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

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#841

Post by righthand » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 4:41 PM UTC

stickfigure wrote: post #277

mcdeltat wrote: post #234

I recently stopped watching youtube altogether and surprisingly haven't been missing it. And I used to watch a LOT (like hours per day) of youtube, mostly quality educational/scientific content. But ultimately you'd be surprised how much you don't need in your life. And side effect is no more ads. If someone sends me an occasional youtube video to watch, I'll take a look, but otherwise no engagement with the platform…

Or just pay for it? I have my whole family on my plan. Nobody gets ads. It is a bargain. You're right, I could probably finish my motorcycle build projects without videos. But why??

> You're right, I could probably finish my motorcycle build projects without videos. But why??

> redirecting that time towards more creative or mindful pursuits.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#842

Post by dimator » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 4:43 PM UTC

PurestGuava wrote: post #513

matwood wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. This isn’t a situation where you can’t pay. YT has a clear, reasonably priced solution for no ads. It also comes with YT music. If people don’t think there’s enough value in YT, then don’t pay and don’t use it. Reminds me of the early justification of Napster where people would complain the latest B. Spears song was garbage and not worth paying for, yet it was the most downloaded song.

> If people don’t think there’s enough value in YT, then don’t pay and don’t use it. The most common throughline of all pro-piracy discourse is that there's a lot of people who feel completely entitled to free entertainment, and they will come up with all sorts of bizarre mental gymnastics to justify that as something other than "I want free entertainment and don't want to see ads." I don't think anyone could articul…

You'll notice that it's always YouTube that is the target, though. People feel entitled to free YouTube as though by birthright. If someone doesn't like Netflix, they cancel and move on, they don't usually claim they deserve it free.

Maybe because it was not monetized originally, and so those who were around back then argue it must remain that way?

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#843

Post by righthand » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 4:44 PM UTC

Somebody start a non-publicly traded ad-based video hosting company and this will be resolved for the most part. If the concern is never "line goes up" then there is less incentive to enshittify the entire platform.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#844

Post by wao0uuno » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 4:52 PM UTC

pier25 wrote: post #197

I'm more than happy to pay for Youtube Premium to remove ads for all the family and ensure content creators can monetize their work.

And because of people like you I can enjoy their services for free. Thank you.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#845

Post by zwnow » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 4:59 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #793

zwnow wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you pay though its really simple to block ads and youtube is already rich enough. Why bow down to consumerism and enrichment of the already rich?

> youtube is already rich enough maybe, hard to say. but the people who make videos, and get 55% of the revenue (give or take a bit), frequently are not (unless you insist on watching mega channels only).

Well it should be a hobby to be a youtuber not a job. Monetizing it destroyed the whole platform.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#846

Post by rwmj » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 5:02 PM 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'll think about the morality of ad blocking around the same time that Google thinks about the morality of all the crap they do all the time.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#847

Post by enragedcacti » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 5:06 PM UTC

bayindirh wrote: post #774

felineflock wrote: post #772

There are 3 primary undesirability aspects of ads: 1) ads as irrelevant intrusions (in spite of all data Google collects, ads are mostly irrelevant for any person) 2) ads as ugly or blockers of beauty 3) ads as thieves of attention or downright theft (scam ads, illegal products) Then, should we pay to get rid of ads or not? Two opposite opinions: 1) paying YouTube support creators 2) paying YouTube rewards the "shiti…

> the content creator's own sponsorships, shorts... Many of the people I watch add "jump ahead" buttons for these sections now, which is neat.

It's actually YouTube that adds those as a feature for Premium subscribers. It infers the locations automatically using viewing data.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#848

Post by wwweston » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

Paying for YouTube has probably been the digital subscription with the single greatest return on a dozen dollars.

Content is uninterrupted without having to engage in the arms race. Music selection is great. Random movies are available.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#849

Post by dietr1ch » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 5:11 PM UTC

Defletter wrote: post #560

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…

Steel-manning the argument, near where I live, it's not that uncommon to see small to moderately sized advertisements along the road, such as a sign outside/near the entrance of a farm that's selling eggs, meat, etc. I am wholly unopposed to this. In fact, I'm very supportive of this, and used them to find a farm to buy local honey from. Whereas the stereotypical massive slabs whose advertisements get wallpapered on,…

On a few nice towns here there's no regular advertisements, but shops are allowed to have nice wooden signs matching the aesthetics of the town signs.

You can still find your way around, and discover things, but looking around feels like you are finding things instead of looking at things yelling at you to find them.

Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

#850

Post by varelse » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 5:12 PM UTC

wwweston wrote: post #848

Paying for YouTube has probably been the digital subscription with the single greatest return on a dozen dollars. Content is uninterrupted without having to engage in the arms race. Music selection is great. Random movies are available.

[dead]