Looks like its over for me and youtube. Being told I cant watch because of an ad blocker.

Where is everyone moving to and using instead of youtube? I will just move to the same place.

  • 👍Maximum Derek👍@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    ublock origin is still one step ahead of them (at least on firefox) but you may need to go into the extension settings and purge then update all your filter lists. The copy of Invidious I installed on my NAS is even more steps ahead.

      • algorithmae@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If the people you watch only upload to YouTube, how would they be available on other services?

          • baatliwala@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            For video hosting? Good luck, that’s almost certainly never going to happen. There is not one single competitor to Youtube even from corporations, there is no way any decentralised solution will work long term, especially not if you are expecting features like 4k or 60fps+ content.

  • Jajcus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    The old business model could not last forever… and even if it could it was not good for anyone.

    Think about it

    Hosting videos is expensive, someone has to pay for it. It was mostly paid by ads. Ads which many (most people) would block and many people would not ever click even when not blocked. But it still made money… The money come only from ads which 1) where not blocked 2) where at least clicked. The business relied on that.

    So YT relied on ads targeting people who did not know how to block ads and people easy to manipulate by the ads (eager to buy whatever they are trying to sell). Probably not the brightest. Or just easy to be taken advantage of. So the incentive would be to promote content for those people. Not good content, not true content, just content that makes ads viewed and clicked.

    People using ad-blocks were still affected by those who do not. And whole site was optimized for advertises not viewers or content creators. And that is bad.

    I am all in favour of any direct form of payments instead of ads powering the internet. Sites get very little money for each view anyway – so the prices for users should also be quite small.

    Unfortunately as long as ads are supposed to be normal part of internet, they may get forced even onto paying customers. We need regulations.

    • Supervisor194@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      lol, every one of these threads has a highly upvoted corporate shill comment.

      And it’s virtually guaranteed that this comment will be replied to in a paternalistic, condescending manner by a for-real-actual-lemmy-user who is only spouting Google’s talking points because they realize how hard and expensive it is to host a video website you guys.

      YouTube pays five-year-old “influencers” millions of dollars. Obviously this is because it is losing money which is your fault for using an adblocker. 🙄

    • coyootje@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wouldn’t mind paying a little bit of money every month to get YouTube ad free. However, it costs €12 a month. That’s a lot of money if you only care about getting rid of ads. I personally don’t need the other features (downloading videos, background play and YouTube music). If they added a 5 to 7 euro a month tier through which you could get rid of ads then that would be much more interesting to me. Now I just feel like I should keep looking for ways around their pop up shenanigans.

    • yukichigai@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      People were okay with ads, then YouTube started making them obnoxious. Ads every 2 minutes, postroll ads that interfere with autoplay, incredibly long “ads” which mean you need to watch YouTube like a hawk to make sure your 5 minute video hasn’t been interrupted by an hour long ad you need to manually skip.

      There’s a balance that people need to be happy with a service, and if the service doesn’t provide that then people will use things like adblockers to get it themselves. It’s the same thing that happened with the first “adpocalypse” that brought about most of the big name adblockers in the first place: people were okay with unobtrusive ads, then advertisers started running popups, overlays, autoplay videos, fake system notifications, on and on and on. The advertising became so disruptive people were unable to use sites without adblockers. And so the cycle repeats.

      YouTube brought this on themselves.

      • Fester@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is my problem with YouTube’s ads. If it was a 5-15 second video ad at the beginning/between videos, plus a banner ad or ads on the side/page, that could be sufferable. But constantly interrupting videos at random points for long ass ads does not mesh well with a short-video platform.

        And I also enjoy reminding people whenever I get the chance that the FBI recommends using an adblocker for security/safety reasons: https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2022/PSA221221

    • Fosheze@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d be in favor of direct payments too if any of the money actually made it to the content creators I watch. As it it most of their videos wind up demonitized so I’m not going to pay youtube just so youtube can pay copyright trolls. If they started pushing back against the people/companies filing false copyright claims then I would be willing to pay. But we all know that won’t happen.

      • thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not to mention cases where they demonetize a video/channel and still run ads on it 🙄

        Apparently the content isn’t advertiser-friendly enough to pay the creators, but it IS advertiser friendly enough to advertise on.

  • Jikiya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t understand this. And not saying it to stir up hate, or troll. This came up for me, I closed the pop-up, and watched the video with no ads. It only added a single click to the whole thing. And they’ve since gone away for me. Don’t know why they stopped, though they have.

    • Whatisawaffle@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think the term is A-B testing. When a company wants to see what effect a change will have, they don’t force it on everyone at once, just on a certain number of people (A), and then see what happens compared to the rest (B).

      https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/A-B_testing_example.png

      This is why you’ll always get people saying, “Huh, I haven’t seen that. It’s not doing it for me on [browser].” They’re in the (B) group…for now.

      The data the company wants is to know if, do the test people like the change (or are at least willing to tolerate it)? Or do they spend less time on the site? If so, how much? If the results are within their predictions, they’ll expand the testing until everyone is in (A).

      There can also be A-B-C-D-etc testing, where some people who get the blocking windows would be able to close it, and some wouldn’t. How many of each ended up disabling their adblock?

      This also helps to “boil the frog”, where they can slowly get people used to the idea that this is happening, rather than having a whole wave of surprised outrage at once.

    • Bongles@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      I believe Google is “testing” it right now, so for some people it’s been slowly escalating to where they were allowed 3 videos before it stopped them from watching anymore videos with the ad blocker enabled.

    • kurcatovium@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pop up is with 10 seconds timer here. Ain’t nobody got time for that!

      Piped/invidious/newpipe/freetube it is.

  • topher@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Libretube. Get v0.19 or higher, youtube just screwed around with its code and broke v0.18. I love how it works with sponsor block to even skip those “this video is brought to you by xyz incorporated, be sure to Yada Yada Yada…” segments.

  • gamenac@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you are visiting YT on mobile, ReVanced has been working perfectly for me on Android. I’m not sure if there is cross-platform support, but there are alternatives to traditional adblockers out there.

  • edric@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I still haven’t encountered this. Use FF with updated uBO filter lists and you should be fine.

  • KISSmyOS@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Peertube is like early Youtube - people making videos for whoever might happen to be interested, without monetary incentive. Plus a lot of crazy mixed in.
    Now I generally avoid all “free” commercial services that expect you to pay with your data or by watching ads.

    If I want professionally made content, I have to pay real money for it, because making that content costs real money.
    But there’s also still lots of people out there who make content for the fun of it, and it’s equally fun to explore that.

  • subspaceinterferents@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    40
    ·
    1 year ago

    I didn’t go anywhere. I spend a lot of time on YouTube and enjoy the service immensely. Also, YouTube Music is my main streaming source. And yeah, I pay for both, every month. It’s worth it to me. YMMV.

        • ThiefUserPermissions@lemmy.myserv.oneOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          I run a lemmy server and nobody pays anything to use it. It a public service by me for anyone.

          Just because some company hasnt figured out how to do it doesnt mean something cannot exist for the good of the public run by members of the public.

          Im not interested in conforming to imposed problems personally. Im interested in building resilient systems. That was why we invented technology as humans to begin with. Otherwise whats the point.

          • patient_tech@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Video bandwidth is expensive. Plus YouTube pays the creators too for producing the content. I subscribe to YouTube, and haven’t had a real TV subscription in years. Totally still saving money. In terms of hours per dollar per month, it’s gotta be pennies for me. Plus YouTube music and downloading to my phone to save data is kinda nice too.

          • algorithmae@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Are you really trying to compare a text/link service with ~10k users to a HD video service with millions of users?

      • Jajcus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        You say content creators should not be paid for their work? And Google should provide all those servers and bandwidth for free?

    • CriticalMiss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m happy it works for you but unless no tracking/privacy violations is included in their subscription model this will not work for a lot of people here.

      • nopersonalspace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Same, privacy concerns are huge for me. Also, there’s no way I’m paying $18.99 a month for it, that’s comically expensive. It’s the same as Netflix’s top tier plan, and at least Netflix has the expense of producing their own content to (attempt) to justify that cost.

    • arcrust@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I started paying for Google music when it started because I didn’t like Spotify. Now I’ve been paying for so long it doesn’t make sense to move away. When they implementet YT premium, I was hooked. I haven’t seen an ad in years.

      Also, streaming music and video is also way more data intensive, I wouldn’t expect the random good Samaritan to pay the server costs for me. Yeah ads suck, but I don’t see it as such a crazy thing to pay for not to have. Two decades ago you’d pay for cable and still get ads.

      I don’t approve of Google blocking adblockers because I’m sure it doesn’t hurt their bottom line that much, but I also don’t blame them.

      • Chickenstalker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        The issue is 10 minutes x 5 ads for a 10 minute video. In what universe is this ok? I was ok with 1short ad at the start of the video but now they also randomly show up. Face it, Google is simply greedy. They know the jig is up and is cashing out as long as possible before it crashes.

        • melonpunk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Google screwed up like a lot of companies do. YouTube was never profitable to run. They were just burning through cash to keep the lights on and become the number one video host online.

          Internally there became a mandate to try and turn it into a profit making machine and the advertisers caught wind so they stepped in with their demands knowing that they were going to be the source of the profits. This is where the content restrictions started to happen as videos needed to become ad friendly.

          I wish YouTube would have figured out another path to help provide the service and pay video creators. At least with Premium you don’t get ads and Sponsor Skip means you don’t see embedded VPN and game sponsors.