Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

    (iter.ca)
    990 points smitop | 13 comments | 20 Jun 25 17:01 UTC | HN request time: 2.065s | source | bottom
    Show context
    lcnPylGDnU4H9OF ◴[21 Jun 25 04:54 UTC] No.44334626[source]▶
    The primary thing that makes advertisements disagreeable is their irrelevance. That’s not to say whether or not the advertisement is for a product or service for which the viewer is interested in purchasing but how it relates to the context in which it is viewed.

    People complain about billboards next to a countryside highway because it is entirely irrelevant to driving through the countryside. Actual complaints may be about how the billboards block a scenic view but that also seems like another way of complaining about the irrelevance. Similarly, if I am watching a Youtube video, I am never thinking that a disruptive message from a commercial business is relevant to my current activities (uh, passivities?). No advertisement is relevant, not even in-video direct sponsorships, hence SponsorBlock.

    If I go to Costco and see an advertisement for tires... well, I’m at Costco, where I buy stuff. Things are sold at Costco and people go there to have things sold to them. I might need tires and realize I can get that taken care of while I’m at Costco. Nearly every advertisement I see at Costco is relevant because it’s selling something I can buy in the same building, indeed usually something juxtaposed close to the advertisement.

    I don’t complain about advertisements at Costco because that would be insane. I complain about the advertisements on Youtube because they’re irrelevant and weird but somehow normalized.

    replies(56): >>44334670 #>>44334685 #>>44334694 #>>44334952 #>>44334957 #>>44334987 #>>44334991 #>>44335199 #>>44335364 #>>44335395 #>>44335516 #>>44335533 #>>44335619 #>>44335751 #>>44335761 #>>44335769 #>>44335918 #>>44335948 #>>44335981 #>>44336024 #>>44336035 #>>44336038 #>>44336099 #>>44336105 #>>44336411 #>>44336425 #>>44336575 #>>44337172 #>>44337482 #>>44337484 #>>44337658 #>>44338009 #>>44338035 #>>44338037 #>>44338155 #>>44338219 #>>44338274 #>>44338480 #>>44338508 #>>44338542 #>>44338654 #>>44338786 #>>44339608 #>>44340005 #>>44340171 #>>44340603 #>>44341020 #>>44342922 #>>44343098 #>>44344128 #>>44344304 #>>44345024 #>>44350462 #>>44351143 #>>44361807 #>>44367427 #
    user3939382 ◴[21 Jun 25 06:06 UTC] No.44334957[source]▶
    They’re disagreeable because you’re having your attention robbed unsolicited for the purpose of someone else trying to get your money. The whole concept is an insult. At best they drive materialism.
    replies(1): >>44335159 #
    1. PurestGuava ◴[21 Jun 25 06:47 UTC] No.44335159[source]▶
    You're trading your attention for entertainment you don't otherwise have to pay for.
    replies(3): >>44335356 #>>44339400 #>>44354238 #
    2. anon7000 ◴[21 Jun 25 07:14 UTC] No.44335356[source]▶
    Not true, cable TV runs ads and costs money. Many sports channels cost money in a cable package and still have ads. The *paid* Netflix plans have ads now.

    It’s pretty clear that companies can’t stop salivating over how lucrative ads are, and will continue to shove ads down our throats inside of paid products as long as we live.

    replies(2): >>44335394 #>>44336316 #
    3. PurestGuava ◴[21 Jun 25 07:19 UTC] No.44335394[source]▶
    OK, but we're very specifically discussing YouTube here, which as discussed, you don't have to pay for; but if you do, you don't see ads.
    replies(3): >>44335560 #>>44335759 #>>44335983 #
    4. agent327 ◴[21 Jun 25 07:47 UTC] No.44335560{3}[source]▶
    ...for now. But I do wonder how well this statement will age.
    replies(1): >>44336172 #
    5. sokoloff ◴[21 Jun 25 08:30 UTC] No.44335759{3}[source]▶
    If you do, you don’t see pre-roll and mid-roll ads. You still see embedded ads, sponsor mentions, “all the tools we used are linked below”, etc.
    replies(1): >>44336693 #
    6. DeusExMachina ◴[21 Jun 25 09:15 UTC] No.44335983{3}[source]▶
    Except, you do.

    https://www.howtogeek.com/more-ads-are-coming-to-youtube-pre...

    replies(1): >>44336326 #
    7. carlosjobim ◴[21 Jun 25 09:55 UTC] No.44336172{4}[source]▶
    All of the people commenting on this thread will be dead and buried one day. That's how well all of this will age.
    replies(1): >>44340560 #
    8. Workaccount2 ◴[21 Jun 25 10:25 UTC] No.44336316[source]▶
    Ad subsidized is not the same as ad free.

    Many hybrid products/services exist to lower costs by taking on some ads. The low tier Netflix plans and $200 smart TVs are examples of this.

    Sports TV is just a monopolist scam though.

    9. Workaccount2 ◴[21 Jun 25 10:27 UTC] No.44336326{4}[source]▶
    Clearly they are referring to the ad-free plan, not the cheaper ad-subsidized plan.
    10. vntok ◴[21 Jun 25 11:33 UTC] No.44336693{4}[source]▶
    That's on the video creator, not YouTube. Just tell them to stop or you won't watch their videos anymore.
    11. owisd ◴[21 Jun 25 17:55 UTC] No.44339400[source]▶
    You do in the end because you're buying the products that are funding the ads.
    12. agent327 ◴[21 Jun 25 20:36 UTC] No.44340560{5}[source]▶
    Society used to have the wisdom to plant trees for its children to sit under. On the whole I think I like that attitude a lot better than this "apres moi, le deluge" thinking we see so much of now.
    13. account42 ◴[23 Jun 25 10:37 UTC] No.44354238[source]▶
    Would we have to pay for the cat videos and other things people currently share on youtube because it's the dominant platform. The creators of these are generally not paid.