• morgan423@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Honestly, Google did this to themselves with not properly vetting the advertisers that they sell space to, and with oversaturation of ads.

    If they’d have stopped granting ad space to scammers and malware spreaders, and if they’d have stopped adding advertisements at the line most people find tolerable (which seems to be a single ad between videos… not multiple at a time, and certainly no mid-rolls), they wouldn’t have triggered quite the level of ad blocking that they did.

    I see this “problem” that they have as being entirely of their own making.

  • baltakatei@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    Next logical step is to modify the uploaded video itself to contain ads around the video frame or on automatically detected clear surfaces in the video.

    • TDCN@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I guess it’s time to just move on with your life if it comes to this

  • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I didn’t have ublock installed on my machines. I’d removed it a year ago because it was breaking sites and my pihole does a pretty good job, but I kept getting pop ups from sites about “turning off my adblocker”. I didn’t have an adblocker running. I was using vanilla firefox. I got so irritated, I looked up how to get rid of those messages and everything pointed me to ublock.

    So, shout out to thinkgeek for reminding me what its like to browse the web without a ton of ads. If it wasn’t for your annoying popup about my non-existent adblocker, I would never have installed an adblocker.

    Oh, and I hadn’t realized how awful youtube became over the last year or so with the ads. I was just dealing with it like an asshole. When I put ublock back on, my enjoyment of youtube shot up!

    I was considering paying for premium too because I want to normalize paying for content and supporting things I like on the web. But I was struggling with the decision because usually you either pay with your data or pay with money. In this case I know I’d be doing both since Google will gladly take my money and also hoover up my data. Then they jacked the rates up to $14 a month…and now I have ublock installed again.

    Its still a problem with the apps on my phone and appletv’s though. If they made it $4.99/mo I’d probably fork it over but $14 is more than my other streaming services and they create their own content. Youtube just hosts content.

    Edit: how-to geek not thinkgeek. I think they went out of business.

  • shirro@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Technology circumvention and copyright infringement are just about the only power consumers have against the near monopolies and cartel like behavior from the tech/media industry since our government regulators have been neutered.

    I am grandfathered into a family Premium plan from the old Youtube Red days. The price is close to doubling come April. In the absence of competition or government intervention to punish anti-compeitive, anti-consumer behaviour I will be relying on ad-blocking and other circumvention measures next year. I am willing to pay a fair price but costs of living have gone up a lot while incomes for regular people are stagnant. The executives running these companies are completely disconnected from reality.

  • Zacryon@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    There’s also the option of biting the bullet and paying for YouTube Premium.

    No. Never. I’d rather stop using YT at all than giving in to coerced user-tracking.

  • Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I love that all the centralized social media networks are scrambling to become shitty for profits right around the time users are realizing that they don’t need centralized servers to host their user-generated content. Users can take their content wherever they want and let these platforms die.

    • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      This 100%. Look at forums. Back in the early days, there were lots of little independent forums. Sites like Reddit took over because you could easily keep your identity across multiple forums and see the content from all your communities on one page. We gained convenience, but didn’t think too hard about what we were losing or who we were losing it to. Then along came enshittification and we are collectively realizing what we lost. Federation is of course the solution. As I see it, the only missing piece is monetization. Platforms like YouTube make it easy to monetize page views, Twitter / X is doing the same. That’s much harder in the fediverse.

      • Blackhole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Patreon for monification?

        Ads suck. And honestly, if we had less content creators, they’d be fine. There are a lot of absolutely degenerates out there. Let’s cull the herd a bit and let us speak individually with our wallets.

        • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          That’s a fair point. Patreon, or whatever comes next, needs to drastically reduce friction. That by the way is why Amazon is so successful, reducing purchase friction. Right now if you have something that a million people will take for free, and you start to charge just one penny for it, your audience of a million will drop to like 12. Not because people don’t want to spend a penny, but because they don’t want to fill out a form and put in their name address credit card number expiration date security code phone number email address etc. If there was a button they could click that was like ‘instant donate 5 cents’ most people would click that a lot.

          The closest thing I’ve heard to that was a crypto called basic attention token, which aimed to do just that. They are making a big mistake though in that they are only integrating with Brave browser rather than making a universal plug-in. So the idea of a universal solution is still a ways off I guess. But I think to make it zero friction it will have to be crypto based in some way.

  • Blaster M@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Meanwhile, Youtube engineers and uBlock Origin volunteers are in a war of attrition, updating both the website (youtube, to block ublock) and uBlock Origin (the ad blocker, to unblock the ublock blocker) multiple times a day every day

  • Cowars@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Someone please add a vivaldi-like tab tiling feature in Firefox so I can switch to it and leave the chromium cancer away.

  • chakan2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I just wonder how much of Chome’s browser share Google is willing to lose over this.

    • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      In video ads = no relevant ads based on the user. Less relevant ads = less revenue generated for people paying YouTube for hosting those ads. Thus, people would pay less to YouTube to host ads. Thus, less profits for YouTube.

      Plus as another dude said: Sponsorblock.

      • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        There’s no reason they can’t mix relevant ads in the video stream itself. It’s just technically more expensive and complex.

        • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          U could still easily evade this. Here’s why:

          Ad is inserted into stream. Either one of two things happens depending upon the way it is implemented:

          1. The length of the video stream increases as the ad is inserted suddenly. The ad blocker can simply calculate the difference and skip the difference worth of time, thus skipping the ad.

          2. The length of the video doesn’t increase to prevent this. Thus, you get the ad stream overlapping in front of the actual video stream. This would thus kinda be on the frontend, which could easily be blocked.

          3. The ad is inserted in the beginning itself at some random time in the video. Hence, the length of the video doesn’t change suddenly like in scenario one. However, remember that regulations require you to visually indicate that a given piece of media is an ad or not. This is why YouTube ads have “Ad” in a yellow box. This could thus very easily be detected by an adblocker that analyses every frame that the box is present in, and skips that frame. This however, would be a little heavier for the user using the adblocker.

          Trust me lol. There is literally no way you can prevent ad blockers.

          • Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            if the platform decides which and where the ads will run during the video on page load, not during video pIay then I dont see how this could be blocked.

            Anither thing they can do is enforce policy and start deleting/banning accounts blocking ads. I have some stuff on google account. Wouldn’t be fun to have it deleted.

            • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Look at point 3. I explained this could still be skipped due to them having to visually indicate that it was an ad. This visual indication could easily be skipped by the local user.

              As for them deleting accounts that blocked ads, how would they identify if someone blocked ads? Generate a secret key for every ad, that would be returned every time a user watched ads? This could easily be overcome, as an adblocker could simply extract this key and send it back to the server.

              Trust me… If there was a way to block ad blockers, the greedy capitalists would’ve done so a loooong time ago.