a single cent to google, they don't need and most of all don't deserve my money.

Premium actually gives more money to creators you watch on YouTube than ads do. It's win-win IMO. Save yourself time, give them more money. Also comes with YouTube Music which is quite good (arguably worse than Google Play Music was but eh)

How about I don't watch ads and don't buy premium?

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#64

Post by mainpassathome »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #49
snapplebobapple wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what i did when i got the "we are going to start blocking playback ...." Message and it worked great. Moral of the story is track content creators you like with rss and you dont need to be logged in.

I was planning to code this with yt-dlp, to just download the videos and never open the webside again.... I just have to figure out how to implement sponsor-block, to remove the "this video is sponsored by shadow raid vpn" messages... probably can be done with ffmpeg :)

either use and nvidous instance that had sponsorblock(?) or use mpv with the sponsorblock script in your program

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#65

Post by garblegarble »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #49
snapplebobapple wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what i did when i got the "we are going to start blocking playback ...." Message and it worked great. Moral of the story is track content creators you like with rss and you dont need to be logged in.

I was planning to code this with yt-dlp, to just download the videos and never open the webside again.... I just have to figure out how to implement sponsor-block, to remove the "this video is sponsored by shadow raid vpn" messages... probably can be done with ffmpeg :)

Good news! yt-dlp already has sponsorblock built-in :-) Have a look in the --help text output for the "sponsorblock-remove" arg.

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#66

Post by Nullabillity »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #49
snapplebobapple wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what i did when i got the "we are going to start blocking playback ...." Message and it worked great. Moral of the story is track content creators you like with rss and you dont need to be logged in.

I was planning to code this with yt-dlp, to just download the videos and never open the webside again.... I just have to figure out how to implement sponsor-block, to remove the "this video is sponsored by shadow raid vpn" messages... probably can be done with ffmpeg :)

    yt-dlp --sponsorblock-remove default

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#67

Post by dylan604 »

brucethemoose2 wrote: post #59
kaelinl wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, in turn, will spawn user scripts which work around the detection. Any client-side solution will be an arms race between Google and user script/adblock devs. The only real way to prevent it is to withhold the video stream from the CDN until the client has streamed the full ad and/or bake it into the video stream. My impression is that Twitch does this for its live streams (although not VODs).

Another option is to require Chrome for playback outside of authenticated apps, and lock Chrome down. TBH baking it into the video stream is probably the easiest path. The whole video doesn't have to be re-encoded if the ad is spliced in. This is a "soft lockdown" since the ad can theoretically be manually skipped by the user, but its probably good enough.

baking into the video stream loses their ability to auction off ads in realtime to customize ads per viewer based on all of the analytics they've hoovered up on that viewer. they aren't doing the hoovering to go back to old school pre-determined ad placement

Re: Anti-Anti-Adblocker uBlock filter to get rid of the annoying YouTube message

#69

Post by gruez »

alwayslikethis wrote: post #43
nickthegreek wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe this is what you are looking for: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37873749 But I also recommend purchasing YouTube Premium if you watch a decent amount. I find it to be a great value.

At this point, I consider blocking ads to be a moral obligation. By giving in, you enable Youtube to abuse users further

What's the point of blocking ads when they're already not present? Or are you saying that we should block ads and refuse to pay? How is that sustainable in the long term? If you're against ads, shouldn't you support monetization models that don't involve ads?
Post reply on HN