Comment by Stumblinbear@pawb.social on Youtube's Anti-adblock is illegal in the EU

Immoral? For making you watch ads? How are ads immoral? You’re using the service, you watch ads, it’s not rocket surgery

Youtube makes money off of adblocked users.

They send your watch habit aggregate data profiles to the number crunchers at alphabet hq, to sell off.

They make fuckloads of money off the free video content theyre given as well as the nonstop data stream of demographics data. Thats why alphabet bought it in the first place.

The ads are just bonus cash. They dont want to miss an opportunity to score more money by selling ad space in their data profile mines.

They are being fully compensated by me logging in and feeding them either free labor as video content or free money as data profiles. They can easily keep the lights on off that alone. They dont need more free cash.

I am not obligated to sit dutifully with the volume up when ads play on my tv.

Nor am I obligated to allow ads to load within my browser.

They send the data they want me to display, down to every element on the page. It is fully within my rights to choose which elements are allowed to load on my computer.

And I wont be fuckin guilt tripped that the billion dollar company will make a fraction of another billion less dollars this quarter over my decisions to do so.

TOS are neither the law, nor are they vetted for legality by anyone working in law enforcement.

TOS very often contain straight up illegal clauses; they are largely meaningless.

Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t the typical terms of service or privacy policy even mention that you, as a user, have the power to reject tracking cookies, tracking pixels, etc. via your browser configuration and third party tools? As far as I know, the YouTube ToS and Privacy Policy also mention these things. I just tried to read it but they seem to have broken it up into a sprawling multi-site multi-page document where I can’t find the legalese to ctrl+f and pore over.

Can anyone find these documents, so I can read through them please?

Edit:

I found it: https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en#intro

There are other ways to control the information Google collects whether or not you’re signed in to a Google Account, including:

Browser settings: For example, you can configure your browser to indicate when Google has set a cookie in your browser. You can also configure your browser to block all cookies from a specific domain or all domains. But remember that our services rely on cookies to function properly, for things like remembering your language preferences.

Device-level settings: Your device may have controls that determine what information we collect. For example, you can modify location settings on your Android device.

it’s immoral

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Its immoral for the way its being done, not what was done.

Uh. It’s not immoral to read the data they’ve served to you on the page they’re visiting on their own website. I’m honestly genuinely curious what moral argument you could make, here

they are taking information from your browser without getting your permission first, to use that information against you.

They’re taking information from the page they served you and runs the code they wrote to read the page they served you to ensure what they served you is actually what you’re seeing

You’re accessing the site, you’re continuing to use the site, you are implicitly agreeing to allow the code they run to modify the page you’re on

I fail to see how it specifically being used to check that ads are displaying is any different from code running normally in your browser to change the page without refreshing the page entirely

More importantly and actually on subject: how is this immoral? What moral code are they breaking here? You can argue legal semantics, but legality is not morality. You made a moral argument. How is this immoral?

Google is tracking you on every website that has a “share to Google” icon.

Which means Google has your entire browser history, even if you use Firefox.

If it was just on their own websites, nobody would be complaining.

This is specifically about YouTube and YouTube specifically detecting adblock on YouTube.

They’d argue that you going to their page which you know is sustained by ads is consent enough to check whether you’re using ad block. It’s an implicit thing, like how when you go to a restaurant you’re implying that you’re going to pay the bill afterward. You can’t eat and then leave saying, “well technically I never explicitly agreed to pay for this meal, it’s your fault for not asking before serving me.”

Fuck that noise. Advertising as a whole is mostly immoral, we just got used to it.

Marketing in general is a reason we live in a consumer society.

The only reason marketing exist is to trick our brains into buying stuff we do not need.

I’d say ban all of it. The world would be better off.

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

Our Rules

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

Youtube's Anti-adblock is illegal in the EU(eupolicy.social)

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Our Rules

Approved Bots

Community stats

Community moderators