You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
397 points

So many corporate bootlickers here, damn.

permalink
report
reply
188 points
*

It’s like they think the only way to make money is to drown us in ads based off the telemetry they scoop up and we’re entitled brats for wanting to have a say in how our data is harvested/used against us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points
*

That’s their business model. Drowning us in ads is literally how they make money. They aren’t a tech company. They’re an ad aggregation company. They collect data via having users use freemium services. They use that data to create anonymized profiles of millions or billions of people. They break those profiles down into subsets. And then they let ad companies buy the ability for Google to target those users with ads based on things they’re likely to buy based on the data that Google has collected. It’s a much more effective way of marketing ads than just playing ad spots on tv or on radio. Better than billboards and magazine spreads etc. That’s literally what Google (and Apple, and Amazon even) do. It’s what Facebook does. It’s what most social media does. Their tech? Just a way to get you to buy into an ecosystem so you continue to feed the profile and the algorithm and see the ads.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-27 points

I’m sorry but with all do respect I do not need you to lecture me about how big data dovetails with digital marketing or the B2B side of it for google, thanks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

I mean, no matter what, you do have a say. You can just not use YouTube. Pretty easy, actually.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That won’t prevent Google from scraping my data from every other website I use.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-34 points

There’s a paid service though.

Like I get the sentiment, and I use YouTube with uBlock Origin to avoid paying, but if you’re not willing to pay and you’re not willing to watch ads what are you proposing?

permalink
report
parent
reply
65 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

I paid for paid for premium for a while. Then it showed me an ad for paramount + anyways. So I said fuck you google and installed an ad blocker.

Point being I was willing and did pay for the premium service. But even “ad free with premium” still wasn’t ad free. It was “ad reduced”

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

There are stil ads with the paid service as i understand it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

The existence of the paid offering doesn’t invalidate use of the free offering, regardless of whether people are permitting ads on the latter. Any given Youtube page is just a collection of web elements and a call to a video server: these things get loaded or blocked at my sole discretion. My hardware, my web browser, my internet bandwidth, my opsec, my time.

If I put household items out on the nature strip, I have no expectation that passers-by will have a cup of tea with me first, then take every item as an indivisible lot. So my proposal to Google is: take those items off the nature strip, put them back inside the house and lock the door. Until they do that, no issue exists, despite the company’s efforts to fabricate one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I cannot get ad-free experience with YT Premium. I can only get ad-free videos bundled with a whole bunch of other useless shit I will never use like YT Music. And the simple reason why I cannot get only ad-free videos is because then I would pay them less, so they don’t give me the option.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

I’ve recently been downvoted to oblivion for writing this exact thing, talking about online newspapers.

People don’t want ads and they don’t want to pay. They just expect to get stuff for free and I can’t decide if that’s because Lemmy is either filled with spoiled brats, or people who genuinely do not know how the world works, or both.

In their partial defence, I must say that the way companies have used the Internet up until a few years ago may have led them to believe that free content is a thing.

And, before someone comes along and tries to tear me a new one, YES, I do use uBlock on sites that harvest too many data (e.g. anything by Google) or sites that are too aggressive with ads. But at least I know that I’m either a freeloader or, in the best case scenario, a protester. And I know that, if everyone did the same, so much of the internet would just shut down or go behind paywalls.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-14 points

lol you got downvoted for a perfectly reasonable question, it’s like Reddit all over again

permalink
report
parent
reply
116 points

In the second quarter of 2023, Google’s revenue amounted to over 74.3 billion U.S. dollars, up from the 69.1 billion U.S. dollars registered in the same quarter a year prior.

But man if we don’t pay for youtube premium how will they survive?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The amount of money they made is entirely meaningless without knowing their spending.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Revenue isn’t profit?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-26 points

that’s google not youtube though, is it? i think youtube is running at a loss still + in a normal country that shit should have been blasted apart already way too many shit is under google.

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

I think they have pretty recently finally become profitable thanks to the increased amount of ads. Although you could always make the argument before that the data YouTube provides to Google that allowed their ad and data empire to thrive is invaluable whether YouTube directly profits or not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Why are people down voting you? Damn there’s an infestation of corp simps here

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

the richest country in the world is a normal country regardless of your xenophobia

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

I’ll say it again: Google pays 5-year-old “influencers” millions of dollars. They have always harvested your data to provide these free services - selling ads was just icing. They still harvest your data and sell ads and they still make the same money they’ve always made - only now they are insisting that everyone watch ads or pay for it as well. And of course, eventually YouTube will insist that you watch ads and pay for it. This is the equivalent of “network decay” for streaming services. This is unreasonable and while there are exceptions to the rule, most people have the same reaction to what Google is doing here: surprise, and dismay, if not outright anger and disgust.

Yet every single thread about it on the Internet is utterly overflowing with people lecturing us about how we shouldn’t expect something for nothing, as if we aren’t fully aware that this is the most transparent of straw men. These people insist that we are the problem for daring to block ads - and further - that we should be thrilled to pay Google for this content, as they are. And they are! They just can’t get enough of paying Google for YouTube! It’s morally upright, it’s the best experience available and money flows so freely for everyone these days, we should all be so lucky to be able to enjoy paying Google the way they do. And of course it’s all so organic, these comments.

Suggest that Google pays people to engage this narrative, however, and you will be derided and downvoted into oblivion as if you were a tin-foil-hat wearing maniac. This comment itself is virtually guaranteed to be responded to with a patronizing sarcastic and 100% organic comment about how lol bruh everyone who disagrees with you must be a shill.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

selling ads was just icing

You’re talking about these as if they’re separate things. Literally no company in existence harvests your data for any reason other than to serve better ads or to drive business decisions internally. Nobody gives a shit about your data otherwise. Ads are literally the only reason.

as if you were a tin-foil-hat wearing maniac

I mean… If the shoe fits, man.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Ok, I’ll bite. Let’s assume Youtube follows your advice, and stops showing ads on YouTube. Data collection is the only source of revenue. How does YouTube make money on that data? Be specific please. Who is buying the data, and what is the buyer going to do the data besides show you a targeted ad?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Suggest that Google pays people to engage this narrative, however, and you will be derided and downvoted into oblivion as if you were a tin-foil-hat wearing maniac. This comment itself is virtually guaranteed to be responded to with a patronizing sarcastic and 100% organic comment about how lol bruh everyone who disagrees with you must be a shill.

Oh hey you put this part in before being downvoted this time lmao. If you think it’s worth googles time to be astroturfing on fucking lemmy, you have a couple screws loose lmfao.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

While I agree, you shouldn’t underestimate just how fucking cheap astroturfing services are, and how much easier it is to generate astroturfing posts using the plethora of LLMs out in the wild.

I still think it’s silly to think they’re doing that here, but it should be considered.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

did you just tey to pre-emptively suggest that anyone who disagrees with you is a google paid shill?

Because if so I would like to know where I can apply for my payment from Google.

I think any reasonable person knows by now that if you don’t “pay for a product you sre the product”, everyone knows youtube collects data and sells it and your eyes to advertisers that’s their business model, guess what those servers youtube runs on? aren’t free, as you yourself said, content creators aren’t free, the engineers working on YouTube aren’t free, so your suggestion is that despite this, youtube should still be free and ad/data collection free.

well do tell me, how long do you think youtube will last with your business model?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I’ve blocked maybe eight people in thirty minutes who are implicitly demanding that corporations create the law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

And one of them immediately down voted you. I wonder why they’re here on Lemmy instead of continuing to support Reddit? They clearly like to be bottoms to corpos.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

We must trust our corporate overlords who will use AI to guide us in their right direction.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

Everyone I don’t agree with == bootlicker 🙄

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Are you arguing people should only try to be correct when it benefits a poor person? When being correct benefits a rich person we should just lie about the truth?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Then stop making stupid arguments, it only serves to make you look stupid

permalink
report
parent
reply
-24 points

I honestly don’t really care if people adblock or not but I think people need to acknowledge that adblock is essentially piracy. That doesn’t make it inherently bad or good but it has the same impacts as piracy at the end of the day. It’s a useful tool to use when companies start to get unreasonable but especially in the case of YouTube it impacts the amount of money the people who make the content earn.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

But piracy has no impact at all. Pirates never wanted to buy your stuff.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Honestly, there is plenty of stuff I’d pay for but I pirate if it’s difficult to access.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I don’t know, I probably would have paid for at least half the things I pirate if I had to (especially books).

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

that only applies to p2p torrents where there aren’t infrastructure costs, youtube has infrastructure costs.

grabbing a torrent from the net and downloading it doesn’t cost anyone anything, it’s all volunteers providing their bandwidth for it.

youtube’s bandwidth isn’t free.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I honestly don’t really care if people adblock or not but I think people need to acknowledge that adblock is essentially piracy.

The same way it is piracy to go to the bathroom during the commercials…

Look, the problem at hand is not if people use adblocker or not, the problem here is how Google check if you are using adblocker or not, which seems to be illegal.

Well, the full “check for adblocker” things seems to be illegal in EU, whatever way it is used, given a sentence from 2016

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I don’t think it’s piracy exactly but I fully realize there would not be a huge video site like YouTube without ads or limiting it to paid subscribers.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 567K

    Comments