Technology

59589 readers

2962 users here now

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

Our Rules

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

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

620

YouTube looks to be testing server-side ad injection to counter ad blockers (9to5google.com)

submitted 5 months ago by AnActOfCreation@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world

236 comments fedilink hide all child comments

YouTube is testing server-side ad injection to counter ad blockers, integrating ads directly into videos to make them indistinguishable from the main content.
This new method complicates ad blocking, including tools like SponsorBlock, which now face challenges in accurately identifying and skipping sponsored segments.
The feature is currently in testing and not widely rolled out, with YouTube encouraging users to subscribe to YouTube Premium for an ad-free experience.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MudMan@fedia.io 60 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (30 children)

OK, can I be real about this for a second?

I'm torn about Youtube ad stuff. Genuinely.

On the one hand the ads suck, we have a good way to bypass them and I certainly don't want to watch Youtube videos if the ads are unskippable.

On the other hand, if I'm being honest I watch more Youtube than Netflix or Amazon Prime and I sure give those guys money for a subscription. If I counted the cost per watched minute, Youtube Premium would make way more sense than a bunch of subs I do pay.

But I also don't want to watch a Youtube that is a paid service. That was never the point. The reason I engage with it so much is it's supposed to be UGC, not TV.

So yeah, torn. Youtube is very weird and the relationship we all have with it is super dysfunctional, creators and viewers alike. We made a very strange future and now we have to deal with it.

[–] untilyouarrived@lemm.ee 33 points 5 months ago (8 children)

I pay for YouTube Premium. I get a lot of value from it, and streaming video isn’t cheap. I don’t think it’s reasonable for anyone to think they should provide it for free.

[–] MudMan@fedia.io 34 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Yeeeah, but my issue with that is they generated the expectation that it'd be free by using their investment money to muscle out smaller competitors. There was a time where Youtube was the biggest of a set of UGC video sites and some of the others were competitive. Now it's the only real alternative.

So from that perspective they made their bed, now they sleep in it.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yeeeah, but my issue with that is they generated the expectation that it'd be free by using their investment money to muscle out smaller competitors.

All of YouTube's competitors were doing the same thing, use ads to subsidize free video hosting. It just happened to be that YouTube was the survivor. If there was competition, it would likely have the same business model that YouTube has. Spotify may be building a YouTube competitor based on the same model.

[–] MudMan@fedia.io 2 points 5 months ago

Yep, that's also fair. Google is the leftovers from the "let them fight" approach to venture capital. Now we have a monopoly on many areas and nobody's left to do anything when Godzilla comes to visit.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (26 replies)