←back to thread

661 points anotherhue | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.429s | source
Show context
nerdjon[dead post] ◴[] No.41227623[source]
[flagged]
pino82 ◴[] No.41231066[source]
Yes, it has nothing to do with privacy. The opposite is maybe true in that case (i.e. google can probably see my usage of sponsorblock in the access logs, which makes it simpler for them to identify me).

But I do use it. I don't watch video clips very often. When I did, most of the times it was disappointing waste of time. Conference talks are the most obvious exception that come to my mind, and they don't interrupt their talk with sponsor ads.

Once something is in YT (or any other big tech silo), I'm completely outside of charity or goodwill mode. It's basically like sth broadcasted by a random tv station for me. I maybe consume it, but I'll not start thinking how I can support them. The 'free web' that I'd explicitly try to support does not happen in big tech's walled gardens.

Btw: Are there any 'good' sponsors in YT? I suspect, a company that sponsors YT channels is by definition suspect. Just because the target audience doesn't really ask for more. They spend hours each day in a loop of mostly pointless 'subscribe, like me, follow me, comment below, $SPONSOR, ...' and always the big show without any actual substance in the end.

Sure, there are always a handful of exceptions...

replies(1): >>41242249 #
1. johnnyanmac ◴[] No.41242249[source]
>Once something is in YT (or any other big tech silo), I'm completely outside of charity or goodwill mode.

real shame to publish the creators stuck in a monopoly when they will be the first to fall, and Google last.