←back to thread

YouTube's new anti-adblock measures

(iter.ca)
990 points smitop | 1 comments | 20 Jun 25 17:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
ttyyzz ◴[20 Jun 25 18:06 UTC] No.44330288[source]▶
Having to pay for something so that's "less annoying" is the worst business model. YouTube Premium is very expensive. I had it for a while when I got a Pixel smartphone with a few months of YouTube Premium included. It was great. I also understand that streaming on this scale must entail incredibly high operating costs; the money has to come from somewhere. It's simply a dilemma. But there has to be a better way. Any ideas?
replies(8): >>44330305 #>>44330334 #>>44330460 #>>44333022 #>>44333268 #>>44333389 #>>44333482 #>>44333786 #
thallium205 ◴[20 Jun 25 18:10 UTC] No.44330334[source]▶
Youtube Premium is very expensive?
replies(1): >>44330612 #
ttyyzz ◴[20 Jun 25 18:37 UTC] No.44330612[source]▶
I would pay that 130€ / year if I was alone. I have to be responsible with the money I earn as I have to feed 3 kids and my wife is not working. We also use other different streaming services like netflix, spotify family... adding youtube premium seems not reasonable for me at the moment.
replies(2): >>44332988 #>>44333844 #
torgoguys ◴[21 Jun 25 01:56 UTC] No.44333844[source]▶
In the USA I subscribe to Youtube Premium family. The rate is just $3.00 a month more than Spotify family. For that price you get both the Spotify-equivalent Google-owned service (confusingly called YouTube Music) AND you get ad-free Youtube as a bundle. Basically just $3/month for no ads on Youtube is worth it and much easier to justify for a household on a tight budget.

It might be worth looking into if the pricing differential is similarly minimal where you live.

replies(1): >>44358429 #
1. ttyyzz ◴[23 Jun 25 18:07 UTC] No.44358429[source]▶
You are Right, its a Great Idea actually.