Sounds like trouble for Newpipe, Sponsorblock, etc…

7 points

This is the best summary I could come up with:


YouTube is bringing its ad blocker fight to mobile.

In an update on Monday, YouTube writes that users accessing videos through a third-party ad blocking app may encounter buffering issues or see an error message that reads, “The following content is not available on this app.”

It also began disabling videos for users with an ad blocking extension enabled.

But now, YouTube says its policies don’t allow “third-party apps to turn off ads because that prevents the creator from being rewarded for viewership.” This appears to target mobile ad blockers like AdGuard, which lets you open YouTube within the ad blocking app, where you’ll get to view videos interruption-free.

“When we find an app that violates these terms, we will take appropriate action to protect our platform, creators, and viewers.”

This likely won’t come as pleasant news to all the users who watch YouTube through ad blocking apps, but it doesn’t look like YouTube is backing down in its battle against ad blockers anytime soon.


The original article contains 220 words, the summary contains 165 words. Saved 25%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

permalink
report
reply
-5 points
*

Folks, Just read the extra 55 words in the article. Most of you wont spend a dime on journalism of any kind, at least fully read the articles your interested in.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

And give “the verge” some ad revenue? Or potentially have their trackers on my phone/computer? Nah I’m good.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

And give “the verge” some ad revenue?

Wait you don’t have an ad blocker ? (to be fair I use an adblocker which does pretend to watch and click ads thus giving the verge ad revenue)

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

My bad i assumed people on this sub had the amateur knowledge required to protect themselves and/or avoid the 5 trackers on the site.

Your right though, if clicking a link to theverge is such a massive risk for you, then not reading articles is probably least of your concerns.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

i chose to read the 41 words of your comment instead 😌

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Last year, YouTube “launched a global effort” to encourage users to allow ads while watching videos or upgrade to YouTube Premium. It also began disabling videos for users with an ad blocking extension enabled.

“We only allow third-party apps to use our API when they follow our API Services Terms of Service,” YouTube says.

To get around this, YouTube once again suggests signing up for the ad-free YouTube Premium.

Not much gained tbh

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

This bot is saving me from having to open the “article”, try to decipher SEO bullshit modern journalism just to find shitpost like this, eat some ads, and unavoidable (at least on mobile) trackers, js, etc. Also personally hate link posts, i wish people put this kind of summaries in the actual post.

Just ignore/block the bot and move on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
10 points

Yeah FreeTube and NewPipe both work for me still. Might be a problem in the future, but I’m hoping I dodge by being in the weird nerd slice that isn’t worth trying to force ads to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

It is!

Terrible moment to learn that YouTube is banning Reporting From Ukraine though. First thing in my grayjay feed when I checked. 😒

Fuck YouTube forever.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Grayjay doesn’t use the API so it should be fine

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

War… War never changes.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

New pipe still working for me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

freetube is also good here

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I use both depending on device and they’re both great. FreeTube just got a great update too (especially if you’re running multiple profiles).

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

If they’re saying third party apps are fine as long as they show ads, I could see third-party apps displaying ads. And then having option to cover the add playback with a black screen, or with other content, but the default behavior would be to show the ad.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Well, hopefully my invidious instance holds up for a while

permalink
report
reply
147 points

I will never tolerate ads. I will give up YouTube before I watch ads.

permalink
report
reply
36 points

Every time I see a youtuber cross post to peertube it makese happy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

What is your suggestion for financing the YouTube infrastructure and development?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I wasnt aware that Adblock was causing Google to go bankrupt. But even if that was the case, I still wouldnt watch ads lmao.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Of course not, Google is a huge company that could probably just live off of patents for the next 100 years. But they’re not going to keep on running a service that just costs them money. Google is in fact notorious for killing off products.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

If blocking ads means they lose out, then i’m fine with them losing out

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

That’s fine. It just reads to me sometimes as if people in the comment sections are angry at YouTube for trying to uphold a stream of revenue, when it’s the only thing that makes the platform possible. Personally I think YouTube has been a huge boon, I’ve learned so much from people who post on the platform and I don’t want to see it go away (which is not to say that it doesn’t have huge issues). So I’m fine with paying in some manner, at least until a better alternative comes up. If you don’t think it’s worth it, great for you, go and do whatever you think brings value to your life. But I don’t understand the vitriol or sense of entitlement to getting a costly service free of charge.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

dont threaten me with a good time

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

I don’t really have a plan for this since I won’t be giving money to far-right propagandists and their spiral of rage attention algorithm.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

You’re never going to get an honest answer to this question, but props for asking it anyway.

Maybe you can run the servers and pay the engineers with good vibes or praxis?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

You’re never going to get an honest answer to this question,

The honest answer was in the post they were originally replying to.

I will never tolerate ads. I will give up YouTube before I watch ads.

Youtube isn’t an existential need.

Ad’s or bust isn’t a real dichotomy.

Here’s another honest suggestion, drop free ad supported Youtube as a product and go full premium.

It’d significantly reduce infrastructure costs and they’d be able to fund it with subscription monies.

edit: used the wrong quote at the start

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Spend their money that they hoard?

Art should not be produced for profit, because it stops being art. Ideally we would subsidize artists, or better yet provide for everyone’s needs and let them make art in their free time. Forcing us to watch corporate propaganda about fucking dishwasher detergent ain’t it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

So call the shareholders and ask them to pay back the dividends that they’ve received over the years, to fund the YouTube infrastructure? That begs the question, what do we do when that money runs out?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I only pay capitalists what is absolutely necessary. I will pirate and steal until they go out of business and something that isn’t profit driven comes along.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I will pirate and steal until they go out of business and something that isn’t profit driven comes along.

I doubt that will ever happen on a big enough scale. Running a video platform is hard and very expensive and making videos is hard and expensive for the creators.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

It should be publicly-funded, like infrastructure. Having a video sharing platform is clearly very important, but I don’t think there are any companies that are both capable of running it and trustworthy enough to do so.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

They can continue burning money the way they always did; you can’t honestly expect me to give the first fuckin shit for the 21st century robber baron capitalists while they’re actively and provably stealing out of our pockets. You are smoking crack if you genuinely expect that. If they’re not gonna pay me for every millibyte of data, every smallest measurable iota they’ve stolen from me to train their AI models, then they can continue self-subsidizing Youtube without trying to raid my pockets again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

This is a good discussion point, rather than an arms race discussion of ads vs adblockers.

Some key points to make are that Google is making a crap ton of money from ads, they are keeping most of it so creators must resort to sponsorships and patreon. Google additionally makes money by selling your profile data.

It’s not like I have a true answer to your question, but a “workable” system should consist of: Google makes money Creators make money Customers are reasonably private The concept of making money isn’t about making the entire system worse, just so you pay for it not to be

My problem with Google is they don’t really care. They’ll burn it all if it makes them money until it’s dead.

There could be some key features that get implemented on a paid tier, but paying is just ads vs no ads.

An equally valid question would be, what can YT do to incentivize you to pay? They could ad features only available to subscribers, but they really don’t.

I would make it a semi walled garden, with free and premium content. Subscription tiers would be for customers and creators alike. Vimeo has a good system (though not perfect) with feature sets only available certain tiers. There’s incentive to upgrade if you want those features.

Here’s a big differentiator though. YT has this magic algorithm that feeds you what it wants to. Creators have no say in that (nor do customers). But if I post a video you like, I want you to watch more of my videos, not videos from somebody else similar to me. YT takes full control, and sends people away just as fast as sending them in. Why would I pay for that?

Platforms like Vimeo don’t do that (I’m not advocating vimeo, they’re just the example I think is most comparable). Wouldn’t having some level of control over that as a viewing customer and content creator have value? No, let’s just slap ads on it.

I can also argue that this goes against my final criterea point, that YT just made things worse with their algorithm and this is just paying to remove it. There was a day where subscribing to a channel meant you got to see their videos. No bell ringing needed.

And I’m sorry I just vomited my brain into these thoughts and wall of text. If you made it this far, bless you.

But this is why I don’t use YT directly. I was with vanced but ended up with newpipe, because its a simple scraper. That fact not only removes ads, but it gives me control of what I watch with my time (which has value). That is the lesson YT forgot, and the root of why any of this is an issue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I was considering paying for premium at one point because i recognize the costs of YouTube and whether people like it or not, it’s run better than a lot of other sites.

The thing that pushed me to go back to ad blocking was actually Google pushing their web environment integrity and now android webview media integrity nonsense. That alone was enough for me to start degoogling everything i could. I now see it as my moral obligation to do everything in my power not to support them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

As far as I’m aware, the majority of money that YouTubers make comes from youtube ads.

Youtube is also way better than pretty much every other social media (or similar) for paying their content creators.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I don’t fucking care.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s actually cheaper to stream videos without ads, less traffic less diskspace ;)

It just got pushed too far. Like Google search itself. Most people are fine with a short ad once in a while, while paying with their invaluable personal data, but they push it too far and make it unwatchable, like Google search itself became garbage because of all the Google pushed SEO bs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I can tolerate ads as long as it’s helping the creators and isn’t used to make the platform worse. The first condition is only sometimes satisfied and the 2nd is being straight up violated.

If they can fix how garbage search is and put the dislike count back, I’ll happily pay for premium as a thank you for making a great platform. But nope, they just focus on making the UI even worse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

No Google product will ever see my money. I will, however, donate to good content providers, and I do every now and then.

permalink
report
parent
reply

DeGoogle Yourself

!degoogle@lemmy.ml

Create post

A community for those that would like to get away from Google.

Here you may post anything related to DeGoogling, why we should do it or good software alternatives!

Rules

  1. Be respectful even in disagreement

  2. No advertising unless it is very relevent and justified. Do not do this excessively.

  3. No low value posts / memes. We or you need to learn, or discuss something.

Related communities

!privacyguides@lemmy.one !privacy@lemmy.ml !privatelife@lemmy.ml !linuxphones@lemmy.ml !fossdroid@social.fossware.space !fdroid@lemmy.ml

Community stats

  • 381

    Monthly active users

  • 297

    Posts

  • 4.6K

    Comments