Hacker News Reader

Comment by bitpush | Hacker News Reader

In HN's opinion, what should a company do when users are actively trying to subvert it from making money?

Imagine a situation where someone walks into Apple Store to explicitly steal iPhones. Is Apple justfied in preventing the person from entering? If you think "steal" is a bridge too far, lets say someone walks into Apple Store with an expectation to chat with the employees, goof around with display units, preventing legitimate customers from accessing them - will the company be justified in preventing that behavior?

View on HN

Google can do what they want but they handle this poorly in my opinion.

First of all they seem to apply the adblocker checking at random instead of on everyone. They won't do that because they know it'll cost them.

Secondly, I use Safari and can simply 'reload page without content blockers' to allow ads and disable the extension on the current page - Google doesn't accept this. You have to fully disable your adblocker extension at the browser level before they'll let you back in. They are 100% doing that so that you stop blocking Google ads on non-Google sites.

> First of all they seem to apply the adblocker checking at random instead of on everyone. They won't do that because they know it'll cost them.

How does applying adblocker detect at random cost YouTube?

What I mean is that if they applied the restriction to everyone they’d lose a meaningful number of users.

Once upon a time, advertisements were intended to be watched by people. Now, the advertisements are watching people. Surveillance capitalists are the parasites turning your private information into their profits. I refuse to acknowledge invasive racketeering as a legitimate business.

It is natural for someone to object to a company's business practices. Millions of people dont eat meat, or consume dairy products due to ethical or moral considerations.

Most of those people stop giving such companies business. Some of them go and protest, but if I understand you correctly you're saying one has to go into a McDonalds and consume their burgers, and then complain?

YouTube has a de facto monopoly on long-form video content.

Then you live without it, if you truly object to their practices. A boycott means nothing if it doesn't hurt a little.

Nah, you insist on building an empire, the onus in on you to git gud at keeping barbarians at bay _at scale_.

The thing got big because it was free. They bought it, society (d)evolved together with the thing, they turned it into what it now is. Monetization is their problem and no one else's.

> Monetization is their problem and no one else's.

It's also the content creator's problem. They're not doing it for free either.

Which means it's also the user's problem. Because without the prospect of money YouTube would be a shadow of what it is today.

Content creators basically do not make money from Youtube. Right now, almost all income comes from patreon, subscriptions, and merch.

I will give google a dollar when they actually work to make their service better for the creators I care about, actually pay attention to their concerns, actually build tools that improve their work, and stop treating content creators as consumables to pump out "content" faster than humanly possible so that they can shove more ads into more faces, and burn them out routinely.

Nearly every great Youtube creator deals with burnout because of Youtube's "algorithm". But youtube doesn't want thousands of talented people making niche content with high quality.

Youtube wants a hundred Mr. Beasts.

I will pay for Youtube when they fucking stop that.

Until then, I support content creators through platforms that actually pay them, actually work towards improving their work experience and artistic endeavors, and treat them like people.

> But youtube doesn't want thousands of talented people making niche content with high quality.

> Youtube wants a hundred Mr. Beasts

Why would that be? Isn't Mr beast expensive to Google? And if you add up 10k small channels to equal mr beast's views that's the same number of eyeballs on ads at no cost to Google (assuming the small channels aren't monetized).

Admittedly I have no idea how it works though.

Why there's no serious competition tho?

Funny that you mention Apple Stores. There's a widely circulated video showing a masked man walking into an Apple Store, yanking all the display units off the tables, and walking right out, without anyone trying to stop him. No intervention. No security. Just quiet compliance from staff and onlookers.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AcUU9snHMe4

Yes, the internet is different from real life. Would an Apple "Genius" really want to fight a guy? The standard in retail is set, call the police and let them deal with it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com