←back to thread

YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

(iter.ca)
990 points smitop | 3 comments | 20 Jun 25 17:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.538s | source
Show context
_345 ◴[20 Jun 25 17:56 UTC] No.44330184[source]▶
What if people just paid for services they use and depend on frequently
replies(6): >>44330209 #>>44330276 #>>44330302 #>>44330325 #>>44330360 #>>44330400 #
xnorswap ◴[20 Jun 25 17:58 UTC] No.44330209[source]▶
I don't want to use it. I only view because others exclusively host content there.

If people hosted video elsewhere, I would gladly never visit youtube again.

Creators are not going to start paying for uploads when they can push their costs to the viewers.

replies(1): >>44330263 #
mmmmmbop ◴[20 Jun 25 18:04 UTC] No.44330263[source]▶
Why do you think the creators you like exclusively host content on YouTube?
replies(1): >>44330298 #
xnorswap ◴[20 Jun 25 18:06 UTC] No.44330298[source]▶
That's not difficult to answer, it's because it's free / they get paid.
replies(1): >>44330425 #
bitpush ◴[20 Jun 25 18:20 UTC] No.44330425[source]▶
.. and that's YT's problem? This is like being angry with Apple, because an app developer created only an iOS app and didnt create an Android. What did Apple do wrong if a developer chose to only create an iOS app?
replies(1): >>44330506 #
xnorswap ◴[20 Jun 25 18:26 UTC] No.44330506[source]▶
YouTube is the system, you've not heard of "don't hate the player, hate the game"?

If I "blamed" the creators, you'd be telling me it's not their fault, they're just incentivised by the system, they're just playing the game.

But when I "blame" the system, you're telling me the system is not at fault, that it's individual choice to choose a near-monopoly on video discoverability that is propelled by and heavily benefiting from the same company's actual monopoly of search.

Is it "YT's problem?"? No, it's to YT's massive benefit, it's my problem when I have to suffer through adverts.

replies(1): >>44330586 #
1. bitpush ◴[20 Jun 25 18:34 UTC] No.44330586[source]▶
> YouTube is the system

But isnt YouTube a mere player in the game as well?

replies(2): >>44330721 #>>44332284 #
2. xnorswap ◴[20 Jun 25 18:48 UTC] No.44330721[source]▶
I think viewing YouTube in that manner would be a nihilist point of view.

I can't think of an adjective less suitable for Alphabet/Google/YouTube than "mere".

3. ndriscoll ◴[20 Jun 25 21:29 UTC] No.44332284[source]▶
Alphabet is the fifth largest company in the world, has earnings higher than most countries' GDP, and is established to have engaged in illegal behavior as a monopolist. It's fair to say they're closer to "the system" than "a player".

Not that this was part of the suit, but the whole practice of giving things away for free and subsidizing them with stalking and ads obviously distorts or completely destroys markets, so yes they can be blamed for doing that. The behavior of these companies is so bad that people in a recent thread were claiming things like chat services (where a single computer can provide service for millions of users) cannot be sustainably run by charging money.