this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
129 points (89.6% liked)

Technology

58061 readers
31 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I mean, I dont actually mind ads... within reason. But over the past few years I have watched less and less youtube content due to the ratio of ads to the actual bloody content I wanted to view.

One recent video about a bloke's guitar amp was great. The ads not so much. I had to view two lots of 30 second unskippable ads before the 9 minute video would start. The guy starts this amazing guitar solo half way through, only to be cut off by TWO MORE bleeding adverts. The solo continues, the guy shreds it out then the video ends.... two more adverts, 30 seconds each no skips (I reloaded the browser in the end which seemed to trigger a 2 minute ad at the start of another video).

Use Piped I hear you cry. Great idea. But how long is that going to last? I am certain that youtube and their parent company are feverishly pushing their engineers to find ways through, around, over and under any tool that stops them making money. The real solution is to tell everyone we know to use other platforms as much as possible and avoid Youtube. Tell every creator we love and respect to diversify where their content goes.

I know people here dont like the politics and trolling that happen on other platforms but thats because they're insulated. With more exposure those platforms will tackle it. Or quarantine it. The other danger is if we dont diversify our viewing and creator hosting then Alphabet will just hold a monopoly and strangle any other real chance.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 59 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Nah, most people don't give a fuck. If the method of bypassing ads gets too intricate, they'll cave.

Seriously, the vast majority of people just let the ads run, or even watch them. They're either unconcerned, or lazy, sometimes both.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago (2 children)

We've tasted ad-less video entertainment and found it good. That said, for at least half a century OTA network TV required watching ads and most people didn't care much because they didn't have to pay cash for the service. I think many/most people have the capacity to tolerate ads to get what they want.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago

I think it's less to do with the fact that ads exist, and more to do with how intrusive they are. Early YouTube ads were pretty tame compared to the ones today, especially when it was just banner ads.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No commercials was once one of the big selling points for cable, and we know how that turned out

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Except that's a myth and never happened. TV on all its forms had ads immediately as it appeared, because it was the same concept as radio: when you have a captive audience waiting to get the programming in order, you can insert anything you want.

Cable promised higher quality programming, exclusive access, higher quality image etc. but never no ads. Sounds familiar?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Yes, and interestingly the earliest cable TV in the US was built to relay broadcast channels to valleys where the signal wouldn't otherwise reach.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

So you dont think the frequency of adverts to content is too much?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 months ago

Its far too much, its maddening. Yet still most don't care.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

That's neither here nor there. What I think is ad glut, and what you think is ad glut, dude doesn't have anything to do with the majority of YouTube users, which is what has to be inconvenienced enough for it to disrupt their business, which is what I thought your post was about

[–] [email protected] 31 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It won't do shit.

Most people will accept Google's cock up their ass and just deal with the ads. Everyone else will find new services or figure out how to continue using ad blockers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I've have premium because of YT music (formerly Google Play Music) which imo is the best music streaming service. I have the family plan that is me my wife, and three friends, the friend paying their portion of plan.

I like giving money to Google less and less by the day, but I don't mind paying for an ad free service that I use extensively. If they start putting ads in the paid service, I will be dropping immediately.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I've been subscribed to the same family plan, since about 2014ish. I like it, but really don't appreciate that they raised the price for basically fuck all. Only reason I haven't canceled it is that creators I watch on YouTube get far more from me as a Premium user than ad-based viewership

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Yea, the annual/semi annual price increases are getting old, especially with no new features.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Netflix and Disney are threatening ads in their paid services, with maybe a higher priced tier to then avoid them. I think this is the model streaming is going for now.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I do my best to not give money to Disney. They're like Nestle in that they have their dirty hands in everything, so it's hard to completely avoid, but I do try.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 10 months ago

No, most people really don't care.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Youtube has a captive audience that isn't going anywhere. The platform is too big to die, and too expensive for any challenger to seriously threaten it. And the only users they stand to lose with this move are the users who are costing them money, they don't care if adblock users leave as long as they keep everyone else.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Its interesting. You talk to my generation and older and they see the ads as invasive. They grew up with less because of TV. And it wasnt really targetted/personalised like internet ads. Younger people, say mid 20s and under dont realise how many ads those are. I reminds me of the rights people lose over the years because people werent educated on matters.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

TV? The platform that basically is one giant ad? This is the most confusing comment.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Depends what country you're from. Here in Australia there are ad free channels, and ad supported channels that have a reasonable amount (for example, watching sports you might see a few ads at half time when the players are resting... but that's also when I get up to take a break from the TV myself...)

There's probably TV here that has more ads, but you don't have to watch those.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

For as long as people have complained about YouTube ads even before they started the crackdown, I don't think it'll matter. Tons of people didn't block them even before the option went away.

Personally, I bit the bullet and got Premium last year because I didn't feel like maintaining a DNS solution on my wifi and like using my TV for it. YouTube is basically the main form of "TV" that I watch when I'm in a couch potato mood. Most actual TV shows that come out aren't interesting to me.

I'm not really advocating everyone just go buy premium. Even in my case I'm not jumping up and down to give Google my money by any means. But for my situation it's an expense that I justify for myself

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

YT Premium is not available in my location and, as yet, adblock still working fine.

When they catch up with my location I'll use either revanced or LibreTube.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Tons of people didn't block them even before the option went away.

Excellent point.

Those of us that adblock are probably a single digit percent of their total traffic.

They just don't want that to increase.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't think it will make enough of an impact for Alphabet to actually give a shit but I agree they're getting out of control with the ads and I think a handful of people will start looking for alternatives. I recently switched from Google to Kagi and I set up Firefox to redirect all YouTube links to Piped lol I think a lot of people are already trying to find alternatives to Google products due to general enshittification but they're so big I don't really see it hurting them in any significant way. I would love to see something actually compete with YouTube though tbh. I personally try to use non Google alternatives whenever possible these days

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How do you get Firefox to redirect all YT links to Piped? Please share

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It’s possible this could begin a regulatory shitstorm. They may realize they’re tempting fate with how hard they’re pushing for profit in bullshit, unethical, sketchy ways.

Then again, some quant will probably walk into the room and present a business plan for regulatory capture of the EU and US and the long term profit that would yield, so they’ll definitely go that route.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

I HOPE it does.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

The assumpion Google is doing is that people install AdBlockes because they want something free. They seems not to be able to understand that they simply gone too far.

Google had the problem that they must show a ever growing revenue and since they cannot add more eyeball (or data to harvest) they simply need to try to get more from what they had. So as you say, the problem is not the single Ad, or the data harvest or any other single thing they do.
The problem is the sum of all of the things they do. They show multiple Ads, harvest your data, make you pay and still harvest your data and show the Ads.

People simply started to think "since Google want to screw me, then why I should not try to screw them ?"

Use Piped I hear you cry. Great idea. But how long is that going to last? I am certain that youtube and their parent company are feverishly pushing their engineers to find ways through, around, over and under any tool that stops them making money.

It will became the usual armed race, until Google would make their services so disfunctional to even the common user that people will simply stop using them since the value they get from the service is not worth the trouble.

That assuming that in some places (the EU for example) Google would not be hit by some law that force them to stop what they are doing and force them to play by the rules everyone else need to follow.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

No. Also AdBlock works again

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

If YouTube ads were like the ads on Pornhub, 30 seconds long and skippable after 5 seconds, I would be OK with ads these 1min at beginning and same in the middle for a 10min video is just ridiculous.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Honestly, I would be fine with it, if they slashed the price of YT premium by about 60%.

Right now the cost of an individual YT premium membership is about 150SEK/Month, that is far too high.

I watch a LOT of YT on my commute, and I would be fine with paying 60-70SEK/Month.

In some regions the cost of an individual membership is the equivalent of about 20SEK/Month, so it is profitable even at those prices.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (3 children)

They really should unbundle YouTube Music or make a plan that's for people that want nothing more than ad-free, and make that tier basically about how much they got from serving you ads.

They're trying too hard to sell Premium as having all of those perks and extras that not everyone wants.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Honestly, I would be fine with it, if they slashed the price of YT premium by about 60%.

Here in Australia they just announced they're about to increase prices by about 60%... new prices is equivalent to 235 SEK / month (that is for a family plan... but the family plan is the best deal - then you can at least share the cost between people).

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It will hurt them a little bit, because it will drive a few people to alternative platforms. However, the majority of their user base is now captive, because they have grown dependent on Alphabet for a number of services. All they have to do is ban a few people from all of Alphabet to set the example, and then 99% of folks will either subscribe or disable their ad blockers. Because getting banned from all of their services would really, really suck for most people who depend on them. Just think of how many non-Alphabet logins would suddenly stop working (either because of federation or gmail dependencies). Not to mention their data saved to the cloud.

Unfortunately, big picture is, they will come out on top. Because of the "embrace, extend, and extinguish" model that they are veterans at. IOW, they know how to royally screw people.

I think our only glimmer of hope is the government continuing to go after monopolies. That's not much of a hope, though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

All they have to do is ban a few people from all of Alphabet to set the example, and then 99% of folks will either subscribe or disable their ad blockers.

It can be like you said or, on the other hand, be the trigger to even more people to seek for alternatives.

Because getting banned from all of their services would really, really suck for most people who depend on them.

While true, fighting with your own clients/source of income is not a very brilliant strategy for a company. People that depend on them for serious reasons can simply decide that the risk is becoming too high and simply seek other solutions. All the SCO saga should have taught something...

Unfortunately, big picture is, they will come out on top. Because of the “embrace, extend, and extinguish” model that they are veterans at. IOW, they know how to royally screw people.

Maybe Google can win this battle, but I am not sure about the war. If the data that show that about 42% of the internet users had an AdBlocker installed are true, it remain to be seen how many of them will accept the condition Google set.

At this point is clear that the use of AdBlockers is hurting them in a way or another and while user may find an alternative solution for Google services, Google cannot find an alternative users for its services. In the end Google lose even if they only show a slower grow then predicted.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (10 children)

Hmmm...well, their fight against the adblockers is quite concerning, especially if the ads are so intrusive that they disrupt the user experience in viewing content, thus pushing more users to get Premium or go to another platform. It's not uncommon these days to find people migrating away from Big Tech platforms and going to other platforms that have more reasonable and sustainable services that benefit both the client and the vendor. The challenge is the content, which may not be as numerous as what you would find on YouTube, and along with that, there's the challenge of convincing creators to go onto those other platforms.

But, I am doubtful that Alphabet will be financially impacted. They might see a loss around YouTube, but that loss could be offset by profits from other products in their portfolio. Furthermore, because they have a paid option, it wouldn't be surprising to see people going for that option, especially if the cost is reasonable, and they are getting premium services not just for themselves but also their friends and family.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

I wish it would but it won’t.

load more comments
view more: next ›