1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
wow just wow while i can't say i didn't see this one coming but it always amazes me where greed could lead someone
FreeTube/Piped on PC
ReVanced on droid
uYou+ on 🍎 phone
SmartTubeNext on 📺
Youtube can do the fuck they want on their website
add mpv+youtube-dl to thr mix and you get a full healthy dinner
yt-dlp is the successor. On droid there are several beautiful front ends for yt-dlp so you don't need a terminal emulator
there's also Newpipe x Sponsorblock on android.
uYou can't be used on non-jailbroken devices, right?
No you can. You need to choose from AltStore, TrollStore and Sideloadly depending on what works for you, then sideload the uYou+ IPA (or the IPA of any app)
Thanks, looking into AltStore now!
I just don't get how these providers (Specifically Reddit with the API lockdown and now the stranglehold on mods, Twitter's new login requirement, and YouTube now cracking down on adblockers) are missing the point that their sites live and die by user generated content.
I understand these sites are hugely expensive to run, but if you keep alienating those who are bringing users to your site in the first place, people will stop submitting and people will stop visiting.
The more ad-riddled they make the platform to try and monetise users, the more they make adblocks necessary to even be usable.
I didn't use to both with adblockers. I didn't like ads, but they didn't affect me enough for me to go through any effort blocking them.
Now I use blockers everywhere, on every platform. Even for creators I like, because I know how little they actually make for ads - so how bout instead of watching 12 hours of ads so they can get 2c, I just send them a dollar or buy their merch every once in a while to not watch ads at all? Etc.
Ads could have had a place. There are ads that serve a purpose, that have minimal disruption but still give businesses a way to develop awareness for those who might want to use them.
Movie trailers (including when they stopped trailing movies and started leading them) are examples of 'acceptable ads' to me. When I purchase something from a store and they include a printed card from their sponsor. When sports teams have logos for being sponsored. A work van with the business logo parked while out on call. Etc.
But the internet's online ads? Email spam? Telemarketing? These are forms of advertising that are actively hostile, and they've become the default. So now a user that wants to be on the internet at all is best served by block all ads, including the ones that would've otherwise been reasonable.
Google will never make me feel guilty for blocking ads when they're already making their search engine unusable, too.
No way I'll use YouTube with ads. The amount of your lifetime they waste is what I'd consider disrespectful to their users. Even if the ads were bearable, I wouldn't turn off my ad blocker on any Google site for tracking alone.
I also don't see myself subscribing to YouTube Premium, firstly because it's too expensive (stop including your music streaming service and make it cheaper maybe?), but also because YouTube is just a platform with a lot of not curated content that YouTube had no part in creating.
Let's see how the cat and mouse games between YouTube and ad blockers and alternative frontends go. If it's too much of a hassle, I'll just stop using YouTube. I don't miss Twitter, I don't miss Reddit, and I won't miss YouTube.
I haven't had this happen using ublock origin, but if they do figure out how to block ublock origin, adnausiem (ublock origin fork) might work. It's a fork of ublock origin that tricks the ad providers into thinking you clicked on every ad, which not only bypasses a lot of adblock detectors, it Actively costs them money by polluting their ad data with garbage.
it Actively costs them money by polluting their ad data with garbage.
Lmaoo, i'm going to install that
If they really want to prevent us from watching videos without ads, they can. They know of the ad is watched or not, we can have some kind of auto-mute-during-ad but that's it.
Question is if they will kill network effect with it.
I have already drastically reducedy yt watching because of too many sponsors... watching two minutes of sponsored material, plus two ads just to see that I don't even wanna watch the stupid video is too much.
Not to mention those laud ads in the middle of relaxing and quiet video... few months ago one ad was starting with screaming, that's when I said no way.
Really not worth watching a 10 minute video that has four minutes of YouTube ads and a minute of a sponsor pitch by the creator.
To everyone who is saying they use adblock and haven't seen this yet: YouTube probably rolled this out to a smaller percentage of users first. It allows them to understand how this change impacts user behaviour, e.g. how many users comply and disable their adblocker, how many more users close YouTube than usual etc. Most tech companies do this type of analysis before releasing a high impact change to all users.
I'd say to you all: get used to bombshells dropping! At some point the investor pyramid scheme will go crashing down. It might be now. All those companies were on borrowed time. Until investors realised that "data" isn't valuable on its own - it's what you make of it. There needs to be a product that generates revenue. Spoiler alert, it is hard to come up with a business plan that takes plain usage data and makes the technical challenges worthwhile to squeeze money from it. I can feel it myself as data scientist. The honeymoon's over, investors want to see ROI.
I mean this cycle will probably recover in a few years when the markets recover but still - some lessons stick
Not the main point, but this is the first time I've seen "allowlisted". Lol
...are they trying to avoid saying whitelisted because of the word "white"?
Yeah, at my company we switched to allow/block listed last year. Whitelisted and blacklisted are verboten
A lot of companies seem to be doing this, personally I think trying to make a connection between race and tech is a bit far fetched. Nobody thinks of race when talking about whitelists and blacklists...
In public repos where these changes are merged in to FOSS projects, they get little resistance too - although I could see concern of a potential backlash if anyone questioned the alleged benefit of such a change.
Imagine if this approach was taken with the (now outdated) IDE interface? Instead of "Primary Master, Primary Slave, Secondary Master, Secondary Slave", there'd maybe be "Primary Primary, Primary Secondary, Secondary Primary, Secondary Secondary" 😵
Hasn't Kubernetes already replaced master-slave with master/manager-worker? Seems like there are plenty of alternatives.
kill all children
The best reasoning I saw for this change was for clarity for non native English speakers. If you're learning the language "allowlist" is definitely more clear in meaning than "whitelist"
Just like "master" in git. WTH is wrong with it. I feed "master" as "the master of kung-fu" is much better then "main".
I do think dropping master is absurd, since it in no way implies slavery or any such thing. master mostly has uses that are entirely inoffensive, unless post-graduate degrees are racist, for example.
But I do think there is some merit in moving off the idea of white is good and black is bad. There are some good arguments that we shouldn't bestow magic powers upon words, but there is also a lot of merit in the idea that these words affect our perception in negative ways and there is really nothing lost by shifting to equally good alternatives.
Probably get shit for this, but…
I just pay for Premium.
YT has literally become my cable. I listen to music, watch movies, documentaries, stand up comedy, news, sports… and cat videos, obviously.
To me it’s just worth it to pay a bit of money each month and have the whole thing just available to me.
I feel like if you were to put a money value on all the complaining, stomping of feet and trying to side-step the ads I’ve seen over the last several years, you’d probably find it’s actually less to just pay and enjoy it.
Just my opinion, of course…
I also have been paying for Premium the last couple years and I completely agree. I get more value out of my premium subscription than I do Netflix or Max. Plus premium supports the creators more than ads do.
you do you if you use it that much and you think it's worth your money then good for you ( i honestly mean it ) we don't like youtube ads, YES that is true but it is not the only reason :
the list goes on but what i want to say is that we don't hate people who pay for youtube we hate those who defend the platform like it's a white knight and nothing shady happening in it
Google sucks and YouTube is evil.
If they were not such an explicitly and overtly shitty company, I'd pay for premium no qualms.
As it is, I wouldn't give them a dollar if the CEO would personally suck me off.
It's the principle of the matter to me. Google became the multibillion dollar corporation it is by selling my data, your data, everyones data. To then come around and demand I pay to continue using their service the way I have for over a decade? But also still continue selling our data? Nah, fuck that. When they cut me in a percentage on the data selling business, maybe then I'd consider premium.
