In a fight between a corporation and a bunch of people very determined to get content for free, history shows the corporation always loses.
this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2023
27 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37739 readers
794 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The only lose on their own terms. That meaning they don't make quite as much money as they used to. It's still money hand over fist.
It's not even that people want stuff "for free."
I mean... well... who doesn't love free stuff, but really if the legit product is priced fairly and buying it provides some actual useful service and isn't inconvenient or comes packaged with scummy garbage hindering it, then people will pay for it.
The problem is - that's not what publicly-traded companies like to do. Valve's Gabe Newell said it best (paraphrasing) - "Piracy is a problem with a service... not the customer."
Shitty services or actions businesses take to place a barrier of any kind between customer and the product they seek as a means to lazily extract more money from customers - especially that which is perceived as greedy will make more people seek alternative means of obtaining said product.
Ask people who host Plex servers why they put movies on their server when they already have a Blu-Ray of it.
It's always "because the disc has un-skippable ads" or "they didn't include Ben Affleck's commentary track on it where he shits on Michael Bay for being a goddamn moron," or "I don't like seeing 14 different warnings before watching the movie I like" or "I don't like seeing 10 min of ads every 5 min of watching my favorite show."
It's hardly ever "I like being a thief" or "I couldn't afford it..." and in the case of the latter, they weren't going to buy it anyway.
I have totally just purchased a few Anime seasons because I didn’t want to deal with ads when streaming it via Crunchyroll. Considering the speed I watch it at, I’d have had to pay for like 3 months of service to not get ads, or I can buy it and permanently own it for a little more.
I won’t watch things with ads anymore if I can help it.
Guess I'm getting banned then, I will never disable my adblockers, the internet (and Youtube especially) is goddamn unusable without them.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Maybe the general public is more compliant than I am, but my money for YouTube creators goes to them via Patreon. Google not knowing how to break even on a bandwidth- and storage-intensive property it's owned for more than a decade does not constitute an emergency I need to have any part in paying for.
If very recent history is any guide, this is exactly how you get people searching "YouTube alternatives uBlock." No one is saying there aren't enough ads on the site; the increasing malignancy of ads over the years is why people categorically reject whitelisting youtube.com, and "more ads" is not a solution to any user-facing problem.
Yeah, video ads are the popup ads of our days. Just as intrusive. Money corrupts :(
Ad companies can't handle the idea that people don't want to be hit with ads every 5 minutes. "Well, it's just BAD ads"... no, it's having my experience constantly interrupted.
I would be okay with it if the amount of ads and their length was reasonable, like one in the beginning and one at the end or something. For a longer video I wouldn't even mind one at the midway point.
I didn't start using adblockers until I was literally inundated and bombarded and sometimes with ads running the length of movie (no, literally).
It completely ruins the experience. I'm happy to support my creators directly though and I do.
part of the issue, imo, is that creators also put ads in their videos. So you get two pre-roll ads, a sponsor segment, an ad in the middle, and then another sponsor segment. Maybe throw in some product placements as well. And one of those ads might be 1.5 hours long if you don't manually skip it. I know I'm not the only one who woke up after falling asleep to a video to find themselves 45 minutes into some ad.
After living with ublock and sponsorblock for so long, it's shocking to watch youtube without them.
It's both. I dread the coming election year, and it's why I won't even THINK of paying for a streaming service that has advertising. I will pay the extra money to avoid them.
Going this hard to fight ad blockers isn't going to work like YouTube thinks it will. The only thing it's going to do is force people to find ways to bypass it or just start using a YouTube alternative. If YouTube is serious about wanting people to use ad blockers less, they should have conducted some form of a survey to find out why people use ad blockers on YouTube and then make changes to either find some sort of a middle ground with ad block users or try to incentives users to turn off their ad blocker.
Obviously, they wouldn't do that because it would require that they listen to their users and everyone knows how much they like to listen to their users before making any kind of decision.
This just seems like another element an ad blocker could block.
Not if they track this server-side, then you just get banned or can't open any more videos after 3 videos, and won't have the message telling you why.
It definitely depends on how they implement it. If they implement it server-side, it’ll probably work, but what’s stopping you from viewing YouTube signed out? IPs change frequently, cookies can be cleared, etc.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
if we don't watch their ads now because of how intrusive and poor quality they are, where's the logic leap to they get money from us if we can't block their ads? We just move on or get better at blocking, they don't actually get money in this scenario... This is the problem with tech decisions these days, the companies are completely out of touch. You can't use consumers as products and then charge them for it, and make no mistake about it you are the product.
Banksy had it right:
People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you're not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you. You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity. Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It's yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head. You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don't owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don't even start asking for theirs.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Every time they make blocking ads harder, more people give up and live with it than those who leave or find a way around it. As much as I wish that wasn't the case, it unfortunately is.
load more comments
(2 replies)
There will be a script to block their recognition just as there is a ton of scripts to work about other anti-adblocks. You could always go watch a video in incognito and just dont use your account.
Ultimatively this will lead to less interaction on the platform, their ads are so penetrant that you can't even watch anything properly anymore, so more people will adblock -> get banned -> not interract anymore
I guess 2023 is the year of enshittification.
The natural next place for people to go to once they can't block ads on YouTube's website is to go to services that exploit the API to serve free content (NewPipe, Invidious, youtube-dl, etc.). If that happens at a large scale, YouTube might shut off its API just like Reddit did and we'll end up in scenario where creators are forced to move to Peertube, and, given how costly hosting is for video streaming, it could be much worse than Reddit->Lemmy+KBin or Twitter->Mastodon. Then again, YouTube has survived enshittiffication for a long time, so we'll have to wait and see.
The vast majority of people that watch youtube, are most likely not using an ad block and won't be affected by this at all. Just like the vast majority of reddit users use the official app, and the vast majority of people on twitter stayed.
It will take a lot more than this to make something else the next big thing. Just like lemmy is nowhere near as popular as reddit, mastadon is nowhere near as popular as twitter. Yes those of us technical enough or that care enough will use an ad block or similar, but we are in the minority, and always will be.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The apps you mentioned are scraping or pretending to be the official app.
The official API doesn't have public methods to build an alternative third party player .
The only way YouTube can stop those apps (beside blackmailing devs with legal letters) is to shut down both their own website and their own app
They can ban google accounts of people who use those apps though. I can see them doing it.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I've been using ad blockers since I was on dial-up, I'm not going to stop using them now. If youtube blocks me, I will get my videos elsewhere. There's too much crap on youtube to sift through to find what you're looking for now anyways.
I'd be fine paying Google for YouTube Premium if I could use it without being logged in. I'd take an access key for anonymous ad-free viewing for $20 a month. But Google is never going to offer that because the data-harvesting is the whole point of YouTube to them. Google is a data-slurping company with an advertising division that dabbles in video, search and phones as side hustles.
In any case, if they really do crack down on adblockers, there are always other methods of watching their videos ad-free, and if I really like a creator, I'll subscribe to their Patreon or watch them on Nebula.
Stop showing 3-minute long k-pop music videos. Like, why is that even an ad? Do they think I am suddenly going to start listening to k-pop or something?
Also, stop showing gross medical stuff, like this is a cure for your foot fungus or look how much earwax is in this persons ear. Just the other day there was an ad about not being able to get an erection. I tried to report, it but I could not see where to do it. But it was pretty inappropriate.
I get ads on my iPhone and always skip them, so this will not really affect me, especially since I mostly use freetube on the desktop.
I wonder if this would affect ReVanced. YouTube and google suck so bad. Also I hope people discover ReVanced because of this regardless lol but I still hope its not affected
I pray we get a Youtube competitor too, because Google has no incentive to change. We've needed one a while.
Depending on what you're watching, https://nebula.tv/ might be a very good alternative for thought-provoking content.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'm worried the sucsess Netflix has had forcing people to stop password sharing is emboldening companies to perform policies such as this :(
load more comments
(1 replies)
I use vinegar on iOS, which exchanges the youtube player with a html5 play, at least in safari. No ads there
Let them test, I will just use container(so they can't track my account). And if ad block not working, I will just not watch that video. And eventually move away from YouTube if it's annoying.
If the adds were bareable it would be different, but no.
On the plus side this should really help with my youtube addiction
I wonder if this will affect Revanced users.
Bad news for me, I use youtube a lot with an adblocker and it's essentially ad-free. It's going to be a bad day for me when they start cracking down. It doesn't surprise me, but it's a bummer.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Good news to everyone! We've wanted an alternative to YouTube for a long time. Now it looks like Google that next big step in forcing alternative platforms to rise in it's place. I'm an avid user of YouTube, but not a snowball's chance in hell will I buy Premium when they are trying to shove it down my throat like that. That's a very good way to get people to NOT buy something but for some reason companies don't seem to understand.
Gabe Newell said it best: "We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem." - Piracy was down and streaming subscriptions were up when Netflix first came about due to the ease/convenience of it, but piracy is seeing a return due to the mishandling and misconception of companies about how to gain profit through improved services vs increased pricing/poor performance.
The reason I bring this up is because YouTube, like many companies, thinks they're "solving" the issue of adblocking by force-feeding this kind of bullshit to the masses, but all they're doing is forcing more people to turn to alternatives instead.
view more: next ›