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

Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

jayd.ml

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 728 posts

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#671

Post by acdha »

joquarky wrote: post #669
throwaway290 wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not your responsibility. That's why Google makes you do it (pay or watch ads). Otherwise they can't pay creators and if they don't get paid then you don't get content you like to watch. Lose lose. So I'd say they kinda figured it out.

> if they don't get paid then you don't get content [citation needed] You're saying no content would be created if there were no payments? Have you never met a real artist?

Yes, real artists need time, supplies, space to work, etc. If you don’t pay them, they’ll have less of everything they need to make the art you like.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#672

Post by joquarky »

throwaway290 wrote: post #533
Saigonautica wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this argument fascinating overall! I don't really use YouTube, but when ads play on random videos and it irritates me, I just close my eyes, the simplest version of content-blocking. (If the ad is painfully loud, I may also cover my ears in contexts where this is not extremely socially awkward) Can we say it's immoral for me to close my eyes? Can someone's business model be the basis of an argument that it's i…

It was fascinating to me for a bit but it gets old fast... consumer: I want to fill my content hole with content someone made through hard work right now and for free and how dare they delay that by 5 seconds after which I can press Skip. I will employ sophisticated tricks and run untrusted code in my browser to work around that delay. also consumer: I will totally not be pissed at all if there is no free content for…

This smells like psychological projection.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#673

Post by array_key_first »

throwaway290 wrote: post #633
array_key_first wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google does not make me do it, I am free to mute the ad and look away. I don't have to watch ads, that is my choice.

If you want to be pedantic: "Google adds video pre-roll ad during which you are likely to see it"

It's not pedantic at all: if I look away and mute, which is perfectly allowed, versus use an ad blocker, what's the difference?

The outcome for me is identical. I don't see an ad, and I won't buy something.

It's the same reason why DVR recording was never piracy. It's the same thing as if I watched the show, except the DVR does it.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#674

Post by ngai_aku »

ZekeSulastin wrote: post #317
jason_oster wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither of these are available on Apple TV. Otherwise, you make a good suggestion; install them where available.

At least for SponsorBlock you can run iSponsorBlockTV[1] on another computer on the same network - in addition to skipping sponsored segments, it also mutes YouTube’s own ads and auto-skips them as soon as it can. [1] https://github.com/dmunozv04/iSponsorBlockTV

I've been using this for a while. It's certainly better than nothing, but there are limitations. Most notably for me, automatic muting doesn't work when HomePods are the default output[1]

[1] https://github.com/dmunozv04/iSponsorBlockTV/issues/60#issue...

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#675

Post by joquarky »

drdeca wrote: post #358
wintermutestwin wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it piracy to pirate a pirate? Most of the content that I view on YT is old live concerts uploaded by fans. Did goog pay a license for those pirate recordings? Who should goog pay? The label? The pirate who uploaded? The OG pirate who recorded the show? So doesn’t this make them pirates too? These are honest questions and it seems way too fuzzy to me to be making moral judgments about the whole mess.

I think saying that it is morally piracy is a little bit of an overstatement. I think one does have the right to block ads on one’s machine if one chooses. However, personally, because of the “if ad blocking was universalized, the services I appreciate would likely not exist” reasoning, I choose not to block ads. As for other things like “muting/covering ads on screen”, yeah, that does seem a bit fuzzy. Sometimes I’l…

Kants Categorical Imperative is a terrible way to model reality. People are too stocastic.

It's the same mistake libertarians make when they assume a fully informed and rational society.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#676

Post by dragonwriter »

joquarky wrote: post #675
drdeca wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think saying that it is morally piracy is a little bit of an overstatement. I think one does have the right to block ads on one’s machine if one chooses. However, personally, because of the “if ad blocking was universalized, the services I appreciate would likely not exist” reasoning, I choose not to block ads. As for other things like “muting/covering ads on screen”, yeah, that does seem a bit fuzzy. Sometimes I’l…

Kants Categorical Imperative is a terrible way to model reality. People are too stocastic. It's the same mistake libertarians make when they assume a fully informed and rational society.

> Kants Categorical Imperative is a terrible way to model reality.

It's not a way to model reality, terrible or otherwise. That’s not what it purports to do.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#677

Post by joquarky »

venturecruelty wrote: post #616
Loudergood wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean DoubleClick. It's clear which business model took over after the merger.

I keep forgetting that they bought DoubleClick. Google has been a surveillance company for so long now that I've kind of forgotten there was ever a Before Times.

Doubleclick actually took over Google.

Perhaps not literally, as in on the financial books.

But certainly in leadership "values".

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#678

Post by joquarky »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #602
komali2 wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Common sense and morality Hah! Someone after my own heart. Well, since we're not talking law, let's get into it! First of all, all profit is theft. Your boss and shareholders are only able to make money because they steal margin from your labor. In this case, Youtube may be providing a platform, but what it gets in return is far more than it gives back to creators. Creators have no rights when it comes to Youtube -…

I’m not reading all that, but certainly you can make the argument that stealing a zero marginal cost good isn’t wrong. It’s still stealing though. Stealing from an unethical entity may not be wrong either, but it is still stealing.

You have no concern for proper semantics. I don't know why OP bothered to respond to you.

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#679

Post by komali2 »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #602
komali2 wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Common sense and morality Hah! Someone after my own heart. Well, since we're not talking law, let's get into it! First of all, all profit is theft. Your boss and shareholders are only able to make money because they steal margin from your labor. In this case, Youtube may be providing a platform, but what it gets in return is far more than it gives back to creators. Creators have no rights when it comes to Youtube -…

I’m not reading all that, but certainly you can make the argument that stealing a zero marginal cost good isn’t wrong. It’s still stealing though. Stealing from an unethical entity may not be wrong either, but it is still stealing.

> I’m not reading all that

I was under the impression we were communicating, which I was genuinely interested in doing with you. Thank you for letting me know that wasn't the case.

I haven't read your comment and won't be replying to the content of it. I hope you have a good weekend!

Re: Someone at YouTube Needs Glasses: The Prophecy Has Been Fulfilled

#680

Post by joquarky »

JAlexoid wrote: post #154
komali2 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The deal you make with YouTube is that you watch the ad in exchange for the video. Did I? Can you tell me where I made this deal? I navigated to YouTube.com, I don't see a contract, I don't see a place to sign or a hand to shake. Where is this bilateral agreement? I think what you meant to say was, YouTube really very much wants me to watch their ads, and I don't care to, so I won't. If your counter is that then Yo…

> I've already archived all the videos I care about That's quite literally what we call piracy.

There are at least two words in your comment that do not align semantically with the definitions of those words.
Post reply on HN