If you don't like it, go launch and finance your own free-to-watch-no-ads-included video site.
OTA TV is free. It's free because the network pays for it via ads. If you aren't watching ads, then you're effectively not paying for the content.- tracking users both on YouTube and outside of it
- then using the collected data to sell more targeted ads
If it were just ads, then far fewer people would care about watching them (at least in the HN demographic). So if you are going to use this argument, please use it correctly.
What if the user doesn't watch ads but allows Google to track them outside of YouTube, and then Google uses that data to sell higher priced ads elsewhere? Ads you may allow because not all websites are obnoxious about how they serve ads. That is another way you are paying for YouTube content. It's disingenuous [via your original statement] to state that not watching YouTube ads means you aren't paying for the content. Users are already paying for the content in a lot of other ways that aren't immediately transparent. Hence why I said you're incorrect. You are leaving out information to support your stance and make the issue black and white when in reality, it isn't so simple.
The world wide web was based on the idea of sharing, not paying for content by being forced to watch ads that I would never ever watch intentionally. Or do you want the internet to be like television?
http://zeronet.io/ for example. served by users for users. all you pay is your ISP, thats IT.
It's definitely an interesting ideas but a long ways away from being somethings the masses can use easily.
Besides, what are you complaining about? If you don't like people's opinions, go launch your own forum where you're free to pay for useless ads all day long and ban anyone who disagrees.