YouTube started slowing video buffer with adblock enabled
old.reddit.com
old.reddit.com
I doubt it, because once they get enough people paying for Premium, they can make even more money by adding ads to Premium.
More and more I feel this should run afoul of anti-trust laws. It's one thing to subsidize a product short term. It's another to subsidize a product for years upon years so you can squeeze out any competition in the market. In the example of Uber and Lyft, how many start-ups that weren't flush with hundreds of millions of VC cash completely failed or never even got off the launchpad because there was no way for them to compete against a company selling it's services at a loss for years at at time?
2) Install Privacy Redirect browser extension ( https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect#get ).
3) In the browser extension's "Advanced" settings tab, enable the "Use Freetube over Invidious when possible" switch ( e.g. https://addons.mozilla.org/user-media/previews/full/241/2414... ).
osascript -e 'tell application "System Events"' -e 'set currentVolume to output volume of (get volume settings)' -e 'set volume with output muted' -e 'repeat 16 times' -e 'key code 145' -e 'delay 0.1' -e 'end repeat' -e 'delay 12' -e 'set volume output volume currentVolume' -e 'repeat 16 times' -e 'key code 144' -e 'delay 0.1' -e 'end repeat' -e 'end tell'
This isn't a good technical solution to ads, but it might be an acceptable life solution. Enjoy the blank screen, look around the room, breath, enjoy the quiet. And be content that this "solution" will work to block ads so long as users have control over their own computers.
Evaluate the value of the deal in the present. You can choose to not renew the subscription if it is no longer worth it.
They killed the wrong product.
But in all seriousness:
1) YouTube can slow it down all you want, ban my account if you have to, I'll not remove my adblocker.
2) YouTube should really reconsider their business strategy, and charging their advertisers more. The total amount of the garbage ads from garbage publishers on their platform is out of control, that's why I installed adblocker in the first place. Raise the price, kick those shitty ads out, good for everyone.
3) Intentionally piss off your viewers is great at converting an objective annoyance to something more personal.
Thing is, video production, storage and distributions are expensive af. There are little to no alternatives explicitly because, especially at small scale, the model is unsustainable. If youtube presumably keeps loosing money to google, there will be no youtube outside of paid tiers, or, indeed, something like floatplane.
Nor do the web ads themselves. Similarly to how the TV provider can tell what ads you are viewing the ad network is what can tell.
It wasn't until digital cable boxes before they could start tracking your account watched what channel at what time on what box. Or at least what was being decoded on that device whether eyeballs saw it or not.
In other words, you're focused on entirely the wrong thing if you're being pedantic with "nor do the web ads themselves". Thanks, as if I was confused on the subject. We're all adults here and understand the video bits are not tracking but the code used to deliver them.
I never have. Approximately 100% of youtube ads I've seen are for harmful, time-wasting, unhealthy, mediocre, scammy products/services. They also tend to be blastingly-loud, and somewhat anxiety-inducing. I've never seen an interesting or informative one.
Why doesn't youtube put effort into ad quality and relevance, rather than hostility toward users who quite naturally want to avoid grotesque influences.
I have a whole list of companies in my head I will avoid as long as I don't forgot about them.
Because the purpose of the ad is just to keep your brain busy for a period of _your_ time.
I know people may not agree, but it’s been pretty effective for me.
That's hardcore, I like it.
I don't think it's black and white regarding need to advertise. Good products can advertise too, it's just that they tend to be tasteful or even inspiring, informative, imaginative, helpful or have some other positive effect on the viewer. I never perceive those qualities in youtube ads. (to be fair, the vast majority of ads outside of youtube also fail to exhibit those qualities).
For example a feel good video from a car company won't make us go out and buy the car. That's not the intention. The aim is not for you to click through right then and spend. The intention is about feeling of the brand. So maybe in 2 years time when you have forgotten the specific ad and are in a position of trading in your old car you will choose this brand of car compared to a similar one from a company that didn't advertise.
Ads are worse than we think. They work on many levels to manipulate us.
Google is still just an ads company at the end of the day.
(Yes Cloud has had net positive quarters but it is still net negative relative to how much SERP dollars it took to prop it up this long.)
We're in a tug-of-war with YouTube: we want perfect service for no cost to us, and they want all our money with no cost to themselves.
It's great if we can find some common ground. But if not, I'll adapt.
(I'm not denying that YT content has value for me. I just don't think they're obligated to provide it for a price I'm willing to pay.)
It's a difficult position. On the one hand, these users are chewing up compute and bandwidth, without providing any ad revenue. On the other hand, if they leave, it contributes to a vicious cycle (or virtuous cycle, depending on your perspective) of eyeballs being elsewhere, and content creators looking elsewhere to reach those eyeballs.
Sure, initially content creators will be posting to YouTube as well, but even a moat like YouTube's can be filled in over time.
If content creator can not monetize those eyeballs very well there is little incentive to target that niche. YouTube would be losing a niche of a niche that are not as profitable to try and platform.
Didn't bother me. Bathroom break.
What bothers me with this is the amount of surveillance that comes with it.
Isn't called surveillance-capitalism for nought. And the best part.. it has already been debunked that targeted ads are as effective as they would like them to be.
1. Chrome had to support adblockers to outcompete firefox.
2. Adblockers were really powerful pieces of arbitrary logic making blocking them infeasible, so manifest v3 had to first be introduced to weaken them.
3. With lean times upon us, everyone is understanding of their move to block ads.
All of these steps were necessary, and had to happen with some time inbetween. Sort of an embrace-extend-extinguish play.
Edit: Well it seems manifest v2 is being phased out very very gradually and it's not done yet. No new extensions are allowed but uBlock might still be around for a few more months.
Of course you would also get a blank screen when the ad server wasn’t responding, because the ad server is not hooked up to the local cdn
Sometimes a 20 second unskippable and turns out to take 60 seconds or more with lag and buffering. Even thought I don't have issues on the video itself.
I just did the math, I watch X hours of YouTube a month, I value my time at X€/hour.
It's cheaper to pay than for me to suffer through over 30 minutes of ads a month.
I also don't trust Google/YouTube with my credit card data (had 15+ fraudulent charges on Google play one day, got the money back but zero explanation how this could have happened with 2fa) so as long as they don't support a secure payment method it's a big no anyway.
They're constantly toeing the line of messing with ad blockers and letting people use them. It seems that someone has seen ad engagement go down enough to start doing stuff like this.
Question : What's the best solution for someone mainly watching STEM channels and various video essayists (Contrapoints, Stories Of Old, various art critics)?
Personally, Youtube Premium feels like paying for a protection racket. So far I'm inclined towards paying for Nebula. Any other ideas anyone?
I funnel money to these creators via Patreon.
I too would love other ideas!
No problems here yet but I'm FF too
You’re just verified product and worth more to advertisers and data brokers because you’re card verified and likely legit. With love, this is antiquated thinking and no longer true.
1) It's too expensive after they got rid of Youtube Premium Lite
2) Google still gets to track your watch history heavily, allowing advertisers to harass you through other Google properties
3) You still get sponsor segments in videos
I certainly won’t pay for YouTube, and if I have to deal with ads, I just won’t watch.
> Subject: Your Premium Lite membership will be discontinued
> Thank you for being one of our first Premium Lite members.
> We’re writing to let you know that after October 25, 2023, we will no longer offer your version of Premium Lite. While we understand this may be disappointing news, we continue to work on different versions of Premium Lite as we incorporate feedback from our users, creators, and partners. [emphasis mine on the bullshit]
> To show our appreciation, we’re offering a 1 - month trial of Premium (even if you’ve had a trial before). With Premium, you can watch videos ad - free, offline, and in the background. Plus, stream music ad - free in the YouTube Music app.
I don't need nor want the other features, just no ads, and paid for it for 2 years. Then YouTube decided to fuck me over and force me into a more expensive subscription tier, fuck them, I'll use ad blockers for as long as they work.
The solution is to allow the people who want to pay for premium value to pay and to push delivery onto peer-to-peer delivery like BitTorrent did 20 years ago so that the expense is minimal and shared by the people who actually watch by hosting what they consume.
It’s not hard. Don’t buy the corporate lies on this one.
This is 99 percent less expensive delivery of content YouTube gets for free but poor Google needs help with expenses? Not likely.
They should be encouraging premium subscription by creating premium services and and supporting it with sponsorship for premium content and access to content creators. We already have many working models like this. They just have too many Hollywood execs and MBAs who are so deeply uncreative and unable to be risk takers or jeopardize their cushy job by making innovative suggestions like this that they can’t come up with any other path. They have a culture problem with their products honestly.
We don’t need Internet video to be shit cable over IP networks. Google could actually innovate here.
My conclusion is: Good.
Traditionally, storytellers and musicians were an important part of society. They were the medium through which ideas and even information would spread. Then came troupes, then came middlemen, then came companies, then came corporations. Each step along the way, the artist was less about her art, and more about the business of making art.
This can be acceptable to many, and I won't knock anyone who enjoys a good Hollywood blockbuster. What I would argue though, is that the pure artist who did it for the art first, and the business second, made better art.
In conclusion; fuck Google, let that dumpster fire burn out.
1 - Pay for YouTube Premium.
2 - Use free ad-supported YouTube.
3 - Don't use YouTube.