- cross-posted to:
- mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
I actually didn’t care when there was an ad in the beginning of the video or what not. It was when I had to start watching multiple ads in the middle of a 10 minute video as well. Like come on, not even broadcast TV is that annoying.
Shorts are such a stupidly blatant way to start showing more ads than content, and they make navigating channels impossible. Hell you can’t even get away from ads in search results with premium.
SponsorBlock addon
The holy trinity: ublock origin, sponsorblock and dearrow. Using all of them makes YT great again.
haven’t heard of dearrow, what does that do?
You know those videos with a crazy thumbnail and title? You know, some stupid idiot BS clickbait nonsense like guy wrestling with a crocodile, but in reality that frame doesn’t even exist anywhere in the video. Oh, and then there’s the big red arrow and a wild title like: A CROCODILE BIT MY HEAD OFF!!!111!!!
Well, dearrow can fix all that. Users can select are more representative frame for the thumbnail and write a better title such as: “collection of random cat videos stolen from other people”. People get to vote on which thumbnail and which title text should be there, while dearrow shows that to the next person. If you care about cat videos, you might click that one. If you’re more interested in crocodile wrestling, you won’t be deceived to click something you don’t want to watch.
Same here. I was listening to a beautiful violin piece being played by a soloist and an ad interrupted it. I would be fine with watching the ad before. I immediately went and watched it elsewhere.
Later, I came back to YouTube for something unrelated and had a message/popup that said ‘tired of being interrupted? Upgrade to premium here!’
They know exactly what they are doing, trying to make it unbearable to use anything other than premium. They can get fucked.
Adding an insane amount of ads is a dark pattern to convince you into joining Youtube Premium. Which is crazy expensive by the way, 13,99 $/month
Premium will eventually show ads too.
Absolutely. Infinite growth demands more and more. Always. Fuck the customer, increase shareholder value this quarter!
“Tired of ads? Upgrade to YouTube Premium PLUS to get rid of all ads!”
Honestly I bought YouTube premium through a VPN to turkey for that price for the entire year. Seems worth it.
I mostly wanted YouTube Music for my bedroom speaker, but if they’re throwing in ad-free YouTube along with it, so be it.
AD Free YouTube is great tbh, it is generally a good experience no matter what device you use then throw in the claim it supports the content creators more seems like win win
Or the knack of starting the add 2 seconds into a guitar solo…
Normal TV is infuriating enough that I can’t be bothered to watch any of that stuff. Watching videos on a computer is just so much nicer. If TV broadcasting stopped tomorrow and everyone around me was in a conspiracy of hiding it from me, it could take me years to find out.
YouTube has been going downhill for many years now, and there have been many incremental steps towards becoming as bad as TV. If they take that final step, I’ll start treating YT the same way I treat TV.
laughs in firefox + uBlock Origin
If I understand correctly, there’s nothing about Firefox that makes ad blockers any harder to detect. What can Firefox and uBlock do to stop Google from blocking adblock users on the site?
That said, I use Firefox and uBlock myself, and I’ve yet to see YouTube stop me from using the site.
They don’t care about Firefox. Chrome is the browser market, they have weakened extensions, they implemented DRM, and here we are.
Coming to you later… “Your browser violates YouTube’s Terms of Service.”
This would become an Anti trust suit I would imagine.
They can just phrase it a little differently and argue semantics in front of a bunch of 70 year olds who don’t know what a browser is in a hearing or two. Maybe a couple campaign contributions through completely legal channels and that’s that. Anti trust enforcement has been falling in the US for decades.
I am cautiously optimistic of that new gal heading the FTC, she’s preparing suits I to Amazon and Google, so we’ll see how that goes
deleted by creator
You could use an extension that changes your user agent but I’m not sure how well that’d work
They have control of Chrome, so they could always implement some kind of API into Chrome to check.
C-C-C-C-Conflict of interest!
Everybody thought this was OK because Chromium is open-source.
Laughs in useragent switch
They’re TRYING, but for now, it would be a user agent extension matter.
It doesn’t matter if YouTube can detect uBlock. The great thing about uBlock is you can just block the anti-adblock script. Since Javascript is executed on the user’s computer, it’s trivial to just tell your computer to ignore it. And moving it to server side would cost them too much money in processing power.
That’s why they want everyone to adopt their DRM, so they don’t have to worry about it.
This logic is so flawed lol. It’s also completely trivial for them to detect when their anti-adblock script has been blocked. If it gets blocked, then they can just stop serving you videos.
There are websites that already do this; it’s not theoretical. The website just doesn’t work if it detects an adblocker.
Whether or not it’s trivial to detect depends on the method used to block it. It already is an arms race, and said race will continue.
Ok but do they know we know they know we know they know?!
deleted by creator
Didn’t Spotify do this a while back, they made threats of account bans as well. In the end it was bypassed and you can still use Adblock in the browser or adfree clients on desktop (or just block ads across device with Adguard or Portmaster), though honestly Spotify kind of sucks in my opinion (usually doesn’t have the music I want and has UI unresponsiveness).
deleted by creator
OK, show us an example. I’ve never run across a website that adblockers just didn’t work on, but maybe you know of one. Give us an example, and we’ll see if we can bypass that. Then we’ll know which of us understands how Javascript works, and which doesn’t.
Firefox currently enjoys protection from being “relatively niche” in the browser market (aka not Chromium based trash).
But if I had to place a bet on which browser would put effort in to protecting your privacy, including which extensions are installed, my bet would be on Firefox over Chrome.
i think it’s mainly the list maintainers staying on-the-ball with changes to sites. they can move quicker than a giant corporation can develop, test, and roll-out potentially site-breaking changes that could adversely affect ‘billions’ of users.
It has always been my understanding that uBlock and uBlock Origin were two totally different extensions for ad blocking. Is this not correct? Back several year ago when ad blockers were new, I recall seeing two different Firefox listings for them, and people would caution users to get uBlock Origin and not the other truncated named one
Ublock fucked the creator who made ublock origin
I am assuming that is metaphorical?
Yes, it is metamorphical lol. Gorhill is the creator of both uBlock and uBlock Origin. However, he gave the uBlock github repo to another dev, who sold it to adblock plus. Do not download uBlock.
However, he did fork uBlock and continued to develop his own version, now named uBlock Origin. Do download uBlock Origin.
PSA: ublock.org is not related to uBlock Origin.
The difference is Firefox is not a chromium based browser and thus not subject to googles fucking bullshit, esp when we come to things like web drm
What can Firefox and uBlock do to stop Google from blocking adblock users on the site
Not sure if you question is serious … but just in case, Mozilla is one of the few non-profit orgs that is fighting for an open web
ref. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/and uBlock Origin can literally work its magic because firefox provides the necessary APIs that allows it to work. (old ref. but AFAIK still relevant: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox)
deleted by creator
Just another Firefox fan boy. They do this shit when as blockers get brought up too as if Brave, Vivaldi, etc isn’t going to strip out the ad blocker nonsense when they build their versions. Just because these versions use Chromium as a base in no way means they have to use their code. Firefox fan boys are too busy talking about Firefox to understand this.
Except WEI is going to make it so the website can detect and block you if you don’t allow the ads, regardless of your browser and extensions
At the moment WEI has been rejected by mozilla, so it wont be implemented into firefox. if google decides to add it into chrome and to their services, they will effectively lock out all firefox users. - A very anarchistic part of me actually would like to see how that would play out … but at the moment i am unsure if google would actually dare doing this, but i guess, it will only be a matter of time and we’ll find out.
Not sure if this move would actually damage the open web … since basically google would single itself out as the enemy … and i dont see many users appreciating such a move.
But if the worst happens and the whole web follows googles example, i guess we can just call this iteration of a “open web” a failure and start over with something much simpler … maybe something like the gemini protocol as its base, which isnt polluted with clientside javascript garbage and bloated CSS/XHTML parsers and rendering engines .
I fully expect that without a change of current course, Google will ensure yt will just stop working on Firefox at some point.
I guarantee there will be a workaround. It’s not magic it’s just code. And once that code is on your machine there’s not much they can do about it.
With streaming media they created this tiny DRM blob (you might have have heard of widevine.drm) which every browser needs to have to decode certain types of streaming media. Now imagine if something like that would be required … the website would only be loaded and rendered if the module would “validate” that nothing has been tampered with (think: signing and checksum validations). - Suddenly no more content filtering/adblocking or maybe just enhancing websites with userscripts. That is the web google is trying to create. Totally under their control and static. The user will again just like with television be a receiver without any influence. I personally find this to be a very scary, degrading and sad thought so much … that i would likely turn my back on this kind of web as much as possible and look for other networks (maybe something like i2p, gemini , … )
I don’t see the W3C or any of Google’s competitors jumping on board to give Google the keys to the web.
With chromes marketshare, they basically already have one half of the keys. If they can get a significant amount the server/backend owners to adopt/use their “features” (maybe lie like they tried with MV3 that it’s all about security and keeping bad actors out) … it’s game over.
Firefox + uBlock Origin user here. I started getting those popups a few days ago.
Purge and update your filter cache, check to make sure you have Anti-adblock filters enabled. If that doesn’t work do some troubleshooting with the extensions, one user found that other extensions were interfering and after disabling the problematic extension it worked.
I’ll try this. Thank you very much!
Laughs in Invidious
Oh my, the creators get paid?!?
https://influencermarketinghub.com/youtube-money-calculator/
Oh… So no, not really…
Sounds like they’re lying to me!
I don’t remember which creator said it but basically by donating them even one dollar they’re profiting more than if you sit thru hours and hours of ads. I guess objectively one can claim the moral high ground by watching ads but that really is like tossing bread crumbs to a beggar.
I’d really like platform like YouTube to come up with a subscribtion model that you pay like $10/month of which 20% goes to YouTube and the rest is split between the creators of which videos you have been watching. Even better if there’s a way to prioritize the ones that you really want to give your support to.
You’ve just described YouTube Premium. Except it’s $14/month now. And I don’t know the numbers for how much of that goes to creators.
You can also “join” a channel, assuming that channel has it enabled.
Imagine believing you get paid to make videos on a video sharing platform. Who do those people think they are?
/s
Even the FBI recommends you use an adblocker, for your personal safety. Source: https://www.tomsguide.com/news/the-fbi-now-recommends-using-an-ad-blocker-heres-why
I don’t think I’ve ever seen the word “allowlisted”. Did someone forget “whitelisted” is a thing, or is that term finally cancelled?
Whitelist and blacklist were indeed cancelled despite having no racial origin.
There are cultural traditions of using colors as symbols, many of which are harmless – red for anger, blue for sadness, green for envy. Whitelist and blacklist come from the very long-standing theme of using white to represent good and black to represent evil.
Regardless of how you feel about the origin of those themes, it makes sense to start moving away from them now. Whether intentional or not, they can be harmful and aren’t really necessary.
Let’s also start removing phrases with white, yellow and brown as those are used to refer to people’s skin colour as well.
The only reason I would even contemplate not using blacklist or white washing is if an actual person of that skin colour says that it is not okay for them, or there’s an actual consensus among people of that community that it isn’t acceptable.
I can tell you as a person with brown skin, with brownie or whatever used as a derogatory name, almost everyone I know isn’t even concerned with terms like brown out or brown note.
Online outrages or articles aren’t an accurate depiction of reality.
Even more dangerously, shit like this drives outrage and diverts attention from actual, real issues faced by people of different races. Like not having stuff to eat or indoor plumbing or mental health infrastructure or access to health care.
deleted by creator
The only people being outraged are people like you when someone is using a different word.
I watched an ig reel that said people react to anything different to them either with fear or judgement. Get over yourself, have some empathy, and move on.
Oh shit, well if you watched an Instagram reel then it’s probably true.
Note though how I’m here reacting to something different with neither fear nor judgement, just with sarcasm.
That’s your take reading a post talking explicitly about how a person won’t be outraged about something without actually taking into consideration how the people who the issues is about feel or act?
Maybe you should stop for a moment, think over what you’ve said and read, and consider that many of these discrimated groups can actually think for ourselves and doesn’t need to be told what to be outraged over?
Ironically you are being very judgemental
not only that but whitelist-blacklist are just bad names.
even greenlist-redlist would be better (at least while we have light signals at intersections) as green means go red means stop are more universally understood.
but allowlist and blocklist are just plain better, they are self explanatory words. you don’t need to learn what they mean since it’s right there in the name.
whitelist-blacklist are names where you need to learn the meaning of them, sticking to them just because they were used in the past is not the best argument.
I’m fairly certain the term “blacklist” came before traffic lights
Words often work like unique signifiers “symbols”, often by using them you learn them and dont question it. Thats a neutral phenomenon. It has advantages and disadvantages. Mainly, redlist is as disconnected from meaning as much as blacklist is. Requiring the understanding of what a “car” is, and why they cant “wheel their way” thru a cross shaped road becuse of a colored light being there. (Mabe even “across” may make no sense anymore in the future) It sounds really stupid when put like that, but accessability is important.
it isn’t though. you don’t need cars to learn red means stop, we literally had miniature roads, crossing and signs at my pre-school (or whatever it’s called in English, the one you go at age 3 till 6, you start school at 6).
Stop sign is red, pedestrian crossing are just red - stop, green - go. you learn that from a very young age so the association is natural.
Also, just to be clear, I didn’t say redlist is good, just that it’s less stupid than blacklist.
Fair, the idea of “going” will be there and hopefully, likely its symbols will stay relivant.
How is blacklist stupid? Green and red aren’t natural, in fact black/white makes more sense because it represents a binary choice (true/false, off/on).
They came from voting in ancient Athens were people had a white ball and a black ball. You put one or the other into a jar, a black was a no vote, white was yes. It has never had anything to do with race. If it bothers you change the words for skin color instead then.
“whitelist-blacklist are names where you need to learn the meaning of them”
You could say this about every word. All language is based on past usage.
Never liked these debates
as “making the words comfortable (to myself, others or both)” (from both sides) matters most.I find that usimg that soundbyte results in people (including me) to not knowing the cultures your refering to and most without being informed assume that their irrelivant (Hence the original reactionary response). Since the debate has in bad faith on nobody’s intent became about “comfort”, ill give that perspective.
Personally, Allowlist and blocklist “just work” (no discomfort). Blacklist and Whitelist are natural feeling and I fully understood the soundbyte reason. For that I can respect depricating the word but banning it (if thats even the goal) is uncomfortable. Ill happly abandon my position if a good argument is given. For now I subconciosly use what word was already there.
Edit: boilerplate is way too harsh, dont like conforntational tone.
Honestly I haven’t heard much rhetoric around anyone banning these terms. But if moving away from them IS good, and the entire catalyst for this conversation is “YouTube chose to use newer, more preferable terms”, then isn’t that a good thing?
Thats what I wanted to communicate, deprication is a fairly normal part of software. Computer interfaces in all their forms are just contracts of expectation, social contracts are simmlar. Deprication is marking an expectation as a mistake or somhow unhelpful.
They are sort of necessary because people understand what they mean. How about we change the words for skin color instead.
It’s common since quite a few years. And blocklist as counterpart
deleted by creator
It’s not been cancelled.
I’m sure someone raised concerns over racist origins, or that they were uncomfortable with the terms. Or perhaps programmers did it themselves as a part of introspection that came around with GitHub changing from “master branch” to “main branch”.Which likely lead people to realise that blacklist and whitelist aren’t really descriptive.
Blacklist came from the 1600s, regarding regicide. And the opposite of that is obviously whitelist.
But it doesn’t actually describe what it’s doing, and ultimately it is an idiom.
Removing idioms in coding is generally good practice.
And you can have other things like “FilterList” or “AdminList” or whatever.You are predictably behind the curve
Remember when YouTube was just a video of a guy at the zoo? Pepperidge farm remembers…
Those suckers sold it to google for a billion dollars. They got screwed.
I heard they were barely able to contain the site at the end as the growth began and expense of maintaining it skyrocketed.
I’m unironically considering ditching any online interaction(s) on the internet and use my PC solely for offline content (write documentaries, texts, play retro games). Because I really don’t want to use the internet with that level of intrusion in my pc.
Take any cybersecurity class and you’ll want to burn your tech in a dumpster. In most cases it’s security by obscurity from sheer numbers that hackers/sites don’t give a crap about you alone.
Additionally, every site you have ever visited tracks your browser, IP, OS, location, and more. This AdBlock tracker is just observing that you have a plugin for ad blocking. That’s the least intrusion that YouTube does.
In summary, there’s no need to be paranoid, but only because everything that can be stolen or observed already has been.
Also to add to what you said, switch away from (Google) Chrome everyone!!
Imagine this message, but on every website, and it literally cannot be prevented, as the browser itself will sooner than later just straight up tell the sites “yo, your content has been modified, maybe block the user from viewing”, snitching on you.
Come to think of it now, I wonder if this will affect poorly implemented sites using that feature to accidentally (or intentionally…) disable dark mode/reader extensions.
And then, due to Chrome’s market share, if left unchanged, web developers/companies will at some point just not bother anymore. Imagine “this works best in Google Chrome, download now” you see for some web apps today, but even with the most basic text based site that can’t prevent you from using your Adblocker in e.g. Firefox or Safari.
It is like people freaking out over giving out their phone number and SS number. I guarantee you that info is already out there in countless databases.
I’ve had the same thought before but then I don’t want to become one of those older out of touch people. I think each generation feels like the world was in better shape when they were younger. But the truth is that many of the young kids today will look back on 2023 with the same fondness and nostalgia as I do when I think about the 1990s. Back in the day older people would warn us that video games and television would rot our brains. Now we warn our kids that TikTok will do the same. Everything is always getting faster and faster but young people are adaptable and I think they’ll find their way.
So, alphabet can rip off the creators but we can’t? What a crappy double standard.
Two days ago I noticed when watching through the app on my phone that I could no longer just skip ads, and the trick of reporting them to skip didn’t work anymore either. I effectively had to just sit and wait.
That same day I got NewPipe, imported my subscriptions, and honestly even if this is just a phased trial or something, I won’t be going back to the standard YT app.
Creators make pennies from ad revenue. If I want to support them, I’ll make a donation or subscribe to their Patreon or something.
I won’t just sit and suffer a slew of ads while my data is harvested under the false pretense that it’s all to support the creators.
Aw that’s so cute, they think they’ll be able to stop adblockers from working for more than a few days. Just like everyone else before them. Good luck with that guys.
- TV : SmartTube
- Mobile : NewPipe / LibreTube
- Desktop : Piped / YouTube with a bunch of browser extension
This my YouTube Premium
I have YouTube ReVanced on my phone. If YouTube ever defeats uBlock Origin on my desktop, I just won’t watch YouTube on desktop anymore. I refuse to watch or view ads.
Fuck this shit with the force of a billion adblockers.
The streaming crash has only just begun.
That’s did news. Perhaps after mastodon grow massive thanks to Elon, and Lemmy grow thanks to reddit, we see peertube get his time to shine thanks to Google… #fuckupyourcompanyFAST
