Anyone know how to stop sites from saying, "It looks like you're using an adblocker... blah blah blah"
UbO, go to settings and enable the filter saying “anti-adblock killer”.
YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
631–640 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#632This doesn't really affect me since I subscribe to premium, but something that a lot of ad-based services don't seem to grasp is why people block ads. It's because they've become increasingly obnoxious. Nobody blocked ads when they were a simple column of links in the gutter or maybe an animated GIF banner with 3 frames. No, adblockers became popular because ads kept getting more loud (both visually and audibly), in…
I feel like the services are well aware of the why but ultimately a video ad is probably worth 50x what a link on the side is.
On mainstream sites ads are almost always not that obnoxious imo. Pop-up ads used to be the standard.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#633I block ads because they're psychological warfare that corporations wage against me. I don't care how unobtrusive the ads are. I don't care if the ads don't track me. I grew up changing the channel on TV when ads came on, and ripping adverts out of magazines before sitting down to read them. I vote for billboard bans whenever I can. I have zero tolerance for ads of any sort. Advertisers have no morals, they're comple…
The fundamental problem of advertising is that they are selling other things than we need.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#634From the article: >“YouTube’s ad-supported model supports a diverse ecosystem of creators, and provides billions of people globally access to content for free with ads,” the company’s statement says. Let's at least be 100% honest with everyone and stop with the disingenuous garbage: 1. Ad-blocker usage is roughly 25-30% of US users. 2. The average YouTube content creator makes less than 0.02 per ad view and thus why…
I think you're being completely disingenuous here. Using an ad-blocker is free-riding and nothing less. We consume a service provided by Google through server capacity, monetization enginea, and improved discovery and by the creators through sweat and tears in creating video content without paying for it. You can consume the content without being exposed to ads while paying Google and the creators their share by buyi…
Did Google ever unfairly dominate competition? Did Google ever use their power tyrannically? Did Google ever release a product or design that caused untold social damage? Does Google deserve stellar treatment because they treat us stellar? Even if you view their ads or buy their product, is the product still not free of exploiting you? Why is it not the correct moralism that we have a right and a duty to take everything from them until they are no more?
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#635From the article: >“YouTube’s ad-supported model supports a diverse ecosystem of creators, and provides billions of people globally access to content for free with ads,” the company’s statement says. Let's at least be 100% honest with everyone and stop with the disingenuous garbage: 1. Ad-blocker usage is roughly 25-30% of US users. 2. The average YouTube content creator makes less than 0.02 per ad view and thus why…
>>“YouTube’s ad-supported model supports a diverse ecosystem of creators, and provides billions of people globally access to content for free with ads,” the company’s statement says. Before I switched to using adblocking on my phone for youtube (like I did for my desktop), I made sure I will never ever buy whatever crap was presented in YT ads. I believe I am not the only one for which ads have a contrary effect to t…
I am looking to build a house, and a few days ago I was driving on the highway and saw a billboard for a custom house builder. I made a mental note never to contact that company. If your ad is on the highway, you are not building my house :)
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#636This doesn't really affect me since I subscribe to premium, but something that a lot of ad-based services don't seem to grasp is why people block ads. It's because they've become increasingly obnoxious. Nobody blocked ads when they were a simple column of links in the gutter or maybe an animated GIF banner with 3 frames. No, adblockers became popular because ads kept getting more loud (both visually and audibly), in…
> This doesn't really affect me since I subscribe to premium...
I'm subscribed as well, but it's becoming less valuable as more and more content creators run sponsored ads in their videos and these play regardless of your subscription status.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#637This is just so funny to me. Google has to have the absolute worst PR for any company I've ever seen to make this happen. Somehow, they've duped the general public (at least on HN) into believing they insert the ads into videos. All they need to do is run a marketing campaign about how as a content creator you get to decide when ads play, whether they're unskippable, and how many ads to place in your video. Blast tha…
I don't think content creators can choose not to have ads in their videos. Creators can turn off monetization, but YouTube can still play ads, they just won't pay the creator. https://www.makeuseof.com/youtube-ads-without-paying-creator... I do agree with your general point. Creators can choose to show less ads, and we should prefer channels that choose to monetize less. EDIT: I'm no longer sure whether YouTube is di…
Another point is that the algorithm (which decides what videos are shown on the homepage, sidebar recommendations, notifications, etc. and provides the majority of views to videos) essentially ceases to promote at all any video that's not monetized.
Which I think is fair -- after all, I think they're already doing non-monetized creators a favor by footing the entire bandwidth bill, they don't owe them free promotion!
But it obviously puts a limit on what a creator can do about ads if they are actually trying to make money (even if they don't want any Adsense money and only want to do their own in-video sponsors, or heck, even if they're just looking for "exposure"). If they turn off monetization, they'll drop off the face of the Earth, essentially.
Hence why creators care so much about a single demonetized video, basically it means the video goes into a black hole and earns them basically no views. It exists, but it may as well not.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#638If Google had the power to implement a device that forced your eyelids open to look at ads they would do it. Their company is user hostile and we should move as far as possible away from their services.
How are they user hostile? It's people who do not want to pay for the service and do not want to watch ads to use the service who are the problem. How else should Youtube make money from those users? They must literally lose money on those users.
They steal your data without telling you (complex legal verbiage on multi-pay TOS's is not a justification). After they steal your data, they push you advertisements that are devoid of morality. Even if I buy their service, I cannot go to their home page without them pushing violence, animal abuse, drug use, provocative sex, biased politics, etc. Even if I buy their service, I must expect they are funneling my data in terrible ways. Even if I follow all the rules, the service continues to abuse me.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#639So... this is pretty evil... but I thought of it a while ago and I'm not that bright, so I'm sure plenty of others have also thought of it. How long until Google / Meta / whomever just starts having faster response times and higher resolution content for people who have clicked on an add in the past N minutes? People who don't click on ads either (1) self-select away from the platform (or at least reduce their time o…
As an advertiser, I don't want them to incentivize people to click on ads, because then people will do it despite lack of interest in my product, and thus just add noise to my numbers. Unless it also leads to an increase in conversions (doubtful) that just makes the individual clicks worth that much less to me.
It simultaneously incentivizes clicking on ads, but also increases the concentration of ad-susceptible users on the platform. Depending on the correlation between a high propensity to click on ads and a high propensity to buy once on a website, such a change might actually increase the quality of clicks that you get.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#640This doesn't really affect me since I subscribe to premium, but something that a lot of ad-based services don't seem to grasp is why people block ads. It's because they've become increasingly obnoxious. Nobody blocked ads when they were a simple column of links in the gutter or maybe an animated GIF banner with 3 frames. No, adblockers became popular because ads kept getting more loud (both visually and audibly), in…
Don't forget that we block ads for privacy, too.