Earlier quoted context omitted.
Paying 13 bucks per month, which is a non trivial amount for a lot of people if it competes with other subcription services, merely to block ads on a website that doesn't even produce its own content is in my opinion one of the worst deals on the internet. That's equivalent to a Netflix subscription, which puts what, 20 billion into original content each year?
> doesn't even produce its own content How do you think those video bits get streamed all around the world? Magic?
YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
71–80 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#72Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#73If they ran less hostile ads, people wouldn't be as hostile to watching their ads. Some of the ads they run are just ridiculous and awful. Ads for scams, soft-core porn ads, just the worst of the worst.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#74Google is intentionally throttling YouTube, slowing down users with ad blockers
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#75Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#76If they ran less hostile ads, people wouldn't be as hostile to watching their ads. Some of the ads they run are just ridiculous and awful. Ads for scams, soft-core porn ads, just the worst of the worst.
I think that’s a rationalization. Most people just don’t like ads no matter what they are. And I can’t blame them, ads are terrible. But this is a case where they offer a nice subscription that takes them all away, so people ought to buy that instead.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#77I pay for YouTube premium (which gives me YouTube music too) and am happy with the lack of ads, even though many creators still mix paid sponsors into their videos. It seems the creators are motivated to keep things minimal or they will lose engagement. What I am not happy with is a lack of control over the homepage and recommendations. I would really like to be able to easily block channels from ever showing up, but…
Totally a theory but sometimes YouTube has a button that says roughly "show me something new". I think that may be the source of those channels returning.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#78I have no respect for Youtube/google developers, like they have apps where you need to pay to use them with the screen turned off, so they screw your battery (reducing your device live) and wasting energy so their boss gets a bigger yacht (cecause it seems ads are not enough)
I don't necessarily disagree but it's not a Google problem. It's a human problem. For example: What value does your comment provide the world? Enough value to offset the carbon emissions from transmission/storage/retrieval/display? Personally, I'd answer no. Thus your comment itself is a waste of energy.
Only pointing it out because of the irony given the content of your post
Otherwise yeah, don’t understand what parent comment is trying to say
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if Google didn't horde whatever data it could about me from the analytics systems that it has installed on a myriad of websites without my consent? What if Google wasn't a monopoly who amassed insane amounts of capital to do this? What if Google didn't lobby governments around the world for special treatment?
> What if Google didn't horde whatever data it could about me from the analytics systems that it has installed on a myriad of websites without my consent? Arent you voluntarily using their website? Nobody is forcing you to open your browser, and type y-o-u-t-u-b-e-dot-c-o-m. > What if Google wasn't a monopoly who amassed insane amounts of capital to do this? MKBHD, LTT and others are willingly uploading videos to You…
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't necessarily disagree but it's not a Google problem. It's a human problem. For example: What value does your comment provide the world? Enough value to offset the carbon emissions from transmission/storage/retrieval/display? Personally, I'd answer no. Thus your comment itself is a waste of energy.
Reframing a problem with anything as a human problem is a tautology - why even go out of your way to write? Only pointing it out because of the irony given the content of your post Otherwise yeah, don’t understand what parent comment is trying to say
I respectfully disagree.
> don’t understand what parent comment is trying to say
They're trying to say Google and those who work there are greedy. I shared my "tautology" to illustrate while OP's point may be largely correct, greed is not unique to Google.