YouTube's new anti-adblock measures • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#681

Post by Cthulhu_ » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:14 AM UTC

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #414

The primary thing that makes advertisements disagreeable is their irrelevance. That’s not to say whether or not the advertisement is for a product or service for which the viewer is interested in purchasing but how it relates to the context in which it is viewed. People complain about billboards next to a countryside highway because it is entirely irrelevant to driving through the countryside. Actual complaints may b…

When Google started ads they were praised for being relevant. But, as long as advertisers are willing to pay more, they can buy off the relevancy, not really caring about directly measurable conversion rates.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#682

Post by al_borland » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:16 AM UTC

hirvi74 wrote: post #410

okdood64 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or just pay for Premium... No one's forcing you to do anything.

Without the ads, I'd probably spend way too much time on YouTube. I need something to push me into the rage-quit territory after enough time has passed.

I subscribe to Premium and quit a while back with this idea in mind. It didn’t work. The ads made me rage-sign-up-for-premium.

Of the various streaming platforms I subscribe to, I probably get the most value from YouTube.

Though I wish there was an option to get it for less without YouTube Muisc, that didn’t also lead to ads on YouTube itself. I was excited when I saw Lite announced, then I read the details and my excitement quickly faded and turned into disappointment.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#683

Post by kerkeslager » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:16 AM UTC

tlogan wrote: post #239

Why do we justify blocking ads, even when we know the content we’re consuming isn’t free to create and even if the content is free, it still costs money to store and distribute? We often rationalize using ad blockers because ads can be intrusive or annoying. But let’s asking ourselves: Why do we feel entitled to get this for free? This isn’t a moral judgment. I genuinely want to understand the reasoning.

I don't feel entitled to anything. YouTube is free to stop serving me content at any time. It's trivial to refuse to serve people content they haven't paid for.

Why do advertisers feel entitled to my attention when I never agreed to give it to them? Simply visiting a page with ads doesn't mean I agree to view ads.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#684

Post by Cthulhu_ » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:16 AM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #454

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The primary thing that makes advertisements disagreeable is their irrelevance. That's not true. We don't hate billboards because of their irrelevancy. We hate billboards because they're giant ugly attention grabbers that make the world look worse for everybody in exchange for making someone money. If the billboards were all about driving-related products, they'd still suck. The YouTube ads are hated because that's…

>> that make the world look worse for everybody in exchange for making someone money. There are places where billboards act as rather effective sound barriers, shielding quiet neighborhoods from road noise.

This is some weird shilling for capitalism or weird devil's advocate tbh. Don't feel like you have to find solutions or positive sides to everything you see on the internet. Billboards are visual noise, road noise is audible noise, neither is desireable.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#685

Post by freedomben » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:16 AM UTC

wiseowise wrote: post #522

grepfru_it wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing is wrong with billboards, I can look the other way. When the billboards show up on my dashboard and I have to stare at it before I can turn off my exit then we have problems I don’t mind watching a video with an ad. My child and I can preoccupy ourself. When it’s a 90 second ad we are forced to watch just to watch a 45 second video I’m gonna make certain we don’t watch that ad

> Nothing is wrong with billboards. Elaborate.

Benefit of the doubt that perhaps that was the entirety of the comment at the time you posted this reply, but they did elaborate if you could take the time to read the whole thing:

> Nothing is wrong with billboards, I can look the other way. When the billboards show up on my dashboard and I have to stare at it before I can turn off my exit then we have problems

> I don’t mind watching a video with an ad. My child and I can preoccupy ourself. When it’s a 90 second ad we are forced to watch just to watch a 45 second video I’m gonna make certain we don’t watch that ad

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#686

Post by al_borland » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:17 AM UTC

inetknght wrote: post #348

okdood64 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or just pay for Premium... No one's forcing you to do anything.

Wait until Google shows ads in premium too. Paid-for cable TV did the same rugpull decades ago.

I’m a Premium subscriber. If they show me a single ad I will unsubscribe immediately.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#687

Post by Workaccount2 » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:17 AM UTC

randcraw wrote: post #350

timmg wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The more Google insists on forcing advertising on us... You can... just not visit youtube, right?

No. Youtube is a monopoly. For a huge amount pf historical video, they are the only game in town. Regulating the hell out of them -- especially gigantic fines for the insane amount of copyright piracy their business model depends upon -- is LONG overdue.

Read up on vid.me, which broke YouTube's "monopoly" back in 2016-2017.

Seriously, go see what happened to them.

Turns out everyone complaining about YouTube, when given the option to jump to a new fresh user focused service, still blocks ads and refuses subscriptions.

This thread, and the hundreds like it, are why people nope the fuck out when considering creating a YT competitor.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#688

Post by Workaccount2 » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:21 AM UTC

al_borland wrote: post #676

cpitman wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or just pay for Youtube.... $8/ month gets rid of most of the ads in videos, $15/month to remove ads from music, shorts, and search results.

I pay for Premium, and have for several years now. The Lite version is not what anyone wanted. I want no ads on YouTube, without also paying for YouTube Music (which I never use). If $8/month still gets me random ads on some videos, it’s no good. I’m sure their thought was people would turn the normal YouTube app into their music player, but I’m not so sure. Eliminating background play from Lite may solve that well e…

YouTube music isn't really a different service rather than a different YouTube app. Under the hood YouTube music is just YouTube with a music player UI. Taking it away wouldn't really lower the cost much.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#689

Post by peenoise » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:22 AM UTC

Dear dkga, you willing to invest your soul but cant even pay 3 bucks a month. You have a cheap soul. Hey Cheapoo. Dont forget the creators you so willingly watch are paid through them, without ads, there are no creators you so love.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#690

Post by peenoise » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 11:22 AM UTC

dkga wrote: post #624

Dear YouTube, It’s not so much that I don’t want to see ads - nobody does, but very very often the ad breaks the vibe of what I am watching and it displeases me to the point I will invest my soul and energy to block ads. Some real-life examples: - watching a video about coding where the creator has a monotonic, calm voice that keeps me engaged, and VS Code in dark mode which is easy on my eyes in my dark room at 2am,…

[flagged]