I'm sure many of you are already aware that YouTube has been rolling out anti-adblock detection for Chrome users for a few weeks now.
Today, as a long time Firefox user with the fantastic uBlock Origin extension installed, I got my first anti-adblock popup on the platform. Note that this may not happen to you personally for a while, but it is inevitably coming for everyone.
Thankfully, the fine folks at uBlock Origin have already advised a simple workaround (on Reddit, yuck!) which I will duplicate in a simplified form below for your convenience. I have tested it on Firefox and it is working fine for me (so far).
PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW ALL OF THE INSTRUCTIONS IN THIS POST.
Update uBO to the latest version (1.52.0+) . <== The extension itself, for technical improvements. You do this in your browser.
Remove your custom config / reset to defaults. <== This means removing your custom filters (or disabling My filters) and disabling ALL additional lists you've enabled. It might be quicker to make a backup of your config and restore to defaults instead.
Force an update of your Filter Lists. <== This is within the extension. Lists are what determine what's blocked or not. How to update Filter lists: Click 🛡️ uBO's icon > the ⚙ Dashboard button > the Filter lists pane > the 🕘 Purge all caches button > the 🔃 Update now button.
Disable all other extensions AND your browser's built-in blockers. <== No need to uninstall, just disable them. They might interfere with our solutions.
Make sure you follow all 4 points above. If you're seeing the message, it's likely due to your custom config (either additional lists or separate filters in My filters).
Restarting your browser afterwards may help too.
Once you've gotten rid of the issue on default settings, you can slowly start restoring your config (if you really need it). Do it gradually, to easier find out what was causing the issue in the first place. Once you find the culprit, simply skip it in your config.
If you want to use Enhancer for YouTube*, you have to* disable its adblocking*.*
May the force uBlock Origin be with you!
Anyone else remember the first ad-pocalypse?
Like when OG AdBlock was created and there was an all-out race between individual websites and AdBlock?
Then OG AdBlock sold out and allowed "approved" ads to still show.
We are seeing history repeat. The only reason ads survived was due to increasing number of users who weren't using adblock.
Now, with market saturation, Google is starting to fight back.
I would absolutely love to see a revitalization on proxy software specifically designed to eliminate ads and tracking. I haven't looked into this in quite some time but I think we're crossing into this territory now.
The pessimist in me says to look out for a bill authored by Google to make adblocking illegal.
But the optimist in me says "the Internet sees censorship as damage and routes around it."
If adblocking becomes illegal I'm done using the internet.
If adblocking becomes illegal people will still do it (and you should too), some really stupid article tried to claim circumventing Anti-Adblock was illegal under DMCA a while back (interestingly they took it down when people continued to block their ads) and the filter providers did it anyway. Piracy still happens in countries where it's criminalized, ad blocking will continue, though the Quorans (used them as an example because they're the biggest snobs about the law and ethics) and people like them will likely use it less, though it's not like they don't already think it's wrong (some also think it's already illegal).
There will always be a free internet. It just may not be the one currently dominated by corporate datacenters.
I am going back to irc and telnet bbs
JavaScript was a mistake
Without JS, you wouldn't have ad blockers and youtube could just bake their ads on the videos themselves while streaming them. Thinking about it, I don't think it's off the table for them.
changing displayed elements does not need js.
In order to delete an element or replace it based on a list, you definitely need JS. You have no other way to access the DOM.
yes that is what exists in this reality.
The current Google approach is adding attestation to Google Chrome. They claim that it is to stop bots, but it can (and will be, they are slow boiling us) also used to block adblockers.
Anyone who cares about free (as freedom) should stop using chrome and clones and switch to Firefox.
No, thanks. Mozilla is the worst of the open source world. I prefer not to give them market share. Brave works beautifully for me and YouTube may disappear tomorrow and my life wouldn't change a single bit.
Brave the chromium based crypto browser better than Firefox? Mozilla isn't perfect but you're off your rocker if you think that is better.
Boy, I've been a FF user for 20 years before. Don't try to school me, please. And yes, it's actually much better and I enjoy using it.
You keep saying that you were a proponent of FF back in the day, but the fact that you aren't giving credence to the experiences that made you switch lessens your credibility and weakens any persuasion power you might have on people switching from FF to Brave.
It would help your cause to explain what made you switch so others might understand you.
But from your demeanor, it seems like you dgaf about other people. So I guess that's fair.
Brave is based on chromium, which is open-source via Google. Now, I may have this wrong, but my understanding is that the reason why Safari, Chrome, Firefox and Chromium-based browsers are the only browsers still around is because Apple, Google and Mozilla are the only companies with the money to keep up with all the new "standards" and features Google keeps shoving into Chrome. While Chromium may be open-source, if Google pulls the plug then it'll only be a matter of time before the Chromium browsers run out of steam and can no longer keep up. I wouldn't be surprised if that's part of Google's plan. Keep people in the ecosystem by giving them the illusion that they're using a different browser while maintaining control over the browser they use and the ability to force them onto a different browser at any time.
This is all ignoring the fact that Brave is a shitty browser. I can't remember where I read this, but supposedly Brave collects a lot of data on your usage despite advertising itself as a privacy-conscious browser.
FUD and ignorance. Please stop bothering me.
Not a lawyer, but that doesn't sound legally possible. It's like turning off the sound when the ads on TV start, you must have the right to consume the data that has been delivered to you however you desire.
Do you know what the DMCA is?
A user rights violation that caters to enterprises and claims that it protects the creators?
"These brave content creators, who produce such culturally significant shows as 'Ow my balls' and 'Matrix 1999 [full rip]', are being literally murdered by hackers who use adblockers. These pirates use their hacking technology to steal this content and threaten our very way of life. While we regret resorting to legislation, we are left with no choice but to show these thieves the harsh reality of the criminal justice system."
You're in luck because we already have several. Namely Piped and Invidious.
Do regular apps and desktop applications like freetube and newpipe count?
FreeTube uses Invidious proxy (if enabled).
Newpipe uses Piped proxy.
Privoxy is still being actively worked on. Not sure how well it works for YouTube though. I suppose we may see a flurry of activity on that front if they keep pushing this.
They're both right.