You must log in or register to comment.
I actually didn’t care when there was an ad in the beginning of the video or what not. It was when I had to start watching multiple ads in the middle of a 10 minute video as well. Like come on, not even broadcast TV is that annoying.
Adding an insane amount of ads is a dark pattern to convince you into joining Youtube Premium. Which is crazy expensive by the way, 13,99 $/month
Premium will eventually show ads too.
Absolutely. Infinite growth demands more and more. Always. Fuck the customer, increase shareholder value this quarter!
Honestly I bought YouTube premium through a VPN to turkey for that price for the entire year. Seems worth it.
I mostly wanted YouTube Music for my bedroom speaker, but if they’re throwing in ad-free YouTube along with it, so be it.
SponsorBlock addon
The holy trinity: ublock origin, sponsorblock and dearrow. Using all of them makes YT great again.
haven’t heard of dearrow, what does that do?
You know those videos with a crazy thumbnail and title? You know, some stupid idiot BS clickbait nonsense like guy wrestling with a crocodile, but in reality that frame doesn’t even exist anywhere in the video. Oh, and then there’s the big red arrow and a wild title like: A CROCODILE BIT MY HEAD OFF!!!111!!!
Well, dearrow can fix all that. Users can select are more representative frame for the thumbnail and write a better title such as: “collection of random cat videos stolen from other people”. People get to vote on which thumbnail and which title text should be there, while dearrow shows that to the next person. If you care about cat videos, you might click that one. If you’re more interested in crocodile wrestling, you won’t be deceived to click something you don’t want to watch.
Or the knack of starting the add 2 seconds into a guitar solo…
laughs in firefox + uBlock Origin
If I understand correctly, there’s nothing about Firefox that makes ad blockers any harder to detect. What can Firefox and uBlock do to stop Google from blocking adblock users on the site?
They don’t care about Firefox. Chrome is the browser market, they have weakened extensions, they implemented DRM, and here we are.
Coming to you later… “Your browser violates YouTube’s Terms of Service.”
This would become an Anti trust suit I would imagine.
They can just phrase it a little differently and argue semantics in front of a bunch of 70 year olds who don’t know what a browser is in a hearing or two. Maybe a couple campaign contributions through completely legal channels and that’s that. Anti trust enforcement has been falling in the US for decades.
I am cautiously optimistic of that new gal heading the FTC, she’s preparing suits I to Amazon and Google, so we’ll see how that goes
deleted by creator
You could use an extension that changes your user agent but I’m not sure how well that’d work
They have control of Chrome, so they could always implement some kind of API into Chrome to check.
C-C-C-C-Conflict of interest!
Laughs in useragent switch
They’re TRYING, but for now, it would be a user agent extension matter.
It doesn’t matter if YouTube can detect uBlock. The great thing about uBlock is you can just block the anti-adblock script. Since Javascript is executed on the user’s computer, it’s trivial to just tell your computer to ignore it. And moving it to server side would cost them too much money in processing power.
That’s why they want everyone to adopt their DRM, so they don’t have to worry about it.
This logic is so flawed lol. It’s also completely trivial for them to detect when their anti-adblock script has been blocked. If it gets blocked, then they can just stop serving you videos.
There are websites that already do this; it’s not theoretical. The website just doesn’t work if it detects an adblocker.
Whether or not it’s trivial to detect depends on the method used to block it. It already is an arms race, and said race will continue.
Ok but do they know we know they know we know they know?!
Those sites aren’t popular enough for people to actively develop custom scripts to get around them.
Didn’t Spotify do this a while back, they made threats of account bans as well. In the end it was bypassed and you can still use Adblock in the browser or adfree clients on desktop (or just block ads across device with Adguard or Portmaster), though honestly Spotify kind of sucks in my opinion (usually doesn’t have the music I want and has UI unresponsiveness).
The only one that kind of worked was Twitch, and the Alternative Player plugin for Firefox still bypasses the ads, you just have to wait while Twitch thinks the ad is playing because they inject it into the stream directly and you can’t access the stream without waiting out the timer.
OK, show us an example. I’ve never run across a website that adblockers just didn’t work on, but maybe you know of one. Give us an example, and we’ll see if we can bypass that. Then we’ll know which of us understands how Javascript works, and which doesn’t.
Firefox currently enjoys protection from being “relatively niche” in the browser market (aka not Chromium based trash).
But if I had to place a bet on which browser would put effort in to protecting your privacy, including which extensions are installed, my bet would be on Firefox over Chrome.
i think it’s mainly the list maintainers staying on-the-ball with changes to sites. they can move quicker than a giant corporation can develop, test, and roll-out potentially site-breaking changes that could adversely affect ‘billions’ of users.
The difference is Firefox is not a chromium based browser and thus not subject to googles fucking bullshit, esp when we come to things like web drm
It has always been my understanding that uBlock and uBlock Origin were two totally different extensions for ad blocking. Is this not correct? Back several year ago when ad blockers were new, I recall seeing two different Firefox listings for them, and people would caution users to get uBlock Origin and not the other truncated named one
Ublock fucked the creator who made ublock origin
I am assuming that is metaphorical?
Yes, it is metamorphical lol. Gorhill is the creator of both uBlock and uBlock Origin. However, he gave the uBlock github repo to another dev, who sold it to adblock plus. Do not download uBlock.
However, he did fork uBlock and continued to develop his own version, now named uBlock Origin. Do download uBlock Origin.
PSA: ublock.org is not related to uBlock Origin.
Just another Firefox fan boy. They do this shit when as blockers get brought up too as if Brave, Vivaldi, etc isn’t going to strip out the ad blocker nonsense when they build their versions. Just because these versions use Chromium as a base in no way means they have to use their code. Firefox fan boys are too busy talking about Firefox to understand this.
Except WEI is going to make it so the website can detect and block you if you don’t allow the ads, regardless of your browser and extensions
At the moment WEI has been rejected by mozilla, so it wont be implemented into firefox. if google decides to add it into chrome and to their services, they will effectively lock out all firefox users. - A very anarchistic part of me actually would like to see how that would play out … but at the moment i am unsure if google would actually dare doing this, but i guess, it will only be a matter of time and we’ll find out.
Not sure if this move would actually damage the open web … since basically google would single itself out as the enemy … and i dont see many users appreciating such a move.
But if the worst happens and the whole web follows googles example, i guess we can just call this iteration of a “open web” a failure and start over with something much simpler … maybe something like the gemini protocol as its base, which isnt polluted with clientside javascript garbage and bloated CSS/XHTML parsers and rendering engines .
I fully expect that without a change of current course, Google will ensure yt will just stop working on Firefox at some point.
I guarantee there will be a workaround. It’s not magic it’s just code. And once that code is on your machine there’s not much they can do about it.
With streaming media they created this tiny DRM blob (you might have have heard of widevine.drm) which every browser needs to have to decode certain types of streaming media. Now imagine if something like that would be required … the website would only be loaded and rendered if the module would “validate” that nothing has been tampered with (think: signing and checksum validations). - Suddenly no more content filtering/adblocking or maybe just enhancing websites with userscripts. That is the web google is trying to create. Totally under their control and static. The user will again just like with television be a receiver without any influence. I personally find this to be a very scary, degrading and sad thought so much … that i would likely turn my back on this kind of web as much as possible and look for other networks (maybe something like i2p, gemini , … )
I don’t see the W3C or any of Google’s competitors jumping on board to give Google the keys to the web.
With chromes marketshare, they basically already have one half of the keys. If they can get a significant amount the server/backend owners to adopt/use their “features” (maybe lie like they tried with MV3 that it’s all about security and keeping out bad actors out) … it’s game over.
Firefox + uBlock Origin user here. I started getting those popups a few days ago.
Purge and update your filter cache, check to make sure you have Anti-adblock filters enabled. If that doesn’t work do some troubleshooting with the extensions, one user found that other extensions were interfering and after disabling the problematic extension it worked.
I’ll try this. Thank you very much!
Adblock is one of the greatest human inventions of all time.
The best anti virus innovation in decades.
I agree
People who choose not to watch ads are far more likely to not spend money based on ads. I know that when I see the same crappy ads over and over, yeah, I remember the name of the product, and I remind myself every time never to buy it. I’m more likely to buy from that seller if I don’t see their ads.
Everyone thinks ads only work on other people, that’s why ads haven’t been banned yet.
Yeah. I’m completely allergic to ads. If this goes through I’m simply not going to use YT anymore.
I operate this way too. There must be literally dozens of us.
In all seriousness, I do find it somewhat surprising that some of these companies think saturating everything with ads is a good idea. As a simple matter of brand recognition, I get that the power of suggestion is a helluva drug. But all that stuff does eventually glom together in my head as general advertising nonsense – as a result I see companies that advertise less / not at all and rely on a quality product and word of mouth as a better buy.
They don’t just think it’s a good idea, marketers have convinced themselves they’re doing you a favor by pummeling you with advertisements day and night.
How else could you learn about their valuable product if not for constant, unending advertisement?
I work in Google Ads every day.
It’s more likely that they’re incompetent and haven’t checked/manually set up their video / display ads, and have let Google decide how often to show their ads. Google then decides to show their ads as often as possible because it gets clicks (even if they’re accidental) and nets them more money each time.
The best trick Google ever pulled was telling advertiser’s to trust them with their money and “leave it up to the algorithm”.
Fuck no, you set it up so Google doesn’t abuse their platform and spam your ads everywhere, ignoring everything Google tell you to do.
The shit I’ve seen in people’s accounts because Google told them to do it…
You can and should limit the amount of times your adverts are shown per day to someone. There’s a not-so-fine line between brand awareness and pissing off potential customers.
I can list a ton of products I by principle will never use. Athelic greens, casper mattresses, simplisafe, express/nordVPN, Honey … Some people may see a pattern there.
Ironically I might actually buy your product even if you spam annoying ads as long as you do it on a platform I block ads on.
No Ad is good sunscreen.
Chumba…Jordan Peterson and the stupid best fiends game, I’ll NEVER use
then they are succesfully livin in your head rent free
Lamo this will introduce more people to revanced
You know why it’s called revanced? Because youtube came after vanced. They wont ignore it forever, unfortunately.
YouTube Vanced was only shut down because they tried to monetise it by releasing their own crypto which sparked Google to shut it down. I think for now Revanced is safe.
Every great project always seems to have that one dude who is like, “But what if crypto?”. Really hoping we are moving past that phase.
But what if AI?
Its a monetization approach, same motives as what youtube does here with the ads so doubt itll ever go away.
The thing is that Revanced follows a new distribution model. Rather than distributing a modified app, they instead distribute patches for the normal YouTube APK so that the user modifies the app on their own device. Thus, ReVanced never distributes any of Google’s IP. It’s kinda like game modding. ReVanced will be a lot harder for Google to kill.
The one downside for ReVanced is that it’s harder for ordinary users to install, so that will limit its popularity.
True enough, but there are always options.
Rerevanced will be popular
Oof, one day soon, we’ll all be watching torrented rips of youtube videos, like we already do TV shows.
I just use yt-dl to download anything from youtube. It cuts the commercial out during download
Rererevanced will be the pinnacle
I know if I’m not wrong vanced got in trouble for using YouTube logo and reverse engineering the YouTube app. Revanced technically not breaking any law as it not directly modifying YouTube like vanced.
Yeah, but YT can change the terms, and now blocking ads, its clear they are stepping up the aggression in chasing profitability.
they’ve captured as many paying
customersproducts as they could under the ‘old’ system, so now they’re trying to squeeze more cash out every other source they can.I don’t fully agree. I buy premium. As long as they keep it ad-free, it’s a vote for a better business model, for platform, creator, and user alike. YT has had that option for years. Up to now, it was essentially voluntary.
It’s time to leave the ad-funded internet entirely behind us, and move to platforms like Nebula, Floatplane, Proton Mail… And yes, even YT Premium. I’m just keeping my fingers crossed they don’t pull a hulu and try to double dip on both a sub and ads.
If that happens, YT is dead to me.
I just can’t agree with the $73/month price for something I rarely if ever use. My grandson loves watching Elmo’s world on it on the tv, ads aren’t too bad yet, get like 10 mins of video before 2 30 second ads. But I refuse to pay google any money, they make enough off the android phones and all their ads they shove down your throat via websites, YouTube and google search engine
It is illegal in the US to bypass DRM.
deleted by creator
What are they gonna do? Revanced is just a patcher, unlike the previous version that fully distributes modified YouTube apk. There is a separate repo that has patched YouTube apk, but if that repo got taken down, the revanced manager still live on.
it’s YouTube re-Advanced
Bailamos.
Or, you could buy YouTube TV, which gives you YouTube Premium as a undisclosed bonus I’ve found. A great option because it helps content creators and allows you to cut cable. I may have some bias on the topic of paying for media content services, but in general pirating hurts the creators. I hate that I’m old and wise enough that I might have been more receptive to Metallica’s arguments during the Napster era. I do feel though that it is in the best interest of creators for certain content to be previewable. The problem with YouTube video monetization are that most are not going to be rewatched.
Wait what? I have YouTube TV and pay for YouTube Premium so would love to not do the latter. Where might I find this undisclosed bonus?
I don’t think I’ve ever seen the word “allowlisted”. Did someone forget “whitelisted” is a thing, or is that term finally cancelled?
Whitelist and blacklist were indeed cancelled despite having no racial origin.
deleted by creator
It doesn’t have racial origin, but it has pretty strong racial connotations.
What isn’t racist if even basic colors are racist?
It’s a bit more than just using colours though isn’t it?
It’s saying:
White = good
Black = bad
Just because it’s not inherently racist, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be changed. And most people don’t seem to have a problem with changing
Yellow road lines mean something different than white road lines. The hard drives I buy have black and red product names (one is faster than the other). Are these racist or just really convenient ways to differentiate ideas?
The good/bad white/black trope has been basic symbolism for a long time.
Might have been a day/night thing but certainly gets racial in today’s 1D cultural filter.
The good/bad white/black trope has been basic symbolism for a long time.
Might have been a day/night thing but certainly gets racial in today’s 1D cultural filter.
White = light, day, sun -> great for human daily activities, so it’s positive
Black = darkness, night -> spooky, dangerous and not great for human activities, so it’s negative
That can be universal, not tied to a specific culture.
BUt wOke!!!
You’re as bad as the people shouting that.
Right because bOtH sIdEs
I mean, you’re certainly proving that there’s stupid people wherever one goes.
There are cultural traditions of using colors as symbols, many of which are harmless – red for anger, blue for sadness, green for envy. Whitelist and blacklist come from the very long-standing theme of using white to represent good and black to represent evil.
Regardless of how you feel about the origin of those themes, it makes sense to start moving away from them now. Whether intentional or not, they can be harmful and aren’t really necessary.
Let’s also start removing phrases with white, yellow and brown as those are used to refer to people’s skin colour as well.
The only reason I would even contemplate not using blacklist or white washing is if an actual person of that skin colour says that it is not okay for them, or there’s an actual consensus among people of that community that it isn’t acceptable.
I can tell you as a person with brown skin, with brownie or whatever used as a derogatory name, almost everyone I know isn’t even concerned with terms like brown out or brown note.
Online outrages or articles aren’t an accurate depiction of reality.
Even more dangerously, shit like this drives outrage and diverts attention from actual, real issues faced by people of different races. Like not having stuff to eat or indoor plumbing or mental health infrastructure or access to health care.
Yes, i dont know and have a hard time figuring out if there really is a culture that is upset at us one would call reasonable. I so often see soundbytes that any real explanation is burried by high school drama.
TL;DR the group is likely more upset that we took away their democracy than our name for filters.
The only people being outraged are people like you when someone is using a different word.
I watched an ig reel that said people react to anything different to them either with fear or judgement. Get over yourself, have some empathy, and move on.
Oh shit, well if you watched an Instagram reel then it’s probably true.
Note though how I’m here reacting to something different with neither fear nor judgement, just with sarcasm.
That’s your take reading a post talking explicitly about how a person won’t be outraged about something without actually taking into consideration how the people who the issues is about feel or act?
Maybe you should stop for a moment, think over what you’ve said and read, and consider that many of these discrimated groups can actually think for ourselves and doesn’t need to be told what to be outraged over?
Ironically you are being very judgemental
not only that but whitelist-blacklist are just bad names.
even greenlist-redlist would be better (at least while we have light signals at intersections) as green means go red means stop are more universally understood.
but allowlist and blocklist are just plain better, they are self explanatory words. you don’t need to learn what they mean since it’s right there in the name.
whitelist-blacklist are names where you need to learn the meaning of them, sticking to them just because they were used in the past is not the best argument.
I’m fairly certain the term “blacklist” came before traffic lights
Words often work like unique signifiers “symbols”, often by using them you learn them and dont question it. Thats a neutral phenomenon. It has advantages and disadvantages. Mainly, redlist is as disconnected from meaning as blacklist is. Requiring the understanding of what a “car” is, and why they cant “wheel their way” thru a cross shaped road becuse of a colored light being there. It sounds really stupid when put like that, but accessability is important.
it isn’t though. you don’t need cars to learn red means stop, we literally had miniature roads, crossing and signs at my pre-school (or whatever it’s called in English, the one you go at age 3 till 6, you start school at 6).
Stop sign is red, pedestrian crossing are just red - stop, green - go. you learn that from a very young age so the association is natural.
Also, just to be clear, I didn’t say redlist is good, just that it’s less stupid than blacklist.
Fair, the idea of “going” will be there and hopefully, likely its symbols will stay relivant.
How is blacklist stupid? Green and red aren’t natural, in fact black/white makes more sense because it represents a binary choice (true/false, off/on).
They came from voting in ancient Athens were people had a white ball and a black ball. You put one or the other into a jar, a black was a no vote, white was yes. It has never had anything to do with race. If it bothers you change the words for skin color instead then.
“whitelist-blacklist are names where you need to learn the meaning of them”
You could say this about every word. All language is based on past usage.
Never liked these debates as “making the words comfortable (to myself, others or both)” (from both sides) matters most.I find that usimg that soundbyte results in people (including me) to not knowing the cultures your refering to and most without being informed assume that their irrelivant (Hence the original reactionary response). Since the debate has in bad faith on nobody’s intent become about “comfort”, ill give that perspective. Personally, Allowlist and blocklist “just work” (no discomfort). Blacklist and Whitelist are natural feeling and I fully understood the soundbyte reason. For that I can respect depricating the word but banning it (if thats even the goal) is uncomfortable. Ill happly abandon my position if a good argument is given. For now I subconciosly use what word was already there.
Edit: boilerplate is way too harsh, dont like conforntational tone.
Honestly I haven’t heard much rhetoric around anyone banning these terms. But if moving away from them IS good, and the entire catalyst for this conversation is “YouTube chose to use newer, more preferable terms”, then isn’t that a good thing?
Thats what I wanted to communicate, deprication is a fairly normal part of software. Computer interfaces in all their forms are just contracts of expectation, social contracts are simmlar. Deprication of marking an expectation as a mistake.
It’s common since quite a few years. And blocklist as counterpart
Blocklist and allowlist are much more intuitive, so if we ignore all the cultural baggage, these changes are rather sensical.
Cultural baggage? Neither term has any roots in racism, blacklist came from a play and whitelist came about as the opposite of blacklist
As of the perception of words has no relevance
you snowflake
Not everything is related to skin color Jesus. The world isn’t so black and white.
It’s not been cancelled.
I’m sure someone raised concerns over racist origins, or that they were uncomfortable with the terms. Or perhaps programmers did it themselves as a part of introspection that came around with GitHub changing from “master branch” to “main branch”.Which likely lead people to realise that blacklist and whitelist aren’t really descriptive.
Blacklist came from the 1600s, regarding regicide. And the opposite of that is obviously whitelist.
But it doesn’t actually describe what it’s doing, and ultimately it is an idiom.
Removing idioms in coding is generally good practice.
And you can have other things like “FilterList” or “AdminList” or whatever.deleted by creator
You are predictably behind the curve
Even the FBI recommends you use an adblocker, for your personal safety. Source: https://www.tomsguide.com/news/the-fbi-now-recommends-using-an-ad-blocker-heres-why
Remember when YouTube was just a video of a guy at the zoo? Pepperidge farm remembers…
Wish Jawed Karim never sold YouTube to Google. But alas…
If he didn’t sold it to Google I don’t think he have enough budget to maintain the site
Yeah, they had the better technology (Google Video was very bad) and Google had the money.
What was bad about Google Video? That was my favourite of the two: nice UI, clean, good recommendations
Two days ago I noticed when watching through the app on my phone that I could no longer just skip ads, and the trick of reporting them to skip didn’t work anymore either. I effectively had to just sit and wait.
That same day I got NewPipe, imported my subscriptions, and honestly even if this is just a phased trial or something, I won’t be going back to the standard YT app.
Creators make pennies from ad revenue. If I want to support them, I’ll make a donation or subscribe to their Patreon or something.
I won’t just sit and suffer a slew of ads while my data is harvested under the false pretense that it’s all to support the creators.
Aw that’s so cute, they think they’ll be able to stop adblockers from working for more than a few days. Just like everyone else before them. Good luck with that guys.
That’s did news. Perhaps after mastodon grow massive thanks to Elon, and Lemmy grow thanks to reddit, we see peertube get his time to shine thanks to Google… #fuckupyourcompanyFAST
I’d love to see PeerTube grow just like these platforms, but I think it’s a lot more complicated to get people to use it than mastodon/lemmy.
Twitter/Reddit weren’t used as a major income source like YouTube and Instagram (I am saying this based on famous people in my country, I don’t know how it goes on other places), and so are easier to replace. The people posting and discussing topics don’t do that for the money, they do because they like it.
YT and its monetization system made possible for people to make a living from the content they produce, and many wouldn’t like or simply couldn’t sacrifice this income source just to go to a more ethical and private platform like PeerTube.
- TV : SmartTube -Mobile : NewPipe / LibreTube
- Desktop : Piped / YouTube with a bunch of browser extensions This my YouTube Premium
The streaming crash has only just begun.
I have YouTube ReVanced on my phone. If YouTube ever defeats uBlock Origin on my desktop, I just won’t watch YouTube on desktop anymore. I refuse to watch or view ads.
