Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

No way I'll use YouTube with ads. The amount of your lifetime they waste is what I'd consider disrespectful to their users. Even if the ads were bearable, I wouldn't turn off my ad blocker on any Google site for tracking alone.

I also don't see myself subscribing to YouTube Premium, firstly because it's too expensive (stop including your music streaming service and make it cheaper maybe?), but also because YouTube is just a platform with a lot of not curated content that YouTube had no part in creating.

Let's see how the cat and mouse games between YouTube and ad blockers and alternative frontends go. If it's too much of a hassle, I'll just stop using YouTube. I don't miss Twitter, I don't miss Reddit, and I won't miss YouTube.

FreeTube/Piped on PC

ReVanced on droid

uYou+ on 🍎 phone

SmartTubeNext on 📺

Youtube can do the fuck they want on their website

I haven't had this happen using ublock origin, but if they do figure out how to block ublock origin, adnausiem (ublock origin fork) might work. It's a fork of ublock origin that tricks the ad providers into thinking you clicked on every ad, which not only bypasses a lot of adblock detectors, it Actively costs them money by polluting their ad data with garbage.

Me who uses piped and all:

I'd say to you all: get used to bombshells dropping! At some point the investor pyramid scheme will go crashing down. It might be now. All those companies were on borrowed time. Until investors realised that "data" isn't valuable on its own - it's what you make of it. There needs to be a product that generates revenue. Spoiler alert, it is hard to come up with a business plan that takes plain usage data and makes the technical challenges worthwhile to squeeze money from it. I can feel it myself as data scientist. The honeymoon's over, investors want to see ROI.

I mean this cycle will probably recover in a few years when the markets recover but still - some lessons stick

Really not worth watching a 10 minute video that has four minutes of YouTube ads and a minute of a sponsor pitch by the creator.

I just don't get how these providers (Specifically Reddit with the API lockdown and now the stranglehold on mods, Twitter's new login requirement, and YouTube now cracking down on adblockers) are missing the point that their sites live and die by user generated content.

I understand these sites are hugely expensive to run, but if you keep alienating those who are bringing users to your site in the first place, people will stop submitting and people will stop visiting.

The more ad-riddled they make the platform to try and monetise users, the more they make adblocks necessary to even be usable.

I didn't use to both with adblockers. I didn't like ads, but they didn't affect me enough for me to go through any effort blocking them.

Now I use blockers everywhere, on every platform. Even for creators I like, because I know how little they actually make for ads - so how bout instead of watching 12 hours of ads so they can get 2c, I just send them a dollar or buy their merch every once in a while to not watch ads at all? Etc.

Ads could have had a place. There are ads that serve a purpose, that have minimal disruption but still give businesses a way to develop awareness for those who might want to use them.

Movie trailers (including when they stopped trailing movies and started leading them) are examples of 'acceptable ads' to me. When I purchase something from a store and they include a printed card from their sponsor. When sports teams have logos for being sponsored. A work van with the business logo parked while out on call. Etc.

But the internet's online ads? Email spam? Telemarketing? These are forms of advertising that are actively hostile, and they've become the default. So now a user that wants to be on the internet at all is best served by block all ads, including the ones that would've otherwise been reasonable.

Google will never make me feel guilty for blocking ads when they're already making their search engine unusable, too.

To everyone who is saying they use adblock and haven't seen this yet: YouTube probably rolled this out to a smaller percentage of users first. It allows them to understand how this change impacts user behaviour, e.g. how many users comply and disable their adblocker, how many more users close YouTube than usual etc. Most tech companies do this type of analysis before releasing a high impact change to all users.

I really don't think it's greed. Can't blame em for trying to win the cat/mouse game of adblocking. I'm sure it's not the end of the world, and new ways to circumvent this will show up.

I will still use invidious while having muy subscriptions saved as RSS feeds so this change will go over my head

Probably get shit for this, but…

I just pay for Premium.

YT has literally become my cable. I listen to music, watch movies, documentaries, stand up comedy, news, sports… and cat videos, obviously.

To me it’s just worth it to pay a bit of money each month and have the whole thing just available to me.

I feel like if you were to put a money value on all the complaining, stomping of feet and trying to side-step the ads I’ve seen over the last several years, you’d probably find it’s actually less to just pay and enjoy it.

Just my opinion, of course…

Not the main point, but this is the first time I've seen "allowlisted". Lol

...are they trying to avoid saying whitelisted because of the word "white"?

Revanced it is

“Allowlisted”?

Are we not allowed to say white/black anymore?