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!
I see a lot of people saying "but that's how creators get paid".
Listen: I didn't put ads on my video. YouTube did. I can't take them off and I don't see a cent from them. Block away.
Except they don't. They get demonetization from literally breathing from Google who treats them like shit, so it's best to donate to their patreons anyway.
Their demonetization "policy" or lack thereof is a major reason why I block ads. I don't believe that Alphabet operates in good faith in this matter.
The RIAA and MPAA are the driving force behind the copystrike behavior. I do think Alphabet has the resources and standing to resist and battle it in court, but that's clearly not their business model. Alphabet is not invested in protecting content generators, only in what metrics they can sell to ad agencies.
It's not a copyright problem. You get demonitized for saying "suicide" for example. They want an artificial happy place where no bad things happen and we can all have fun watching ads forever.
… and rape and sexual assault and pedophile… some videos (like on cults) are really weird to watch cus so many words are bleeped out.
That's not even always the issue though - like recently Veritasium had an ancient video demonitized for mentioning that the subject of the video committed suicide, so now their most recent video is a censored re-upload of it. They include a new segment talking about the frustrating demonitization scheme Youtube has.
Alphabet doesn't have to battle it.
If they just had copyright owners use the DMCA process, creators could counterclaim illegitimate takedowns and Google would have no liability for leaving the content up as proscribed by the claim process.
They choose to do their far more aggressive alternate system instead. It's not out of any obligation or legal exposure.
Those aren’t this only things that cause you to be demonetised though. Having the wrong opinion is enough.
And not the usual "wrong opinion". Some platforms demonetise you for the wrong opinion "hitler had the right idea" but youtube demonetises you for the wrong opinion "right to repair"
In the words of TomSka: "Ayy it's Youtube. We're going to demonetize and age restrict this video." "WHY?!" "Ohoho we ain't gonna tell you. But don't do it again."
I have so little sympathy for Google.
Next step from Google will be to make creators that have Patreon set up be ineligible for ad revenue or ban linking/mentioning Patreon outright.
Not even, though. Practically all the YouTube "creators" these days have [this part of the video is brought to you by scandanavian interwebz to keep out teh hax0rs] sponsored segments that are [Have you shaved your fuckin' nutsack lately bro? Check out this ball hair trimmer from clipyerjunk dot com] littered throughout [zzzzzzzzzip … ^reecrootah ] their videos.
That being said, some of them at least put effort into finding and vetting content-relevant sponsors that can actually be helpful. I can kinda just barely tolerate those.
I can strongly recommend the SponsorBlock extention (also available in revanched).
I run a private invidious instance
Oh sheeeit! I used revanced on Android, but I had no idea there was also a Firefox extension for that. Thanks!
I see a lot of people saying "but that's how creators get paid"
And they're not wrong. But they put themselves in this position when they uploaded their videos to servers owned by one of the worst corporations in the world, with massive privacy implications, and no alternatives.
I watch them on other platforms when they make it available.
Creators are victims here too. For most of them YouTube was a very different place when they were beginning their careers on the platform.
Not that it changes your point, I just feel it's important to keep in mind that the process of "Enshittification" sucks for everyone (well, except shareholders).
Creators are victims here too.
Eeeeh that’s wildly arguable. It costs marginally $0 for a creator to upload their content to some other platform besides (not instead of) Youtube. If they don’t, and then they complain that people don’t Monetize Them, to me it feels like they are trying to, in ethical terms, make bystanders feel guilty that they (creators) are whoring out in public.
Their content has better reach on Youtube, though. And has a better comment section which would be relevant to the video (which Oddysee has a problem with)
Better comment section? Youtube is basically an incel / right-wing / flatearther comment pile.
In my experience Odyssey has that too, even on unrelated videos, and they’re often liked for some reason. Atleast on Youtube you see those comments only on newest
They are wrong. Most creators don't get paid from ads.
But it wasn't always that way. Creators had to survive multiple crises as Youtube made sudden changes that impacted their livelihoods.
Those that survived rely on merch, patronage platforms, paid promotions, and promoting their content on other paid platforms.
id actually love to see the breakdown of channels with content by subscriber count/youtube partnership status. I suspect a very large percentage will be non monetised. speaking from experience it either takes a shitload of work to get the ability to earn literally a few dollars or you somehow get lucky with a "viral" hit. even people in my niche the "big ones" make maybe a couple hundred bucks a year in ad revenue
…yes? They do.
No, they don't. Only a very small percentage of the videos on Youtube end up making any money for the creators.
its why even with ads they use sponsers
That's because only a very small percentage of creators get enough views to make tangible amounts of money…probably the same ones you actually watch.
I think you need 1000 subscribers to be able to monetize your videos. That's not an issue for the well known youtubers but the vast majority of them don't make a penny.
Also, you watching hours of ads makes few cents for the content creator. By donating one dollar directly they've already made more than they ever would from ads.
Yeah, Nebula is an alternative that's trying to grow. Think it's creator owned too which is nice. I haven't made the switch yet, but if I wanted to support creators directly I'd choose Nebula over YouTube. And if I could, I'd send money straight to them via Patreon or PayPal or other.
I mean I have >200 subscriptions so that would get expensive quickly.
I think that's how some creators do get paid. Large enough channels will get some form of revenue sharing from YouTube. That's why when a video is demonetised the creators get very upset. As is when YT does some fuckery with their algorithms and their views plummet.
Mind, the rates keep getting worse, from what I hear. Hence more and more pateron and in-video promos, it's a better and more stable source of income.
I'm sure some do, but I also don't hang out to watch "10 most fatal crashes (#2 will amaze you)" and "here's a 10-minute SEO-optimized video to tell you something that would otherwise take 20 seconds to read" videos, which are probably typical "creators".
Not to mention a majority of those channels are content/ad farms that probably deserve to die anyway. AKA you should block their ads or better yet avoid watching them entirely because they are leeching off the platform and hurting legitimate creators because those channels are run by companies who pump out highly produced videos faster than any legitimate creator could to rake in money from ads and sponsorships, their videos are also often filled with disinformation.
I'm talking about channels like TroomTroom, 5 minute crafts, etc. but there are also others out there centered around subjects outside of DIY.
The criteria for getting monetized really aren't that big. They don't have to be that large, and most small to medium sized channels will usually make more from direct sponsors and supporters. But also, those are the creators working on the thinnest margins, and they definitely feel the loss of the YouTube ad money.
But the bigger issue is that deminitized videos just don't get promoted as heavily. And if you have multiple videos deminitized, you can get your whole channel deminitized.
I have a note in the description of every video that say “seeing ads on my videos? Use ublock origin!”
Genuine question:
Do you host your content on other platforms (like lbry/odysee) as well?
Use adblock, then work an extra 3 minutes and donate your salary to the creator.
Even with videos I enjoy from channels I really like, I block all ads … and if they have a 30 second spot in their video to plug some product or service, I fast forward it to skip their personalized ad spot.
I don’t want ads … if I want to give you money, I’ll give you money because I like you or the things you do or the things you make … not because of some dumb product that you think makes you look good.
If I like a channel or personality or artist or singer or someone just makes me laugh … I send a dollar, a fiver or even a ten depending on how good it was.
If everyone did that, no one who makes a video would care about ads.
To add, you have to become a partner before ever seeing a penny, which means you’ve fronted all the start up costs.
Blah blah blah blah.
I don’t care who does and who doesn’t get paid, and I’ll come up with every excuse to ignore that pesky creator income.
The mental hoops you all go through is insane. It’s on par with Trumpers, just less damaging.
You think I’m jumping through mental hoops for telling people to use an ad blocker?
Alternatively, some folks can also try Freetube for an ad free youtube experience as a desktop app
I've been telling people I use libretube on my PC, but freetube is actually what I use (I'm dumb). It's dope. Plus if you use the libredirect add on for Firefox, YouTube links just automatically open up the video on freetube after adjusting the add on's settings of course.
didn't know libredirect could redirect to Freetube, I've just been having mine go to an Invidious Instance… I'll have to look into this.
As much as I’d love to use it, I can’t until each profile has its own “watch later” playlist. Afaik it puts everything into one playlist. And why do I need a profile with all subscriptions, that’s why profiles exist, to not have all in one. I appreciate the work, but it’s not there yet for me
Not sure what site that is you've linked, but the official site seems to be this one: https://freetubeapp.io/
It works perfectly with Libredirect. Thank you!
It's the flathub repo, which is also listed on their official website! But your link is valid too
That's the link to the official FreeTube Flatpak. More generally, the linked site, Flathub, is the largest source of Flatpak applications. If you click through the .io site, you'll land on the Flathub page if you look for the Flatpak.
I actually switched from the .deb to the Flatpak just this afternoon so I can do updates with my package manager. The .deb version "phones home" (you have to enable it I think) every time it starts up to check for updates, but Discover (my package manager) fetches updates for Flatpak apps along with everything else. It's basically been the same experience as the .deb so far.
Thanks, I have no idea what you're talking about though as I'm on Windows :)
Briefly: My comment was basically a remark that the way FreeTube works is independent of how it is installed.
A very vaguely similar idea for Windows would be to compare the installed edition (usually distributed as an .exe) versus the portable edition (zip or 7z, i.e. an archive). For FreeTube there's probably no difference, but in general, Windows programs break when made portable, so "portable editions" need to be tested separately.
Probably not important for a Windows user, but it's something a Linux user might want to know. 😀
Thanks for the explanation!
Most Linux distros have an app store AKA "package manager" to manage software.
Flathub is the main repository where updates are sent.
snazzy app, thanks!
And for those of you on Android, there's always SmartTubeNext and NewPipe.
If you're on Android I'm actually going to recommend a new app from Futo called GrayJay. It's cross-platform so you can watch videos from YouTube, Twitch, PeerTube, Rumble, Kick, etc. all from a single app.
Thank you! I didn't know they also made an app that does this. For anyone looking for the link it's the following: https://grayjay.app/
I'd also recommend looking into their other projects such as their Android voice input app: https://voiceinput.futo.org/
Or other projects: https://futo.org/projects/
And/or with SponsorBlock if you don't care about sending that data to the open APIs. It's pretty useful if some channels you watch have a lot of sponsors, self promotions, etc.
NewPipe+SponsorBlock is a fantastic fork that's pretty awesome.
Can I watch livestreams in freetube?
Yes
I've been using it on Linux and it's pretty nifty.
The only right answer.
I was worried we'd be seeing waves of this kind of anti-user aggression from large websites. My hypothesis is that twitter is running an active experiment to see just how user-unfriendly you can make something with an established userbase / what level of profitability corresponds with what level of fuckiness.
YouTube n' friends have been watching from the sidelines and picking their own jaw up off the floor after seeing just how much the average user will bend over and take.
…which all makes me absolutely LOVE to see communities like this. Yo ho, motherfuckers!
It's all about boiling the frog slowly. People will put up with almost anything if it creeps up on them slowly enough, and these companies know it, as do authoritarian governments. We always say we'll kick up a stink if the next step happens, but then hardly anyone else does, so we stay quiet too. And this happens again and again.
That's the scary part about Twitter.
Most companies turn the burn up slowly. Musk took one look at the frogs, then turned the stove up to max, hired a technician to hold a welding torch up to the base of the pot, hired a chemist find an additive for the water to increase its boiling point and heat retention, pissed in the pot, and is actively pouring gasoline all over the kitchen with one hand while flipping the frogs off with the other.
And the frogs are just taking it.
What message does that send to YouTube?
What message does that send to YouTube?
Oh fuck off!
Firefox read mode works
I fucking love Inspect -> Delete Node. I shouldn’t have to use it but it’s a life saver sometimes.
To be fair, I don't think much has changed for small time twitter users.
He turned off the like and retweet numbers. He filled everyone's feed with ads that don't say ads. He bans everyone he disagrees with about anything, as soon as he notices them.
It also hasn't changed much for the porn/adult content side, though a lot of those users are slowly migrating to other places, especially bsky.
Well… The government's coming for those people, trying to scan everyone's face before they can view anything.
twitter's not meant to be an experiment. Musk is just really stupid. But other platforms are learning from it anyway
I wonder if long ads across all videos while they scroll content will make the kids of non tech savvy parents get fed up and turn to other entertainment (games, streaming… books?). I'm sure a not insignificant portion of yt views are tablet addicted children mindlessly scrolling all day, so I'll be curious if there'll be any drop in traffic from this.
I mean, GI Joe and He-Man had a lot of ads back in the day, but not nearly to the extent yt does.
GI Joe and He-man were ads, but they were enjoyable ads. Advertising has gone from a masterful creative craft, to an industry where they just shove the cheapest shit they can produce in front of your face as many times as possible, while loudly screaming their name. It's pretty pathetic that it still works.
Yo dude, Facebook has been doing this for a decade or more. They intentionally break parts of their website and then track how often someone will come back and try to use it, assuming they ever left in the first place. Now they're about 99% absolute dog shit, and people still go there. It's actually kind of amazing.
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.
The pessimist in me says to look out for a bill authored by Google to make adblocking illegal.
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?
The pessimist in me says to look out for a bill authored by Google to make adblocking illegal.
"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."
I would absolutely love to see a revitalization on proxy software specifically designed to eliminate ads and tracking.
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.
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.
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.
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.”
They're both right.
Emphasis on #4 here - the anti-adblock will trigger if it detects any subpar adblocker, including e.g. Brave Browser's "Shields" thing (even if you also use uBlock Origin). Helped a friend figure this out lately and found out they were running 3 adblockers and Brave Browser. Some people are truly special.
Definitely, and note that (for me anyway) I didn't have to disable any of my other extensions. I think they are referring mainly to adblocking extensions in that step.
Does he use two condoms at the same time to avoid pregnancies? Same principle.
I use three so the middle one doesn't get dirty.
Reduce, reuse, recycle!
Front to back, back to front, inside out, then back to front and front to back again.
It's more like using the pill and a condom. Different ad blockers can block different sets of ads.
Two- with hot sauce in the middle, so you know which one broke.
#4 says "all" other extensions. Does it really mean all? Password managers, gui shit, source citation extensions?
That's too figure out which extension is causing an issue. If everything works right then you have nothing to worry about.
If things do not work, the easiest is to get to a working state (latest version, removing any custom filters, disabling extensions) then once confirming that it works, gradually enabling things back until you can identify the offender.
What sucks about these measures (and others) is that they usually do a decent job of subverting the adblocker AdNauseam, which clicks on ads in addition to blocking them.
This forces me to us uBlock Origin, ironically causes the people who implement these countermeasures to make less money off of my visits.
I thought Brave Shields was just repackaged uBlock Origin?
Not as far as I know, but I don't have much experience with Brave Browser. They probably use the same ad-filtering lists on the backend but their implementation is probably not identical. I know that for this situation in particular, Brave Shields was causing Youtube to act up but Ublock Origin wasn't (might be fixed at this point in time).
Ah thanks for clearing that up, I don't rember where I got this misconception
Lol That's awesome, less of a workaround and more of a "we fixed it already, but whatever you're using probably hasn't caught up yet".
Alternative solution: Since YouTube disabled all ads in Russia, you can just use russian vpn/proxy for the most effective YouTube adblocking possible.
Thank god we have people working tirelessly to prevent Google’s greed
While I'm thankful for the team at uBlock Origin, I still wouldn't call it greedy that a company that provides a quite excellent free video streaming platform, would also like to make a little profit from it too or at the very least to cover the expenses.
They already do make more than "a little profit" from YouTube. The shareholders demand infinite growth tho, so Google has to nickle and dime their users for even more profit. The bane of any publicly traded company.
more than "a little profit"
Can we be sure about that? YT is owned by Alphabet, a publicly traded company. However, they have chosen not to disclose the financial statements of YT, thus not telling investors about profits or losses. Now think about it: if you had a cash cow that was making you a fortune, wouldn't you want to disclose that to investors, make it public, so that your company (and the stock you own in it) is worth more? And yet they don't do that, which makes me (and Louis Rossman apparently) think that YT is likely not as profitable as we may think, if it even turns a profit. The ad business, especially now, is not doing well, which coincides with YT's crackdown on ad blocking. Why would that be? Probably because they are at a loss rn, and are truing to make that back by forcing users to watch ads.
Youtube may be making a loss, but Google is not and they are better off keeping users in their ecosystem. If there was a viable alternative, I doubt this would be happening. There isn't though, and with no competition anymore they're free to capitalize and attempt to make as much profit as possible.
That's why I was going through my list of Youtubers I've subscribed to the other day. So basically, many of them are on Odyssey or PeerTube, and some have their own podcasts and blogs, so I'll be able to keep up with most of the creators I follow on YT, and the work they do.
I have been using YouTube almost since the day one. I've watched tens of thousands of hours of free content, and I've not watched a single ad. If their every user was like me, then how could they make any profit from it? Now the profit comes from the people that do watch those ads aswell as people who pay for premium. What does that make me then? A freerider.
You're still adding views to the video and engage by liking which is good for the influence metrics. Google uses that to ask for higher prices to show ads on that video. Well, they give the influence metrics to advertisers and they have to decide themselves how much showing an ad on this video would be worth for them. It's like an instant auction, there is no fixed price. So, while you are freeriding, the compensation of you not seeing ads is mainly covered by advertisers.
To be clear, advertisers are not paying more because they pay Google for an ad that is blocked (that's not happening), they pay more because Google uses your views to tell advertisers that this video is a good investment.
You adding views to some random video absolutely does not offset the cost of your usage through ads. Ads can make a surprising amount of money for a platform (upwards of 4 or 5 dollars a month per free user). Based on YouTube removing premium Lite, I think it's actually very safe to assume that the consumption of free users is around that, so approximately $7 per month on average. Do you honestly think this would offset that cost in any universe?
It's okay to want stuff for free. Just make sure you fully understand the consequences and don't try to play it off like you're the good guy.
It's not the advertising that's the problem, it's the tracking and surveillance that comes with it. Until they get rid of that, uBlock Origin is a necessary security measure.
To me it is the advertising that is the problem. Without ads, there's no need for collecting user data either. Even if it's non-targeted ads, that would still make the advertisers the customer, not the people watching those videos. This incentivizes them to optimize the platform to please the advertisers, not the users, resulting in a worse service.
I understand why many people feel like the option to have non-targeted ads instead of monthly fee seems tempting, but in my opinion this doesn't solve the root of the problem, which is the ads-based bussines model. It's what makes everything go to shit.
Ad based models aren't great, but the alternative is subscription based. And we know exactly what the internet feels about that. Look at the amount of people here in this thread given that exact choice and refusing to pay
Yeah but those same people are already paying for Spotify, Netflix, Disney+ and so on. I'm not some bussines genious, so I'm obviously talking out of my ass, but I'd imagine if YouTube had switched to a affordable subscribtion model like 5 years ago, today we'd have a much better platform. I don't think it's so much the subscribtion model itself that's the issue, but the transition from a free platform to paid one.
Along with what the other comment says, it's also how intrusive it is. If it was in-line ads or banner ads or something that'd be one thing. It's constant ads that stop videos though. Even short videos I feel like you get multiple ad breaks. It's horrible.
the nature of the web is that you are sent information and a suggestion of how to render it. The user is free to view as little or as much of that content as they decide.
"ad blockers arent allowed on youtube" is an insane statement. ad blockers arent on youtube. you are just being selective about which content you render.
it is greedy to try and rewrite the fundamental workings of the web because you feel entitled to profit.
Okay, let's get rid of all ads and move to subscriptions across the entire internet. What a fantastic idea.
Donations work too.
Donations don't work by themselves. Pretty much ever.
Original YouTube, before Google, was one of many Video streaming websites – living alongside competitors such as Dailymotion, Vimeo… And Google video. Those guys, yes, would've deserved this sort of compassion.
Google's YouTube is an evil entity that bruteforced itself into a de facto monopoly, routinely changes the rules for content creators that have built the platform and often depend on it for their living, allows a predatory system of copyright trolls to thrive at the expense of the creators, frequently allows creators to be robbed of their channel and income by arbitrary strikes while being completely deaf to requests for help, leverages Google's power to crush potential competitors, influence public opinion, stifle free speech… I could go on. Sympathy for such an entity, quite frankly, for me, is a form of Stockholm syndrome.
Whether you like their actions or not, they still have bills to pay
you excluded an important piece - YT has been updating their script (idk terminology) several times a day. so the instructions may not work. see the below -
I followed the 4 steps, but I'm still experiencing issues The latest fix for anti-adblock was made on Oct 12, 2023 and currently corresponds to ID cc87ee3e *.
- The ID mentioned above refers to YouTube's latest anti-adblock script. You can monitor it via this link: https://pastefy.app/G1Txv5su/raw (top to bottom = oldest to newest). This means that the current fix is matched with the script with corresponding ID.
For example, in https://www.youtube.com/s/desktop/c97476a7/jsbin/desktop_polymer_enable_wil_icons.vflset/desktop_polymer_enable_wil_icons.js, the c97476a7 part is the ID.
If the latest ID (the last line) does NOT match the current one written above, it means YT has updated it recently and you may encounter anti-adblock again. PLEASE DO NOT REPORT IN THIS CASE.
If the ID does match and you still get anti-adblock, kindly repeat the 4 steps above. Thank you.
Uninstalling + reinstalling uBO, then force updating all your filter lists like in step #3 may also help.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
It's okay little buddy, you tried your best.
I think this bot is on Crack
The Adblock Wars continues…
For those using Safari, a simple custom browser stylesheet with a few styles is all you need, and is undetectable, as anti-adblock works with javascript, so no pesky “Why you blocking the ads? Mimimimimi…”
Go on… As an avid non-apple\mac household I would install safari pretty quickly just to watch ad-less YouTube.
I think this should work with any browser that allows you to apply a custom user stylesheet. This used to be normal in the past, but Chrome took it away, and I don’t know if Firefox still allows it. Copied from a reply I put in another post:
Ok, do this: download this stylesheet: http://damianvila.com/external/fuckyoutube/hider.css Save it somewhere where you can find it easily. Open Safari and go to Safari > Settings > Advanced. In the "Style sheet" dropdown, select "Other" and navigate to the style sheet. For maximum effect, do this while you have YouTube open… :D
The stylesheet is organized in a way that you can comment/uncomment blocks to customize what you want/don't want to see on YouTube. Right now it has my preferences, but if you want to keep something, or hide something I had viewable, just comment/uncomment as you wish. The ads part is clearly marked, and the rest is menu things and navigation elements (I don't need most of those). I also hate Shorts with a passion, so I hide those too. Keep in mind that this can only be used in the desktop version. It doesn't work for mobile or any of the apps. Sadly, you'll have to suffer with the shitty ads there. But at least, you can have a decent experience while watching on your Mac. And since it's a user stylesheet, and has no Javascript whatsoever, YT has no way ob detecting or blocking it, so they can do nothing (other than changing the names of the titles, but that is easily fixed).
Have fun.
P.S: you'll notice that sometimes, where there should be an ad, you'll see like a blink in the video. Don't worry, it's normal. The video will continue without problems, and you won't see the ad.
P.S.2: This stylesheet sometimes blocks shitty Google (or other sites) pages (because people are assholes and put things there that shouldn't be there). If you happen to find yourself in this situation (a page that is suspiciously blank, or don't allow to scroll, or behaves oddly) you can temporarily change the sylesheet to "None Selected", and see if the problem is fixed. When you're finished, remember to switch back to the stylesheet, or you'll have a shock when you go to YouTube… XDDDDD
Genuine question, why be avid anti-apple? I’m a mac fan, but I still use Linux and windows in my daily life. I’be never understood the anti-mac hate
Not OP, but genuine answer: because I loathe being forced into their way of doing things. Every little thing on the Mac seems engineered with an "our way or the highway" mentality, that leaves no room for other (frequently, better) ways of achieving anything.
Adding to that, window/task management is an absolute nightmare (things that have worked certain ways basically since System 6 on monochrome Mac Classic machines, and haven't improved), and despite all claims to the contrary, its BSD-based underpinnings are just different enough to Linux's GNU toolset to make supposed compatibility (or the purported "develop on Mac, deploy on Linux" workflow) a gross misadventure.
I just find the experience frustrating, unpleasant, and always walk away from a Mac feeling irritated.
(For context: > 20 year exclusively Linux user. While it's definitely not always been a smooth ride, I seldom feel like I'm fighting against the computer to get it to do what I want, which is distinctly not my experience with Apple products)
Also if you want an "our way or the highway" attitude you can buy a PC, install a gnome distro, and not pay like 1000 bucks more for 16G more RAM that you won't be able to use in another machine because Apple locks everything down for reasons that definitely don't involve unadulterated greed.
Just a quick list.
- Apple actively makes device designs more difficult to repair. Everything is either glued or soldered together.
- They purposely make it more difficult to get tools and parts. Some tools are proprietary.
- Performance per dollar is terrible. The better, slightly more repairable machines cost a ton of money. Spend the same amount of money on a regular PC and you would have a beast of a machine.
- Apple sues and/or attacks anyone who tries to help people repair their devices.
- They purposely push out OS changes that make older devices less usable.
That's not even including the treatment of employees or condition of the factories where Apple devices are built. I don't know as much about that. But I can definitely comment on the above after managing iPads and Macbooks in a corporate environment.
Apple is a snobby company with terrible overpriced repair. All of their products are heavily locked down wildly expensive milled aluminium.
Sure the new m1 chip is good but the amount of vendor lock in is too much and of course mac OS is a trash bsd distro. TLDR: overpriced products, trashy company.
Thanks. Their repair pricing is obnoxious, I’ll give you that, but their pricing model really isn’t ridiculous otherwise. For the performance you get it’s great. I’m willing to bet most companies source their alumni from the same place, but my only genuine issue is that MacOS is a great piece of software. I still like Catalina/Mojave myself, but the newer variations are still good. Do you have specific gripes with the OS?
tbh, I've only had limited experience with MacOS, and it wasn't very great (compared to my Linux setup), and afaik this is the general consensus among technically inclined people.
About the pricing model, it's ridiculous is everyway, not just for repairs. Like, you can get a laptop/PC with almost double the spec compared to what apple has to offer at that price.
All this is said without considering the fact that apple stuff costs almost twice the price in my country (India).
but their pricing model really isn’t ridiculous otherwise.
I mean, $1600 for a phone is ridiculous. I’ve had iPhones for the past 12 years, but it never even crossed my mind to buy the latest model. It’s just speculation at that point.
Personally, I don't like the way Apple does business. Primarily, that you aren't just buying the product, you're buying into their ecosystem. Almost everything apple does well only realistically works of you stay confined to their stuff. And you're fucked if you wanted compatibility with older software. Remember when Apple just decided 32 bit was dead to them?
And while their hardware is pretty good, it costs wayyyyy too much. I just got a new pc with the top end amd cpu and an rtx 4090, and it cost under half what a Mac pro costs. I seriously doubt their ARM desktop chips are really that much better. Maybe if I were to buy a Mac and use it the rest of my life without upgrades, the efficiency of using an ARM cpu would save me the difference on electricity?
Just curious, how many years have you used Macs?
I got my first mac 7 years ago, the 2017 macbook air. I put that lovely machine through its paces, even got it to run Destiny 2 and gta 5 at one point. Until last year I was issued a work laptop and it’s windows. I have a windows desktop at home, but Mac just works with my slightly chaotic flow better.
Okay, this context helps. I think a lot of people who hate apple do so blindly but also a lot of people who hate apple have decades of reasons piling up. I started in the former camp, having a general distaste for Macs because they were pretty intentionally not interoperable with other computers. When I discovered they had become much less like that in the OSX era (early 2000s), I got really really fond of the OS. Since those days, they've done quite a lot of annoying and shitty things to the Mac os, but more importantly, their mobile products are designed very much to prevent interoperability. It's the business model. Pretend every other product sucks and yours is best, but you really just worked extra to prevent smooth operation with other products.
Apple is on my shit list these days since most of their decisions are corporate asshole ones, designed to make them profit at the expense of users or even society at large. They likely would've never even adopted usb-c on their mobile devices had the EU not forced them. They're a pretty garbage company. I say this fully acknowledging that Mac os is still pretty good despite the bonehead decisions. I do often feel that they keep ruining it slowly though.
They are doing same stuff as the other companies, but are better at PR.
If you use their products you are even more locked down, but for some reason that's more acceptable than on pc. I think many apple fans are wearing rosy tinted glasses and don't notice any of that for some reason.
For example there was a big deal recently by Google adding attestation mechanism that likely will be used to prevent ad blockers blocking ads. Safari already has this implemented.
Also got the damned pop up a few hours ago myself. Luckily all that it seems to do is cause the pop up. Once I clicked close it would start playing.
YouTube really is trying to generate competition fast as possible with all the nonsense over the past couple years. Sure. Ads a big revenue. But forcing people to watch them will not work. People will leave and go elsewhere or at least break it and use ads anyway.
They're just being dicks considering how tiny the Firefox userbase is
I fully expect to have to be fingeprinted, DNA tested and retinal scanned to access cOnTenT in a year or two
They already requested my ID a couple of years ago, because for some reason they classified some RDR2 channel I was watching to be 18+. I literally blacked out EVERYTHING besides my name and date of birth and they accepted it lol.
I watch on duckduckgo video search results (no ads, fully private) or yt-dlp if I want to watch it again later.
Good to have the ad-block instructions for using the actual YouTube site.
Also thanks other commenters for recommendations of freetube and futo, reminders of pipe. Will try em out soon!
btw its not actually fully private when watching them from DuckDuckGo, they give a warning that the video provider can still track you when watching from ddg. Likely much less, but they still have their ways
Interesting to know that it doesn't have ads from there though
SponserBlock and Return YouTube Dislike don’t cause any issues, btw
I (had) YouTube Premium and despite that I'm now shadowbanned on YouTube for what I can only assume is using Return Dislike, uBlock and/or Enhancer. I've never made a single comment that would warrant a ban so I have no other explanation but that Google decided to screw over a paying customer just because I use add ons.
Some ips are shadowbanned, if you are using a VPN/proxy it might be the reason.
It's unfortunately my account that's shadowbanned. Kinda moot at this point because fuck Google regardless. Just seems absurd to me (but not surprising) that they would shadow ban a paying customer.
I've been using everything you mentioned for months and my videos still get in the algorithms, and my comments can be seen.
