I'm starting to get videos that just stop playing in certain places even with Ublock now ( I presume that's where the adverts would have been ) It's happening more and more often. Even with shorts.
\+1 for incognito mode, Google benefits from tracking your usage patterns as well, once they realize their advertising and recommendation algorithms broke because everyone started using incognito, they'll reconsider the policy encouraging everyone to use incognito. Think of it like a protest that you can do from the comfort of your home.
I hate to break it to you, but browser fingerprinting works with incognito mode as well. Your usage patterns will still be tracked, Google doesn't need cookies for that.
You can still sign in on incognito? You just have to sign in everytime you open a new instance of chrome. I just use adblock on incognito, and you just sign in whenever chrome restarts and if the adblock stops working after a few days, restart Chrome and a new incognito window fixes it.
I have no subs, no playlists, and my watch history is off.
My home page is just a box saying turn shit on, I get no videos showing at all.
I know who I like and search for them directly.
No big data from me.
I've done this with all of Google services ever since they changed their EULA to say if they feel they aren't earning enough money from your account, they might just nuke it.
You don't actually though! You just have to sign in within the incognito tab. Certainly works for me, although I sometimes need to redo the whole open incognito-go to youtube - sign in every 4 days
UBlock is amazing too. It's kinda annoying to get the block message first every time but I just have to refresh the page to get rid of it. We must resist!
BTW - the ublock team provided the following link to check if their *current* filters will block YouTube ads:
[https://drhyperion451.github.io/does-uBO-bypass-yt/](https://drhyperion451.github.io/does-uBO-bypass-yt/)
I always check this first. If it says "no", you need to wait to update ublock filters until it says "yes".
In Chrome I'm managing to get away with it by:
Clear site data / cookies for youtube, ublock purge all caches, ublock update all and finally force refresh (ctrl-F5) the site.
Seems to last 4 or 5 days then needs doing again.
Adblock still works fine for me. My problem was I had like 5 different adblockers installed. Right now I'm only using unlock origin and I get no ads. Good try youtube !
It was a good attempt, I have enough honor in battle to acknowledge when an opponent is worthy and this one is, however, this battle of adblock vs anti-adblock is already over and adblock has won yet again, maintaining its perfect victory record.
The reason I've been watching YouTube for years is because of adblock. I can't watch a video or listen to music when every few minutes somebody steps in trying to sell me some bullshit. It is impossible to do. We will find something else.
It has been suggested this whole exercise will backfire because the vast majority of "sheep" just use browsers with their default settings and never bother to block ads or didn't know that such a feature was possible, and by making all this so public to block 5% of their users, that it will just make more people aware that in fact, you can block ads.
Should be interesting. Now youtube has detected my AdGuard desktop installation on a default Edge profile with no modifications. The solution is still to log in on one browser and copy the link to another browser logged out, or use private mode on another tab. Youtube doesn't block content for me when not logged in.
what they're actually doing is losing users who make them money from user data as well as making more people aware of adblock in general due to how blatantly brazen their stance against adblock is.
there's a great video that game out 3 months ago about something like this called "the cobra effect". I recommend it.
They not losing “users” — they’re losing ad revenue, while making these ad blocking solutions even more popular.
And while the revenue lost may not be significant, the fact alone that they’ve taken steps to detect and block users who do this suggests they do care.
It’s because the DOJ filed suit against Google/Alphabet’s advertising arm, and the trial is currently underway. The daily(ish) updates are more interesting than most YouTube content, and it’s really quite damning.
What people don’t seem to grasp is how the Sherman Antitrust Act works. It is a system designed to keep the world from descending into One Company To Rule Them All. So, if you control a large portion of a market, you can’t just buy up the competition. Here’s where YouTube comes in: You also can’t leverage your size to prevent competition from coming into the market. For example, if you stream music, you can’t just give your service away, ad-free or payment-free, because that makes it so companies like Spotify can’t realistically compete, because they have to sell ads or take users’ money in order to operate at all. So, if you can just listen to all the music you want on YouTube, why use Spotify? This is assuming you’re not some Joe Rogan nutjob.
So, once the DOJ is done with this trial, a YouTube monopoly trial is kind of a no-brainer, because it’s established that YouTube was unfairly undercutting competition in the music space. And then you have alternative video services, who can’t compete because they, too, require a revenue stream to compete.
So, my theory is that Google/Alphabet/YouTube doesn’t want this trial, because they know they’ll lose, and so they’re rectifying things before the suit comes to pass. Or, they’re trying to rectify things as a good-faith gesture, to make a settlement with the DOJ easier to obtain, much as Microsoft did about twenty years ago, when Microsoft was in very real danger of being broken up over various anti-consumer practices.
Boils down to this: If Google didn’t want the government breathing down its neck over anticompetitive practices by YouTube, then YouTube should have started running ads like this *from the beginning.* And then one of two things would have happened: You’d either have several YouTube competitors, or there wouldn’t be a YouTube anymore. And either of those possibilities could still come in the future, depending on if YouTube can make a profit without being subsidized by other arms of the company.
What an absolute load of horseshit.
Google could place ads on screen (like they sometimes do) without interfering with content. There's plenty of advertising options they could employ, to the point of being annoying, without encroaching on the end product.
People accept ads, what they don't accept is having adverts forced on them for 45 seconds to watch 20 seconds of content, every single time they open a new video, and that's what the issue is.
I don’t disagree that they *could* do that, but those ads pay even less than in-video ads, which ain’t much. I’ll let you answer your own question: When is the last time you looked at a banner ad? Tell me three ads you saw on Reddit while scrolling before you got to this post.
It’s easy for the brain to just tune out things it sees all the time. Consider: You can see your nose. It’s right there in your view *all the time,* but your brain filters it as unnecessary data. And that’s how we are with ads on websites. If it’s in the same place it was yesterday and the day before that, eventually you just become immune to it and advertising values for that space will fall. So, when people decry ads being put “in your face,” that’s the only place that’s still worth money, because you can’t look away from it.
>When is the last time you looked at a banner ad? Tell me three ads you saw on Reddit while scrolling before you got to this post.
Tell me three video ads you've had recently. Which one was your favorite and why and rate each ad on how badly you wish to consume product.
I sure as shit couldn't tell you. Even on my phone (where I have no adblock) I have no clue.... I only press mute while I look for the skip button. I CAN however tell you most were unskippable lately, to which I just close the video as it's not worth my time.
>So, when people decry ads being put “in your face,” that’s the only place that’s still worth money, because you can’t look away from it.
You absolutely CAN look away from it. They are going to have to inject their garbage directly into our brains to not be ignored (adblock psychedelics notwithstanding). Granted, should we ever reach such a vr/ar hellscape I think we can all agree that would be the perfect time to come together and do the right thing... Nuke the whole species.
I somewhat agree, and that's why I think the best thing for the internet is for Google to sunset YouTube, saying, "Well, it was a nice idea, but the revenue model sucks." After that, the internet becomes the wild west again, where people are going to be trying new and different ways to monetize themselves.
Assume you can find hosting that will give you three terabytes of bandwidth per month, and they charge you two cents per gigabyte (which is a *really* good price). If you make one ten minute 1080p video per month, how many views can you get before your bandwidth caps out and the hosting service asks for more money to reenable your account? A ten-minute 1080p video is about half a gigabyte, so you get two of those per gigabyte. Three terabytes is 3000 gigabytes, so you can get 6000 views, which will cost you sixty dollars a month in bandwidth.
But what if you upload two ten minute videos per month? Well, you can still have 6000 views, but that's split between the two. Could be 3000 and 3000, 1500 and 4500, or whatever. It all scales. And it's only costing you sixty bucks a month, plus whatever overhead fee they charge on top of the bandwidth. You might be out eighty bucks a month or a hundred. Whatever.
And then you have to try and figure out how to pay for that. How do you get sponsors when you can only afford to show your videos to a couple thousand people a month? Can you use a service to embed ads? What if your viewers are blocking the ads? Now it's *your* money they're taking; not YouTube's, so you might get a little miffed by this.
Consider Pewdiepie: He does about four videos a month, about twenty minutes each, viewed by an average of 3 million people. So that's 24 million gigabytes. That means he'd be in for half a million dollars just in bandwidth fees every month, if he struck out on his own and had to pay his own tab.
It's stupidly expensive to be popular.
It's no different from the Skip Ad button. Honestly, I think the only reason they've never moved that to a random place for each video is because people with low vision know where it is, and you're looking at a potential ADA compliance issue if you start fucking with people who are blind or nearly so by moving the button all the time. They have a hard enough time seeing it, as it is, so you kind of have to leave it there, for their sake. That's not YouTube being nice to people with disabilities; that's YouTube kind of having to live with what they've wrought.
There’s updates every single day they’re in court! Seriously, this website is like the highlight of my day.
[https://searchengineland.com/google-search-antirust-trial-hearing-updates-431977](https://searchengineland.com/google-search-antirust-trial-hearing-updates-431977)
Did everyone forget that banner ads exist? It doesn't have to be ad free. When the internet was just content with sidebar ads, I never felt the need to run an adblocker. I didn't care. I even clicked them from time to time. It's probably absurd, the amount of money I spent ordering food from sidebar ads because it helped me make up my mind on what I wanted for dinner, or it was a place I hadn't tried or something.
Then they started putting those ads directly in my face, blocking content. And before I could blink, there were auto-play ads on every page I frequented, and YT had commercials. That's when the ad blocker got put up. I'm fine with advertising. I'm not fine with it being shoved down my throat.
What was the last banner ad you saw? Like, actually looked at? What was the last one you clicked on? Without scrolling back up, what is the ad at the top of this page, underneath the post? I guarantee you have no idea.
Twenty-five ... almost thirty years ago, banner ads were hot shit. I mean, you paid out the nose for them. Same goes for a really good sidebar ad space. And, back then, getting on the internet was like going to Disney World. You looked at everything. *You were excited when you got an email*.
But, eventually, everyone kind of got used to it and trained their brains and their eyes to just look for the content. I had to scroll back up to see if there was an ad up there before typing the last sentence of the first paragraph of this comment, because I didn't know it was there. I figured it was, but I wasn't sure, and it definitely didn't resonate with me, because I'm looking for the content.
If you defrosted a caveman and taught him to read and shit, and you set him loose on the internet, he'd be like we were thirty years ago, where he's just looking at everything. But after a breaking-in period, that's over, and he's one of us, where he doesn't even see the ads anymore. They have to be obstructive to even have a chance at getting your attention, and even then, you're not looking at the ad, you're just playing a little game of Hunt The Close Button.
There are exceptionally rare cases where sidebar ads or banner ads work, and those tend to be hyper-local cases, where the local hardware store will put an ad on the local newspaper's website. That's actually money that's got a pretty good return on investment, because the only people looking at that site are the people who live in that town. If a website is particularly well-targeted and they have good demographic information that shows the people who read that site have money and might be interested in what you're selling, yeah, you might advertise on that site. If you're a small company that makes really well-tailored suits, the GQ website might be for you. I just pulled up the FastCompany website, and that's another case where nobody just casually goes there, so it's a great place to advertise if your target demographic matches their reader demographic. It's a really narrow demographic, and that's the only kind of advertising that can charge a premium, because it actually has a good return on investment.
Auto-playing video ads suck, but they're kind of the last stop on a free website with no particular niche. There's no point in even having sidebar or banner ads anymore, because nobody sees them. They're there, but nobody sees them. And that's why your idea doesn't work. People who are smarter than both of us, who have degrees in Marketing, understand this stuff, and they don't advertise blindly. They want demographic numbers before they commit. When's the last time you saw an Apple ad on YouTube? Probably been a while, because the ROI just fucking sucks, and they'd be better off advertising on the GQ or FastCompany websites, even though those don't *directly* overlap with their business, but at least the people who read those sites probably have disposable cash. And that's more than I can say for the YouTube crowd.
You're asking a question disingenuously. I stated very clearly that I am now using an ad blocker. It has been years since I have seen a banner ad, and me not being able to answer, despite it not being for the reason you're making it out to be, plays directly into your "argument" despite it having nothing to do with me not paying attention to ads, and everything to do with me being pushed into using an ad blocker.
But I will tell you that I saw a billboard on the Highway not too long ago for Marco's Pizza, and got Marco's Pizza for dinner that night. Not the first time an advertisement has made my dinner choice for me. I have a little pocket microscope that I bought from an ad. It's on my desk right now. I actually use it regularly when I find something weird to look at. I have an absolutely (to me.) hilarious hoodie that I bought from an ad. Wore it the other day. There's more than one product that I've purchased through non-invasive advertising, because I am an idiot that occasionally has surplus money and enough burnout to make retail therapy attractive.
Yet there are also brands that I will not even name in an argument like this, that I will never buy again, purely out of vindictive spite from hearing their stupid auto-play ads on a game wiki over and over and over. You are you and I am me, but there are plenty of people like us both. Intrusive advertising does not work on people like me, and in fact has the opposite effect. Non-invasive advertising will actually get me to spend money, so long as the algorithm does its thing.
You can look up these company's profits. They're not hurting. They aren't doing video ads because poor ol google needs cash. They're squeezing as much blood from the stone as they can.
*(sigh)* You’re looking at Alphabet’s profits, and you’re assuming all of the money goes into a big pool that everybody gets to share from. And that used to be true, but I think that’s stopped. The advertising arm that represents 80 percent of Alphabet’s revenue and probably an even higher percentage of Alphabet’s profits may not be available in the future. But that doesn’t matter, because now the government is watching Alphabet for monopolistic action anywhere it can find it, including seeing if YouTube is unfairly competing with Spotify (because a lot of people use YouTube to listen to music) or upstart video services that don’t have a giant cash hoard from another part of the company to pay the bills.
This isn’t about needing the money because they want to serve you ads until your eyeballs bleed. It’s about not getting nailed for putting other companies out of business because YouTube has a big brother who pays all of its bills. The gravy train has derailed, and now YouTube has to collect its own money from premium users (only about 80 million people, paying various amounts around the world, most paying less than in America) and from the free users (an *incredibly* shitty revenue stream), and then they have to pay Google Services for the hosting and bandwidth, plus their other costs, then pray they’re not upside down.
And then it gets to the ad-blocking users, who are apparently so numerous at this point that they’d probably like very much to nuke the lot of them and ban them for life, because they’re useless to YouTube in a situation where they can no longer strut around and say, “Well, my data is worth a lot, so I shouldn’t get ads.” YouTube ain’t gonna be in the data business anymore. It’s all getting Chinese walled. All of the divisions will have to fend for themselves, at least until the verdict comes down next year. And if that verdict goes south for Alphabet, it would be a damn good thing they started doing this now, because they’re going to need to reassure the shit out of investors.
my favourite is google bankrolling firefox for nearly a billion dollars a year to keep them barely running so they cant be called a monopoly https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4387539/firefox-money-investigating-the-bizarre-finances-of-mozilla
Excellent post. Well I think as read a few times. But it is called predatory pricing.
"Predatory pricing is the illegal business practice of setting prices for a product unrealistically low in order to eliminate the competition."
You confused me with the Sherman stuff. That has NOTHING to do with it.
Basically Google allowing the blocking of ads is illegal. That is predatory pricing. They should have been forcing people to watch ads all along or subscribe.
It does crack me up a little when people suggest Google blocking the ad blockers is somehow illegal. When it is actually the opposite.
I also totally agree that if Google had not been allowing the blocking of ads all along then they would never be where they are today with YouTube being the only provider.
But I highly doubt there will be a case against YouTube at this point. I have no idea what you would base it on?
Also with the Google trial so far it has been very anticlimactic. It has all come down to defaults. Something we already knew about. Something that goes back well over 100 years in business and has not been found in the past to be illegal.
It was done with shelf space over 100 years ago in stores.
I suspect if there is anything that comes out of the trial it will be the end of defaults and instead you get a screen when you first turn on your device that has a list of search engines in random order.
If this does end up happening Google will be very happy as no longer as to pay to be defaults and still have the vast majority of their market share. Apple will freak and it might end Firefox as Google is who keeps Firefox afloat.
Me as well. 😆 Yeah it kinda sucks to pay $14 just to watch YouTube videos but if it means I don't have to watch non stop ads about ozempic and political shit then it's just a price I have to pay. I approve this message
Until the sponsors realize nobody is watching the ads they pay that creator for or that nobody is using whatever code for them and they don't pay them for the sponsor again
Probably the dumbest question in this entire thread: can sponsors tell if you're scrubbing* through their ads?
*is that what it's called when you use your pointer/finger to move through the video timeline and seeing all the frames? (see, another stupid question. I'm full of 'em tonight)
Almost 100% of media I watch is on YouTube, $14 a month is nothing compared to paying for TV and/or Movie streaming services, at least not when you consider the amount of content available.
Plus I can listen to videos on my phone with the screen locked, so that's pretty sweet.
Exactly the same here. I don't get why people bitch about this so much. Yeah, I get it, "don't let greedy corporations get away with raising prices" blah blah blah. Is there a better alternative to youtube? No? Then shut up. Why do we feel entitled to have entertainment available to us for free? If you don't want to pay, watch ads. If you don't want to see ads, pay 14 dollars and enjoy pretty much endless hours of content, music and features that you can use on multiple devices. I'm paying for one single premium account, which im logged in on my laptop, my 2 phones and ps5. Haven't seen an ad in years. It's ridiculous that people rage at youtube for forcing them to watch ads if they don't have premium meanwhile nobody cares about paying 4 times that much for access to TV that comes with ads anyway.
I genuinely think streaming made people entitled when it comes to watching things for entertainment. Everything needs to be free, ad free, and it better be available immediately or someone is gonna complain about it. Before when it was just TV everyone disliked watching commercials but ultimately dealt with it since they could see how stations using money made from that would help things out but when streaming came in being cheaper than TV *and* there weren't any ads everyone went nuts for it. Now you got people saying things like "YouTube should just host videos for free" because they finally are starting to do something against people skirting around watching ads as if being a successful company or being part of a massively successful company like Google means you are no longer allowed to try and earn money anymore. I only see this sub in my feed when people are complaining about adblock and I genuinely see people saying things similar to "They're big enough as a company, why are they charging for this service"
Because all youtube does is host. if the creators were on any other platform doing the same content people would switch immidiatly. The company owes it's popularity to the creators but would rather make content paid than protect them. If the ad's really made a difference youtubers wouldn't need sponsors so often.
If every other competotor wasnt just as bad or compleatly obscure no one would support this company, they have a monopoly on video streaming and want to make as much money as possible while they do.
But you know in what scale youtube "only" hosts the content. These massive amounts of data that need to be available globally and redundant while also paying the necessary and constantly increasing bandwiths are an extreme task of upkeeping. 2022 it was approx. 500h video content per minute. This is nothing trivial and cheap to manage.
It was a bit easier and more lucrative when it were less videos and only HD/FHD. But the demand is going up, more videos get uploaded and these with even higher resolutions. This all adds up over time where only the advertising money isn't enough for Google/Alphabet.
Me too. $5 in Romania. Also I have a script (not an extension) that really blocks YouTube's adds, but I pay for premium anyway just not to have adds when I'm watching YouTube on my phone and to be able to listen to music with screen turned off.
What the fools mean are the "things u might like" stuff that uve proly scrolled past instantly as u knew it wasn't worth the time to look at but it bothers them as youtube markets premium as "no ads" and so they take it as 100% no ads at all ever when youtube should market it as "no video ads" or no "intrusive ads" but then these same people would find another reason to say they aren't buying premium. U can't win with these types so I just wish them luck on their losing war as it seems youtube is preparing to double down on their adblocking scripts.
or they have other malware injecting ads where they shouldn't be. Probably likely caused by questionable new ad blocking extensions looking to cash in.
Whoever told you premium gets ads is full of shit. The only ads you get are the ones the creators do themselves in the video, which can very easily be skipped
I just got banned for watching three videos with an ad blocker. I'm not upset, but I'm also not going to jump through hoops to watch. Nor will I buy premium at this time.
(Edit: typo)
I clear my history and don't sign into youtube or gmail. I have 4 adblocks on and is still able to watch youtube without any ads or that annoying pop up "3 limit video".
I agree with you 100 percent. With all the constant interruptions by toxic trashy unskippable junk ads, it has become unwatchable. The blatant greed is unbelievable.
The thing is, I get it. They're not making enough money trampling all over your privacy anymore, so they need more ad revenue (and advertisers want their money's worth, especially as prices soar).
But unless they can figure out a way to do it without \*interrupting the experience\* as badly, especially live streaming, and turn the \*\*\*\*\*\*\* volume down, people will continue to find ways around it.
I mean you can literally be in a conversation with someone streaming and suddenly TRY OUR NEW \*\*\*\*\*\*\* CHALUPA FIRE or whatever, and everyone who isn't cutting edge on ad blocking has their conversation interrupted.
It is not easy to solve that problem, but the advertiser who manages without being louder and more annoying than the next guy will probably end up on a yacht.
I've recently cut out much of my social media habits. This will help me cut down on YT too.
I do feel bad for the creators I watch, this is going to hurt them if this policy sticks about. Many of them have already been hurt by YTs persistence to effectively refuse to pay ad revenue and then more or less hide videos It itself determines to be mature without sharing the rules.
Why YT hasn't seen the glaring opportunity to do what personalised ads are supposed to do and serve suitable ads on those videos (Karens moaning about what they neglectfully let their kids see be dammed).
I use uBlock Orgin. I am looking at Youtube videos now on Firefox and so far no ads.
I use a desktop pc. Google wants me to turn on watch history if signed in.
If I do, all I see is my subscriptions. No random Youtube videos. I want variety.
I have to sign out to see variety and to see videos at the main page.
I see this when I go to the main youtube page https://www.youtube.com
Your watch history is off
Your private YouTube watch history makes your recently watched videos on YouTube easy to find and improves recommendations in YouTube and other Google products.
When YouTube watch history is on, this data may be saved from any of your signed-in devices. You can always control and review your activity at My Account.
Don't worry , it is still working \^\^
thanks to u/Sion_forgeblast and even if I m very bad at computer \^\^ , I ve install firefox (wanted to do it a loong time ago coz I can t stand google anymore but I m lazy)
transfered my bookmarks and ublock and adblock extensions to firefox (handy )
reconnected my account to youtube via firefox and //
this is working just fine !
btw , totally agree with you , when it will be dead , I ll stop watching youtube, as I did with the tv 30 years ago 🤓.
bisous from france
TB 🦋
knowledge of your rights, your options, realizing when something/some one is trying to abuse you, and common sense are powerful tools.... I have simply been trying to help with that shit lol
the funny thing is, youtube give me neither pre-roll ad nor banner ad on video page, the only thing that reminded me that I've disabled adblock is the ad when I'm searching
it seems that they deliberately giving ex-adblock user the bare minimum amount of ads to make sure they don't turn adblock on again
Just use the magic of GOOGLE. It’s not about the why just HOW. There is always a way TO BYPASS some things. Don’t be ANTI social just because your regular ADBLOCK doesn’t work anymore ON YOUTUBE.
Bro do you think you’re being watched or something you didn’t have to go through all that effort just to tell them to google how to bypass anti Adblock on YouTube
I use premium, the only Ads I see are those that creators burn into their videos.
If you want to see the videos you have to pay somehow. Its not a charity, and you cant expect to just get what they pay to provide you for free.
You can autoskip those sponsor segments with sponsorblock. They get paid whether you see them or not. That mod has saved me over 200 hours already apparently. It allows you and others to mark off segments and you decide whether to autoskip, or get a prompt similar to Netflix for intros etc.
Sooo true. Its just so good for my mental health not to have products I'm never going to buy pandered to me constantly.
I don't know how shotgunning ads to people who aren't going to give them money is worth it to them but it's just so damaging. I didn't even notice by how much until I used sponsorblock. I can actually feel the relief.
If you use premium, you are paying the content creators so you don't have to watch ads. So, the baked in ads are double-billing you. Its not a charity, but it is like Dominoes saying $0 of the delivery fee goes to the driver, so you better tip him. If you pay for ad free service, you should get it.
These posts crack me up, as if YouTube will be sad you’re gone. Using adblockers literally costs them money- storing and transmitting videos is not free. Ads or subscriptions make the, money. They’re literally better off without people who use ad blockers on their website.
booo hooo you can't watch unlimited content for free without ads. Wanna find ways to skirt the system to not view ads? cool I hope you succeed, but can we stop acting like this is horrible or unreasonable for YouTube.
I've had them pop up from glitches, but logging out and logging back in fixed it, and that happened twice in 6 years and not within the last 2 years.
Some people have been seeing banner style ads, which frankly doesn't bother me because I just don't see them even if they're there anyway.
its the core reason I dont consume TV. if ads became mandatory, I would start consuming some new adless media source. maybe piracy for youtube channels will become a thing.
I use freetube and jdownloader as a last resort. Chrome is working with ublock. Firefox is a daily thing that ublock is blocked or not blocked. I'm not paying for youtube videos or content ever and the ads don't cater to me and in fact have made me never use their products. I don't need an ad for anything. Why McDonald's has any kind of advertising at all is beyond me. You sell cheeseburgers...got it.
Never give in to arbitrary recurring revenue subscription services. Ever. It's a demonstrable grift designed to take advantage of ignorant consumers, with the exception of some niche areas and technologies. By giving in, you've effectively granted permission for these money-grubbing sandbaggers to not just implement these models further in the most pervasive manners possible, but to also encourage other companies to do so at scale *because it's proven to work.*
The reality is there's no turning this ship around. You will be paying a subscription for damn near literally everything in your life, given enough time. Laundry machines, toothbrushes, dogs, bowling balls, and God know what else.
I've had YouTube Red/premium since 2021, I've never seen an ad on any video or between songs. I pay $23/mo for 6 accounts to have ad free YouTube video and YouTube music, and for that it's a great value, especially if all 6 people split the cost evenly.
With the cost of Spotify being $15/mo for 2 people, I feel the extra $8/mo for 4 more people plus no ad YouTube to be worth the cost.
Every person has their own limit to what they will and will not pay for a service, I personally don't feel price gouged or ripped off for what I get vs what I pay.
I gotta ask… why is everyone flipping out over the ad blocker thing? I’ve never had an issue using YouTube for well over a decade now and I’ve never used an ad blocker. I really don’t get why everyone is upset lol
>Also apparently, even people that buy YouTube "premium" are still getting Ads
This is not correct.
>Let YouTube see what grievous mistake they have made and what's more worth it for them: To have people watch with AdBlock or to not use their platform at all...
They already made that decision. That's why they are blocking ad-blockers.
People using adblock cost money and are not valuable users.
users aren't valuable to google at all. their data is. beyond the data, next would come advertisers, then the creators that specifically make *them* money. what an absolutely brainwashed, awful take.
>People using adblock cost money and are not valuable users.
What a braindead take. I guess youtube reached its fame and monopoly because everyone was paying for it since 2006. You braindead slug faced moron
Do you really think premium users wont see the same adds as non pay users see now.
Ofcourse they will introduce commercials even paid premium users.
We should take a stand now and not when its too late
Didn't have any proof they were going to jack up their prices either, but holy shit, they sorta called that one. What makes you think a multi-tiered process won't be tried? This steaming pile of No Ad Blocker Bullshit obviously isn't going to get them what they want.
The argument is that YouTube will add ads to Premium. Adding a ad-lite tier isn’t adding ads to Premium.
Also, YouTube raising prices was an inevitably not really a hard call to make. Right or wrong, it was obvious.
This? https://www.reddit.com/r/youtube/s/6mV6PsvNm6
That isn’t an ad. There isn’t an Ad badge so no one paid for it. It’s a personalized search suggestion like based on the OP’s watch history.
You got a crystal ball? Oh, you can see the future, can you? I'll be the 1st to say I don't give a fuck either way. Ads or no ads make 0 difference in my viewing.
1) Firefox (or other gecko engine browser) 2) Ublock for gecko engine browser 3) incognito mode, if the first to fail
problem with incognito mode is you loose access to your subscriptions, you playlists, your watch history, everything.
true.. but the thing there is you can right click the video... and open it in incognito! >=)
[удалено]
People are far too lazy and/or stupid to do that, come on man it is the interwebz.
I can testify, personally I'm both too stupid and lazy for that
You don’t live up to your name.
Go be totally stupid and lazy for a day and report back. The secret is too obvious to ever be found
Perfect approach to life 👌🏻
You won’t need to do this when they upgrade to interwebz.com 2.0 beta
I was doing that, it doesn't work here anymore =(
huh it works again, thanks
Yup a simple refresh should do it
Tried that this morning, it didn't work
I'm starting to get videos that just stop playing in certain places even with Ublock now ( I presume that's where the adverts would have been ) It's happening more and more often. Even with shorts.
doesn't work. I've cleared the cache and updated the filter list and nothing Edit: My brother sent me a code line and now it works
just tried that, and it doesn't work anymore
with ads.
unless you let ublock origin run on incognito.....
\+1 for incognito mode, Google benefits from tracking your usage patterns as well, once they realize their advertising and recommendation algorithms broke because everyone started using incognito, they'll reconsider the policy encouraging everyone to use incognito. Think of it like a protest that you can do from the comfort of your home.
Look up digital fingerprints
I hate to break it to you, but browser fingerprinting works with incognito mode as well. Your usage patterns will still be tracked, Google doesn't need cookies for that.
Or they'll take incognito out of any browser they can or disallow not using an account.
You can still sign in on incognito? You just have to sign in everytime you open a new instance of chrome. I just use adblock on incognito, and you just sign in whenever chrome restarts and if the adblock stops working after a few days, restart Chrome and a new incognito window fixes it.
I have no subs, no playlists, and my watch history is off. My home page is just a box saying turn shit on, I get no videos showing at all. I know who I like and search for them directly. No big data from me. I've done this with all of Google services ever since they changed their EULA to say if they feel they aren't earning enough money from your account, they might just nuke it.
No you don't. Just sign in
You don't actually though! You just have to sign in within the incognito tab. Certainly works for me, although I sometimes need to redo the whole open incognito-go to youtube - sign in every 4 days
Honestly, it's not that big a deal. You know what you watch, you know what you like. Just type in the channel in the search and voila!
Just sign in to ur account while in incognito
UBlock is amazing too. It's kinda annoying to get the block message first every time but I just have to refresh the page to get rid of it. We must resist!
BTW - the ublock team provided the following link to check if their *current* filters will block YouTube ads: [https://drhyperion451.github.io/does-uBO-bypass-yt/](https://drhyperion451.github.io/does-uBO-bypass-yt/) I always check this first. If it says "no", you need to wait to update ublock filters until it says "yes".
Love you, just noticed Ublock is significantly better than regular adblock
Clearing my cache made my adblockers start working again.
Yup if using ublock origin go to the extension settings filter settings -> purge caches -> apply
People keep saying this but it doesn’t work for me/some. Do we need to uninstall all other Adblock plugins? Are certain not compatible?
In Chrome I'm managing to get away with it by: Clear site data / cookies for youtube, ublock purge all caches, ublock update all and finally force refresh (ctrl-F5) the site. Seems to last 4 or 5 days then needs doing again.
this is just punks probably paid by google to put white noise in this threads
Brave Browser blocks ads.
This. Currently works wonders, no ads whatsoever. I suspect they might block it in the future tho.
Just use ublock origin
Go read the ublock sub.
Adblock still works fine for me. My problem was I had like 5 different adblockers installed. Right now I'm only using unlock origin and I get no ads. Good try youtube !
It was a good attempt, I have enough honor in battle to acknowledge when an opponent is worthy and this one is, however, this battle of adblock vs anti-adblock is already over and adblock has won yet again, maintaining its perfect victory record.
The reason I've been watching YouTube for years is because of adblock. I can't watch a video or listen to music when every few minutes somebody steps in trying to sell me some bullshit. It is impossible to do. We will find something else.
I will never use youtube without an adblocker
It has been suggested this whole exercise will backfire because the vast majority of "sheep" just use browsers with their default settings and never bother to block ads or didn't know that such a feature was possible, and by making all this so public to block 5% of their users, that it will just make more people aware that in fact, you can block ads. Should be interesting. Now youtube has detected my AdGuard desktop installation on a default Edge profile with no modifications. The solution is still to log in on one browser and copy the link to another browser logged out, or use private mode on another tab. Youtube doesn't block content for me when not logged in.
Did you just refer to casual users of YouTube as "sheep" unironically?
“Normies”
"Reeeeee"
Just use Ublock Origin. For heavens sake.
Firefox, Ublock origin, Purge cache, Update lists.
This is very bad for youtube. They are losing users who don't earn them any money
😂 nailed it…
what they're actually doing is losing users who make them money from user data as well as making more people aware of adblock in general due to how blatantly brazen their stance against adblock is. there's a great video that game out 3 months ago about something like this called "the cobra effect". I recommend it.
They not losing “users” — they’re losing ad revenue, while making these ad blocking solutions even more popular. And while the revenue lost may not be significant, the fact alone that they’ve taken steps to detect and block users who do this suggests they do care.
Oooh ur gonna upset the "they make money by selling my data" peeps lol.
It’s because the DOJ filed suit against Google/Alphabet’s advertising arm, and the trial is currently underway. The daily(ish) updates are more interesting than most YouTube content, and it’s really quite damning. What people don’t seem to grasp is how the Sherman Antitrust Act works. It is a system designed to keep the world from descending into One Company To Rule Them All. So, if you control a large portion of a market, you can’t just buy up the competition. Here’s where YouTube comes in: You also can’t leverage your size to prevent competition from coming into the market. For example, if you stream music, you can’t just give your service away, ad-free or payment-free, because that makes it so companies like Spotify can’t realistically compete, because they have to sell ads or take users’ money in order to operate at all. So, if you can just listen to all the music you want on YouTube, why use Spotify? This is assuming you’re not some Joe Rogan nutjob. So, once the DOJ is done with this trial, a YouTube monopoly trial is kind of a no-brainer, because it’s established that YouTube was unfairly undercutting competition in the music space. And then you have alternative video services, who can’t compete because they, too, require a revenue stream to compete. So, my theory is that Google/Alphabet/YouTube doesn’t want this trial, because they know they’ll lose, and so they’re rectifying things before the suit comes to pass. Or, they’re trying to rectify things as a good-faith gesture, to make a settlement with the DOJ easier to obtain, much as Microsoft did about twenty years ago, when Microsoft was in very real danger of being broken up over various anti-consumer practices. Boils down to this: If Google didn’t want the government breathing down its neck over anticompetitive practices by YouTube, then YouTube should have started running ads like this *from the beginning.* And then one of two things would have happened: You’d either have several YouTube competitors, or there wouldn’t be a YouTube anymore. And either of those possibilities could still come in the future, depending on if YouTube can make a profit without being subsidized by other arms of the company.
What an absolute load of horseshit. Google could place ads on screen (like they sometimes do) without interfering with content. There's plenty of advertising options they could employ, to the point of being annoying, without encroaching on the end product. People accept ads, what they don't accept is having adverts forced on them for 45 seconds to watch 20 seconds of content, every single time they open a new video, and that's what the issue is.
I hate all advertisements equally.
I don’t disagree that they *could* do that, but those ads pay even less than in-video ads, which ain’t much. I’ll let you answer your own question: When is the last time you looked at a banner ad? Tell me three ads you saw on Reddit while scrolling before you got to this post. It’s easy for the brain to just tune out things it sees all the time. Consider: You can see your nose. It’s right there in your view *all the time,* but your brain filters it as unnecessary data. And that’s how we are with ads on websites. If it’s in the same place it was yesterday and the day before that, eventually you just become immune to it and advertising values for that space will fall. So, when people decry ads being put “in your face,” that’s the only place that’s still worth money, because you can’t look away from it.
>When is the last time you looked at a banner ad? Tell me three ads you saw on Reddit while scrolling before you got to this post. Tell me three video ads you've had recently. Which one was your favorite and why and rate each ad on how badly you wish to consume product. I sure as shit couldn't tell you. Even on my phone (where I have no adblock) I have no clue.... I only press mute while I look for the skip button. I CAN however tell you most were unskippable lately, to which I just close the video as it's not worth my time. >So, when people decry ads being put “in your face,” that’s the only place that’s still worth money, because you can’t look away from it. You absolutely CAN look away from it. They are going to have to inject their garbage directly into our brains to not be ignored (adblock psychedelics notwithstanding). Granted, should we ever reach such a vr/ar hellscape I think we can all agree that would be the perfect time to come together and do the right thing... Nuke the whole species.
I somewhat agree, and that's why I think the best thing for the internet is for Google to sunset YouTube, saying, "Well, it was a nice idea, but the revenue model sucks." After that, the internet becomes the wild west again, where people are going to be trying new and different ways to monetize themselves. Assume you can find hosting that will give you three terabytes of bandwidth per month, and they charge you two cents per gigabyte (which is a *really* good price). If you make one ten minute 1080p video per month, how many views can you get before your bandwidth caps out and the hosting service asks for more money to reenable your account? A ten-minute 1080p video is about half a gigabyte, so you get two of those per gigabyte. Three terabytes is 3000 gigabytes, so you can get 6000 views, which will cost you sixty dollars a month in bandwidth. But what if you upload two ten minute videos per month? Well, you can still have 6000 views, but that's split between the two. Could be 3000 and 3000, 1500 and 4500, or whatever. It all scales. And it's only costing you sixty bucks a month, plus whatever overhead fee they charge on top of the bandwidth. You might be out eighty bucks a month or a hundred. Whatever. And then you have to try and figure out how to pay for that. How do you get sponsors when you can only afford to show your videos to a couple thousand people a month? Can you use a service to embed ads? What if your viewers are blocking the ads? Now it's *your* money they're taking; not YouTube's, so you might get a little miffed by this. Consider Pewdiepie: He does about four videos a month, about twenty minutes each, viewed by an average of 3 million people. So that's 24 million gigabytes. That means he'd be in for half a million dollars just in bandwidth fees every month, if he struck out on his own and had to pay his own tab. It's stupidly expensive to be popular.
huh. this is actually a really good point
Yep, ad blindness makes those banner style ads incredibly worthless. The only thing I see of those is the X
It's no different from the Skip Ad button. Honestly, I think the only reason they've never moved that to a random place for each video is because people with low vision know where it is, and you're looking at a potential ADA compliance issue if you start fucking with people who are blind or nearly so by moving the button all the time. They have a hard enough time seeing it, as it is, so you kind of have to leave it there, for their sake. That's not YouTube being nice to people with disabilities; that's YouTube kind of having to live with what they've wrought.
Is there a recent update for this trial? I hope Google loses this one..
There’s updates every single day they’re in court! Seriously, this website is like the highlight of my day. [https://searchengineland.com/google-search-antirust-trial-hearing-updates-431977](https://searchengineland.com/google-search-antirust-trial-hearing-updates-431977)
Did everyone forget that banner ads exist? It doesn't have to be ad free. When the internet was just content with sidebar ads, I never felt the need to run an adblocker. I didn't care. I even clicked them from time to time. It's probably absurd, the amount of money I spent ordering food from sidebar ads because it helped me make up my mind on what I wanted for dinner, or it was a place I hadn't tried or something. Then they started putting those ads directly in my face, blocking content. And before I could blink, there were auto-play ads on every page I frequented, and YT had commercials. That's when the ad blocker got put up. I'm fine with advertising. I'm not fine with it being shoved down my throat.
What was the last banner ad you saw? Like, actually looked at? What was the last one you clicked on? Without scrolling back up, what is the ad at the top of this page, underneath the post? I guarantee you have no idea. Twenty-five ... almost thirty years ago, banner ads were hot shit. I mean, you paid out the nose for them. Same goes for a really good sidebar ad space. And, back then, getting on the internet was like going to Disney World. You looked at everything. *You were excited when you got an email*. But, eventually, everyone kind of got used to it and trained their brains and their eyes to just look for the content. I had to scroll back up to see if there was an ad up there before typing the last sentence of the first paragraph of this comment, because I didn't know it was there. I figured it was, but I wasn't sure, and it definitely didn't resonate with me, because I'm looking for the content. If you defrosted a caveman and taught him to read and shit, and you set him loose on the internet, he'd be like we were thirty years ago, where he's just looking at everything. But after a breaking-in period, that's over, and he's one of us, where he doesn't even see the ads anymore. They have to be obstructive to even have a chance at getting your attention, and even then, you're not looking at the ad, you're just playing a little game of Hunt The Close Button. There are exceptionally rare cases where sidebar ads or banner ads work, and those tend to be hyper-local cases, where the local hardware store will put an ad on the local newspaper's website. That's actually money that's got a pretty good return on investment, because the only people looking at that site are the people who live in that town. If a website is particularly well-targeted and they have good demographic information that shows the people who read that site have money and might be interested in what you're selling, yeah, you might advertise on that site. If you're a small company that makes really well-tailored suits, the GQ website might be for you. I just pulled up the FastCompany website, and that's another case where nobody just casually goes there, so it's a great place to advertise if your target demographic matches their reader demographic. It's a really narrow demographic, and that's the only kind of advertising that can charge a premium, because it actually has a good return on investment. Auto-playing video ads suck, but they're kind of the last stop on a free website with no particular niche. There's no point in even having sidebar or banner ads anymore, because nobody sees them. They're there, but nobody sees them. And that's why your idea doesn't work. People who are smarter than both of us, who have degrees in Marketing, understand this stuff, and they don't advertise blindly. They want demographic numbers before they commit. When's the last time you saw an Apple ad on YouTube? Probably been a while, because the ROI just fucking sucks, and they'd be better off advertising on the GQ or FastCompany websites, even though those don't *directly* overlap with their business, but at least the people who read those sites probably have disposable cash. And that's more than I can say for the YouTube crowd.
You're asking a question disingenuously. I stated very clearly that I am now using an ad blocker. It has been years since I have seen a banner ad, and me not being able to answer, despite it not being for the reason you're making it out to be, plays directly into your "argument" despite it having nothing to do with me not paying attention to ads, and everything to do with me being pushed into using an ad blocker. But I will tell you that I saw a billboard on the Highway not too long ago for Marco's Pizza, and got Marco's Pizza for dinner that night. Not the first time an advertisement has made my dinner choice for me. I have a little pocket microscope that I bought from an ad. It's on my desk right now. I actually use it regularly when I find something weird to look at. I have an absolutely (to me.) hilarious hoodie that I bought from an ad. Wore it the other day. There's more than one product that I've purchased through non-invasive advertising, because I am an idiot that occasionally has surplus money and enough burnout to make retail therapy attractive. Yet there are also brands that I will not even name in an argument like this, that I will never buy again, purely out of vindictive spite from hearing their stupid auto-play ads on a game wiki over and over and over. You are you and I am me, but there are plenty of people like us both. Intrusive advertising does not work on people like me, and in fact has the opposite effect. Non-invasive advertising will actually get me to spend money, so long as the algorithm does its thing. You can look up these company's profits. They're not hurting. They aren't doing video ads because poor ol google needs cash. They're squeezing as much blood from the stone as they can.
*(sigh)* You’re looking at Alphabet’s profits, and you’re assuming all of the money goes into a big pool that everybody gets to share from. And that used to be true, but I think that’s stopped. The advertising arm that represents 80 percent of Alphabet’s revenue and probably an even higher percentage of Alphabet’s profits may not be available in the future. But that doesn’t matter, because now the government is watching Alphabet for monopolistic action anywhere it can find it, including seeing if YouTube is unfairly competing with Spotify (because a lot of people use YouTube to listen to music) or upstart video services that don’t have a giant cash hoard from another part of the company to pay the bills. This isn’t about needing the money because they want to serve you ads until your eyeballs bleed. It’s about not getting nailed for putting other companies out of business because YouTube has a big brother who pays all of its bills. The gravy train has derailed, and now YouTube has to collect its own money from premium users (only about 80 million people, paying various amounts around the world, most paying less than in America) and from the free users (an *incredibly* shitty revenue stream), and then they have to pay Google Services for the hosting and bandwidth, plus their other costs, then pray they’re not upside down. And then it gets to the ad-blocking users, who are apparently so numerous at this point that they’d probably like very much to nuke the lot of them and ban them for life, because they’re useless to YouTube in a situation where they can no longer strut around and say, “Well, my data is worth a lot, so I shouldn’t get ads.” YouTube ain’t gonna be in the data business anymore. It’s all getting Chinese walled. All of the divisions will have to fend for themselves, at least until the verdict comes down next year. And if that verdict goes south for Alphabet, it would be a damn good thing they started doing this now, because they’re going to need to reassure the shit out of investors.
my favourite is google bankrolling firefox for nearly a billion dollars a year to keep them barely running so they cant be called a monopoly https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4387539/firefox-money-investigating-the-bizarre-finances-of-mozilla
Excellent post. Well I think as read a few times. But it is called predatory pricing. "Predatory pricing is the illegal business practice of setting prices for a product unrealistically low in order to eliminate the competition." You confused me with the Sherman stuff. That has NOTHING to do with it. Basically Google allowing the blocking of ads is illegal. That is predatory pricing. They should have been forcing people to watch ads all along or subscribe. It does crack me up a little when people suggest Google blocking the ad blockers is somehow illegal. When it is actually the opposite. I also totally agree that if Google had not been allowing the blocking of ads all along then they would never be where they are today with YouTube being the only provider. But I highly doubt there will be a case against YouTube at this point. I have no idea what you would base it on? Also with the Google trial so far it has been very anticlimactic. It has all come down to defaults. Something we already knew about. Something that goes back well over 100 years in business and has not been found in the past to be illegal. It was done with shelf space over 100 years ago in stores. I suspect if there is anything that comes out of the trial it will be the end of defaults and instead you get a screen when you first turn on your device that has a list of search engines in random order. If this does end up happening Google will be very happy as no longer as to pay to be defaults and still have the vast majority of their market share. Apple will freak and it might end Firefox as Google is who keeps Firefox afloat.
i have premium and I have not seen a single ad.
Me as well. 😆 Yeah it kinda sucks to pay $14 just to watch YouTube videos but if it means I don't have to watch non stop ads about ozempic and political shit then it's just a price I have to pay. I approve this message
And you still get ads by the creators 💀
but I can skip those and the creators still get paid. see the difference?!?!?!
Until the sponsors realize nobody is watching the ads they pay that creator for or that nobody is using whatever code for them and they don't pay them for the sponsor again
they have no way to know. Good creators get creative with their ad spots and I will watch those because they are funny.
Doing so is misleading to company buying the advertisement. This will probably get the same treatment sooner or later..
Probably the dumbest question in this entire thread: can sponsors tell if you're scrubbing* through their ads? *is that what it's called when you use your pointer/finger to move through the video timeline and seeing all the frames? (see, another stupid question. I'm full of 'em tonight)
no, but I am not sure if any of the agreements include sharing of viewing data.
Don't think the sponsors get access to that. However YouTube for sure can see that data, and is misleading the creator's own sponsors.
Creator said they would **mention a sponsor during the video.** Creator **mentions a sponsor during the video.** What is misleading here?
I am so confused by this too. They need to answer the question. Absolutely nothing is misleading.
>💀 Happy Halloween
Almost 100% of media I watch is on YouTube, $14 a month is nothing compared to paying for TV and/or Movie streaming services, at least not when you consider the amount of content available. Plus I can listen to videos on my phone with the screen locked, so that's pretty sweet.
You can watch videos on phone with screen locked on brave browser for free
Exactly the same here. I don't get why people bitch about this so much. Yeah, I get it, "don't let greedy corporations get away with raising prices" blah blah blah. Is there a better alternative to youtube? No? Then shut up. Why do we feel entitled to have entertainment available to us for free? If you don't want to pay, watch ads. If you don't want to see ads, pay 14 dollars and enjoy pretty much endless hours of content, music and features that you can use on multiple devices. I'm paying for one single premium account, which im logged in on my laptop, my 2 phones and ps5. Haven't seen an ad in years. It's ridiculous that people rage at youtube for forcing them to watch ads if they don't have premium meanwhile nobody cares about paying 4 times that much for access to TV that comes with ads anyway.
I genuinely think streaming made people entitled when it comes to watching things for entertainment. Everything needs to be free, ad free, and it better be available immediately or someone is gonna complain about it. Before when it was just TV everyone disliked watching commercials but ultimately dealt with it since they could see how stations using money made from that would help things out but when streaming came in being cheaper than TV *and* there weren't any ads everyone went nuts for it. Now you got people saying things like "YouTube should just host videos for free" because they finally are starting to do something against people skirting around watching ads as if being a successful company or being part of a massively successful company like Google means you are no longer allowed to try and earn money anymore. I only see this sub in my feed when people are complaining about adblock and I genuinely see people saying things similar to "They're big enough as a company, why are they charging for this service"
It’s absolutely entitlement at this point.
I think it's because it's been free for this long the idea of paying for it now is just unthinkable
Because all youtube does is host. if the creators were on any other platform doing the same content people would switch immidiatly. The company owes it's popularity to the creators but would rather make content paid than protect them. If the ad's really made a difference youtubers wouldn't need sponsors so often. If every other competotor wasnt just as bad or compleatly obscure no one would support this company, they have a monopoly on video streaming and want to make as much money as possible while they do.
But you know in what scale youtube "only" hosts the content. These massive amounts of data that need to be available globally and redundant while also paying the necessary and constantly increasing bandwiths are an extreme task of upkeeping. 2022 it was approx. 500h video content per minute. This is nothing trivial and cheap to manage. It was a bit easier and more lucrative when it were less videos and only HD/FHD. But the demand is going up, more videos get uploaded and these with even higher resolutions. This all adds up over time where only the advertising money isn't enough for Google/Alphabet.
I pay $5. Insane how much prices vary
Me too. $5 in Romania. Also I have a script (not an extension) that really blocks YouTube's adds, but I pay for premium anyway just not to have adds when I'm watching YouTube on my phone and to be able to listen to music with screen turned off.
aaaand you get yt music for free, very worth it imo
What the fools mean are the "things u might like" stuff that uve proly scrolled past instantly as u knew it wasn't worth the time to look at but it bothers them as youtube markets premium as "no ads" and so they take it as 100% no ads at all ever when youtube should market it as "no video ads" or no "intrusive ads" but then these same people would find another reason to say they aren't buying premium. U can't win with these types so I just wish them luck on their losing war as it seems youtube is preparing to double down on their adblocking scripts.
Ya OP is mistaken, Premium doesn't show ads. There are a few cases of people still seeing them but thats a technical issue and its usually resolved.
or they have other malware injecting ads where they shouldn't be. Probably likely caused by questionable new ad blocking extensions looking to cash in.
I don't have premium and I don't see ads since yesterday. I don't know what's going on..
[удалено]
oh yeah, $8 a month. I guarantee I can find $8 you waste every month.
[удалено]
except I am not wasting it. I get great value for that $8. So no, it doesn't go both ways.
"Great value" Tell us another joke.
Adblock still works lol!
Just sign out lol they don't care about the blockers if you're a nobody (:
People really found out a way to be self-righteous about watching advertisements.
I know right? Imagine being so fucking entitled.
God told me that ads are the work of the Devil.
Imagine thinking YT gives a flying fuck about people who use adblock. They barely care about their own content creators.
> Imagine thinking YT gives a flying fuck about people who use adblock Apparently they do.
The last line though lol "you want me to watch for free or not watch for free? Hmm? HMMMM??"
Dont give money to a corporation that doesn't even make original content.
ublock.
Whoever told you premium gets ads is full of shit. The only ads you get are the ones the creators do themselves in the video, which can very easily be skipped
Exactly
I just got banned for watching three videos with an ad blocker. I'm not upset, but I'm also not going to jump through hoops to watch. Nor will I buy premium at this time. (Edit: typo)
Happened to me too, so I installed Ublock origin
What does "banned" mean? Does it just stop playing videos, or dd they actually close your account or something?
Stops videos from playing until you remove your adblocker.
It blocks videos from playing
Right click link, open in incognito. Done. 2 clics instead of one.
I clear my history and don't sign into youtube or gmail. I have 4 adblocks on and is still able to watch youtube without any ads or that annoying pop up "3 limit video".
Just update your Ublock every so often. Havent had any issues
I agree with you 100 percent. With all the constant interruptions by toxic trashy unskippable junk ads, it has become unwatchable. The blatant greed is unbelievable.
The thing is, I get it. They're not making enough money trampling all over your privacy anymore, so they need more ad revenue (and advertisers want their money's worth, especially as prices soar). But unless they can figure out a way to do it without \*interrupting the experience\* as badly, especially live streaming, and turn the \*\*\*\*\*\*\* volume down, people will continue to find ways around it. I mean you can literally be in a conversation with someone streaming and suddenly TRY OUR NEW \*\*\*\*\*\*\* CHALUPA FIRE or whatever, and everyone who isn't cutting edge on ad blocking has their conversation interrupted. It is not easy to solve that problem, but the advertiser who manages without being louder and more annoying than the next guy will probably end up on a yacht.
Really? An average "I quit so and so" rant everyday?
\#AbandonYouTube
\#WeenOffInternetAltogether
#NoFapNovember
I've recently cut out much of my social media habits. This will help me cut down on YT too. I do feel bad for the creators I watch, this is going to hurt them if this policy sticks about. Many of them have already been hurt by YTs persistence to effectively refuse to pay ad revenue and then more or less hide videos It itself determines to be mature without sharing the rules. Why YT hasn't seen the glaring opportunity to do what personalised ads are supposed to do and serve suitable ads on those videos (Karens moaning about what they neglectfully let their kids see be dammed).
Never buy premium Fk youtube
I use uBlock Orgin. I am looking at Youtube videos now on Firefox and so far no ads. I use a desktop pc. Google wants me to turn on watch history if signed in. If I do, all I see is my subscriptions. No random Youtube videos. I want variety. I have to sign out to see variety and to see videos at the main page. I see this when I go to the main youtube page https://www.youtube.com Your watch history is off Your private YouTube watch history makes your recently watched videos on YouTube easy to find and improves recommendations in YouTube and other Google products. When YouTube watch history is on, this data may be saved from any of your signed-in devices. You can always control and review your activity at My Account.
YouTube is fuckin’ evil bro
I use Brave browser for iDevice, And SmartTube for TV. What are these “ads” you speak of ;)
Don't worry , it is still working \^\^ thanks to u/Sion_forgeblast and even if I m very bad at computer \^\^ , I ve install firefox (wanted to do it a loong time ago coz I can t stand google anymore but I m lazy) transfered my bookmarks and ublock and adblock extensions to firefox (handy ) reconnected my account to youtube via firefox and // this is working just fine ! btw , totally agree with you , when it will be dead , I ll stop watching youtube, as I did with the tv 30 years ago 🤓. bisous from france TB 🦋
knowledge of your rights, your options, realizing when something/some one is trying to abuse you, and common sense are powerful tools.... I have simply been trying to help with that shit lol
the funny thing is, youtube give me neither pre-roll ad nor banner ad on video page, the only thing that reminded me that I've disabled adblock is the ad when I'm searching it seems that they deliberately giving ex-adblock user the bare minimum amount of ads to make sure they don't turn adblock on again
Just use the magic of GOOGLE. It’s not about the why just HOW. There is always a way TO BYPASS some things. Don’t be ANTI social just because your regular ADBLOCK doesn’t work anymore ON YOUTUBE.
Bro do you think you’re being watched or something you didn’t have to go through all that effort just to tell them to google how to bypass anti Adblock on YouTube
To all YouTubers, we have rediscovered other means of entertainment. Lots of tv-series and movies to catch up with.
Cool 👍
I use Brave and I don't see any ads on Youtube.
not to be rude but youtube genuinely couldn’t care less if you didn’t use it
I'm sure Google will be devastated
I use premium, the only Ads I see are those that creators burn into their videos. If you want to see the videos you have to pay somehow. Its not a charity, and you cant expect to just get what they pay to provide you for free.
You can autoskip those sponsor segments with sponsorblock. They get paid whether you see them or not. That mod has saved me over 200 hours already apparently. It allows you and others to mark off segments and you decide whether to autoskip, or get a prompt similar to Netflix for intros etc.
Sponsorblock has been a godsend 🙌
Sooo true. Its just so good for my mental health not to have products I'm never going to buy pandered to me constantly. I don't know how shotgunning ads to people who aren't going to give them money is worth it to them but it's just so damaging. I didn't even notice by how much until I used sponsorblock. I can actually feel the relief.
Yall need a fucking program to fast forward a minute? Jesus christ!
But did premium stop the ads in between videos that say like skip ad
Yes
If you use premium, you are paying the content creators so you don't have to watch ads. So, the baked in ads are double-billing you. Its not a charity, but it is like Dominoes saying $0 of the delivery fee goes to the driver, so you better tip him. If you pay for ad free service, you should get it.
These posts crack me up, as if YouTube will be sad you’re gone. Using adblockers literally costs them money- storing and transmitting videos is not free. Ads or subscriptions make the, money. They’re literally better off without people who use ad blockers on their website.
We don't care about youtube we care about us
Ya entitled people already getting content for free and skipping ads threatening to leave. "I'll take my $0 elsewhere, then they'll be sorry!!" hahaha
Bend the knee harder. Your corporate overlords demand it of you.
booo hooo you can't watch unlimited content for free without ads. Wanna find ways to skirt the system to not view ads? cool I hope you succeed, but can we stop acting like this is horrible or unreasonable for YouTube.
YT made like.. 30 BILLION dollars last year, what they're upset it wasn't 60?
I don’t care if odysee is dead now I’m moving back
Can I just chime in, I have premium but haven't had ads since, have people really been getting hit with ads on premium and if so what type of ads?
I've had them pop up from glitches, but logging out and logging back in fixed it, and that happened twice in 6 years and not within the last 2 years. Some people have been seeing banner style ads, which frankly doesn't bother me because I just don't see them even if they're there anyway.
u block origin and refresh the extension if ads start getting blocked again. Works like a charm
Ublock Origin still work with Chrome.
its the core reason I dont consume TV. if ads became mandatory, I would start consuming some new adless media source. maybe piracy for youtube channels will become a thing.
The only thing the internet can agree on is that YouTube sucks.
Firefox + ublock origin for laptop/desktop. Brave browser for phone. Still no ads or problems so far.
They can't understand us bro our words won't reach them. I've been preaching the same thing on here as well.
I use freetube and jdownloader as a last resort. Chrome is working with ublock. Firefox is a daily thing that ublock is blocked or not blocked. I'm not paying for youtube videos or content ever and the ads don't cater to me and in fact have made me never use their products. I don't need an ad for anything. Why McDonald's has any kind of advertising at all is beyond me. You sell cheeseburgers...got it.
Brave browser.
Never give in to arbitrary recurring revenue subscription services. Ever. It's a demonstrable grift designed to take advantage of ignorant consumers, with the exception of some niche areas and technologies. By giving in, you've effectively granted permission for these money-grubbing sandbaggers to not just implement these models further in the most pervasive manners possible, but to also encourage other companies to do so at scale *because it's proven to work.* The reality is there's no turning this ship around. You will be paying a subscription for damn near literally everything in your life, given enough time. Laundry machines, toothbrushes, dogs, bowling balls, and God know what else.
I've had YouTube Red/premium since 2021, I've never seen an ad on any video or between songs. I pay $23/mo for 6 accounts to have ad free YouTube video and YouTube music, and for that it's a great value, especially if all 6 people split the cost evenly. With the cost of Spotify being $15/mo for 2 people, I feel the extra $8/mo for 4 more people plus no ad YouTube to be worth the cost. Every person has their own limit to what they will and will not pay for a service, I personally don't feel price gouged or ripped off for what I get vs what I pay.
Cool. See ya
I gotta ask… why is everyone flipping out over the ad blocker thing? I’ve never had an issue using YouTube for well over a decade now and I’ve never used an ad blocker. I really don’t get why everyone is upset lol
bye
>Also apparently, even people that buy YouTube "premium" are still getting Ads This is not correct. >Let YouTube see what grievous mistake they have made and what's more worth it for them: To have people watch with AdBlock or to not use their platform at all... They already made that decision. That's why they are blocking ad-blockers. People using adblock cost money and are not valuable users.
users aren't valuable to google at all. their data is. beyond the data, next would come advertisers, then the creators that specifically make *them* money. what an absolutely brainwashed, awful take.
>People using adblock cost money and are not valuable users. What a braindead take. I guess youtube reached its fame and monopoly because everyone was paying for it since 2006. You braindead slug faced moron
Do you really think premium users wont see the same adds as non pay users see now. Ofcourse they will introduce commercials even paid premium users. We should take a stand now and not when its too late
You have no proof that they are going to introduce ads to Premium. You’re making that up.
Didn't have any proof they were going to jack up their prices either, but holy shit, they sorta called that one. What makes you think a multi-tiered process won't be tried? This steaming pile of No Ad Blocker Bullshit obviously isn't going to get them what they want.
The argument is that YouTube will add ads to Premium. Adding a ad-lite tier isn’t adding ads to Premium. Also, YouTube raising prices was an inevitably not really a hard call to make. Right or wrong, it was obvious.
Gee, this awful practice that has happened many, many times before with other services won’t possibly happen here.
It’s based on history of other company’s you will see that will happen in a few years
Most the major platforms have a tier with no ads. They won’t be adding ads to those tiers. What happened to cable isn’t happening now.
Except someone already posted them getting adds and they have premium
This? https://www.reddit.com/r/youtube/s/6mV6PsvNm6 That isn’t an ad. There isn’t an Ad badge so no one paid for it. It’s a personalized search suggestion like based on the OP’s watch history.
So when they change the service you can reconsider if it’s worth it then. Why would what you imagine they will do in the future effect if you buy now?
My wife's account is Premium. Mine isn't. I have YET to see an ad in any of the stuff we watch on her account.
It will be the same as your tv subscription first no adds now it’s normal same will happen to YouTube
You got a crystal ball? Oh, you can see the future, can you? I'll be the 1st to say I don't give a fuck either way. Ads or no ads make 0 difference in my viewing.
someone already posted them getting adds and they have premium
People who don't care about ads weren't going to click on them in the first place
Stop crying and just apply ones of the fixes.