[dead]
YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
981–990 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#982Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you saw a giant, attention grabbing billboard for something you are looking for, you wouldn't hate it. In the context of roads, these are businesses putting their signs on the side of the road. For example I usually find billboards/signs pointing to the nearest supermarket, restaurant or gas station to be useful, because that's the kind of thing I may want do do when I am driving, and I am getting useful informati…
Of course I would hate it. Ads are just mental warfare against you. Its someone trying to manipulate you for profit. If I drive somewhere I know where I want to go. If I need supplies I can pull over and check on the map where the nearest store is. In such case I don't care what store it's, just it's proximity.
> In such case I don't care what store it's, just it's proximity.
So you'd go to a hardware store for food? Surely you need to know what they sell.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#983Earlier quoted context omitted.
They’re disagreeable because you’re having your attention robbed unsolicited for the purpose of someone else trying to get your money. The whole concept is an insult. At best they drive materialism.
You're trading your attention for entertainment you don't otherwise have to pay for.
Would we have to pay for the cat videos and other things people currently share on youtube because it's the dominant platform. The creators of these are generally not paid.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#984Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't get it. You are not the target Most advertising is seeking the less intelligent consumer. Or the young and still naive consumer. They outnumber you 1 million to 1. It's why female musicians make more money putting their name to a makeup brand then their music. It's why Elon will make some promise that is unrealistic. It's why Apple put low paid everyday tech support staff in their stores and called them Gen…
Couldn’t youtube easily discern those who are young and naive from those who aren’t so that the latter don’t get ads? It would be a win-win for everyone: youtube spends less (no need to spend bandwidth), companies dont get hated that much, non-naive-young consumers are not bombarded with ads.
It just so happens that anyone who thinks ads don't affect them is naive and thus a profitable ad target.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#985Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't get rid of the ads. Most medium to big youtubers will have one or more sponsored segments inside the video.
But that's their choice, not youtube's.
Sure, but I'm paying youtube, not the creator. So I'm expecting youtube to solve the problem they promised to solve.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#986Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#987Earlier quoted context omitted.
You lose on long run. In few years, you will pay more and still watch ads while YT will no longer be free. (let me remind you of video streaming services) Managers want their rewards that are tied to earnings and stockholders want to earn more. And once they both get their money, the next year reward will be tied to even more earnings. And stockholders will want to earn more.
By this logic you lose in long term no matter what you do. If you pay premium: they'll add ads to premium too. If you watch ads: they'll add more ads. If you use ad-blocker: they'll embed ads into the video. If you use another platform: the said platform will need to monetize and you are back to square one.
> If you use ad-blocker: they'll embed ads into the video
If they do this then the right arrow becomes your best friend. If it's part of the stream then they have no way of blocking things so you can't skip past them. If they embed some way of notifying the app that it needs to block skipping here or there then that's what adblock would start triggering from. I'm assuming that's why they don't do it now.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#988Earlier 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…
YouTube is providing these videos through the standard html ports with no authentication necessary, like most websites on the planet. This is how you give away information away for free on the web. I don't feel entitled to free stuff, but if someone is giving it away, why not take it?
And since I'm taking what they are giving me for free, then whether or not I decide to watch the parts they try to force on me to try to entice me to buy something I have no intention of buying is none of their business.
If they didn't leave this door wide open then I would be forced to decide if it's worth enough for me to pay to use it. But since they do I do what I want. It's not up to me to make sure that YT's and creator's business models are making them money.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#989The biggest issue I have with YouTube advertising is placement in the video. When watching network television, ads are placed between scenes where a pause is acceptable. On YouTube I'll often get an ad in the middle of an actor's sentence or action where it completely disrupts everything and destroys the moment.
Re: YouTube's new anti-adblock measures
#990The 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…
I complain about ads on YouTube because it interrupts my attention from what I am watching, which is nothing new.
Whilst you're correct about Costco, advertisers don't care where you are to show you an ad. The data shows that if you are laying on the couch watching YouTube and an ad appears relevant to you, that it sells. I don't think advertisers are sitting there scratching their heads as to why people don't like them. No advertiser looks at a billboard in the countryside and thinks people enjoy looking at them, its a profit making opportunity, even if that means hijacking your YouTube video on tech reviews for an Audi commercial.
The difference with Costco in your example is that the ads don't impeded on your ability to continue shopping around Costco. If you were walking around Costco and had to stop to listen to someone market to you about clothing when you were simply there to buy some bread and milk you'd get annoyed.