The ad revenue is a portion of what the advertisers paid.
YouTube DOES get its content for free. They pay YouTubers per view, essentially a portion of profit, whereas something like Netflix pays for the creation of content and then also a portion of profit made.
I know you’re mostly joking, but Google does sell your data/browsing habits for advertising, being able to show car dealership ads to someone who’s browsing history indicates they’re in the market is extremely valuable. It’s not just about things “about you” like demographics/location, but an active, rolling profile about where you’re most likely to spend your money.
I believe he is referring to the fact that YouTube don’t have to pay upfront for new content, they even get new content without hunting for it, and many smaller channels don’t have partnership and so on.
Sure they have a platform, backend and so on. But Netflix needs to have all that too plus buy things to show to their customers.
I believe he is referring to the fact that YouTube don’t have to pay upfront for new content, they even get new content without hunting for it, and many smaller channels don’t have partnership and so on.
Well, sure, but on the other hand, those smaller creators couldn’t attract any attention or grow their audience without a platform to do it on. And, like it or not, youtube has that and doesn’t charge those new creators anything to use the platform (unlike platforms like Vimeo, as one example).
Most of those large profitable channels wouldn’t have been able to grow totbhwir current size without a free to use platform to spread their content to a wider audience.
There’s give and take on both sides.
;
Of course, the payment share on ads and memberships is fair and equitable is a separate discussion…
Honestly I’m surprised they haven’t done so already, they already have the tech to do it, probably need to scale it a bit.
Now I wonder if there aren’t SFW videos in pornhub from people that want to upload videos but don’t want to use YouTube. Or NSFW video that aren’t really porn, like a random guy reviewing videogames naked for some reason. I’m not checking either.
They do, but the costs to store all of that high resolution video is enormous. Especially since it must be replicated to local repository for quicker access as popularity raises and removed when popularity falls on videos. The amount of content stored and served is significantly more than Netflix houses. That being said, ads are getting way too intrusive.
I recommend you to sideload SmartTube on your TV, *if it has an Android-based OS. It works better than the official app in my opinion, and includes SponsorBlock.
Dear Youtube: Bring back the downvote count, allow me to disable shorts, allow me to disable your bullshit annoying ass startup music, then half the price and then we’ll talk about paying for your “service”.
The problem is that they make it unreasonable when they get greedy and many people don’t tolerate their shit. This isn’t a “people won’t pay for the service” problem. We’ve all paid for streaming services. I personally won’t when it feeds into their shenanigans.
On desktop blocktube has improved things so much too. It has made search results so much better, since YouTube suppresses smaller channels in favor of the same large youtubers depending on the subject. Really wish it could be integrated into mobile YouTube options, but until then my hope is waiting until mobile firefox getting desktop extension support.
For new videos it’s an estimation with added dislike data of people using the extension, it’s rather accurate for most videos. For old videos before the dislike removal it uses old archived data plus new data added on top using the algorithm and data by the extension users
They want to frame it so that internet ID is the solution. That way you as a person can be banned, not just the account or ip. Good luck buying and selling when everything becomes digital and you get banned.
have you ever searched “ad blocker” on your browser of choice’s extension store and scrolled down? or had a cheap/free VPN that advertised ad blocking functionality?
those. for some reason people install those. and they never get updates.
Not sure what you’re on about, Google is absolutely capable of detecting if you’re using Ublock Origin, Piped, ReVanced, whatever. The question isn’t if they CAN break those things, it’s just if they WILL.
And if they’re beta testing this system right now, I’d say it’s just a matter of time.
Yeah, I’m glad I already have a cheap annual subscription to Curiosity Stream + Nebula. I’ll have to look for some other decent video platforms if they’re going to start being dicks about YouTube.
They are capable of detecting it because they aren’t putting much effort into being undetectable. If there was a need, uBlock Origin itself could be made entirely undetectable.
Of course the YouTube script running in your browser will be able to detect changes made to the page and request blocking. However, the said script can be modified by a different extension to either receive incorrect data about blocked requests and page information, or to send a fabricated result back to the server. Google can react to it by modifying the script, and the extension would need to adapt accordingly. It’s a game of cat and mouse.
If there was a need, we could have YouTube running in an entirely clean headless browser with no adblockers, while the real browser we use pulls data from it and strips out the ads.
Ultimately, currently we have the last word on what happens on our end. Unfortunately, Google’s webDRM, pushed by traitors to humanity Ben Wiser, Borbala Benko, Philipp Pfeiffenberge and Sergey Kataev, is trying to change that.
I mean, you could do all sorts of wild shit but at a certain point it’s impractical for most people. You think Google has actually put effort into this so far? You haven’t seen effort yet, they’re just beta testing.
Oh, they absolutely are capable of telling if you have uBlock Origin installed. However, uBlock is also capable of blocking scripts, so you can make a filter to block whatever part of the scripts on the page it is that detect your adblocker. I’ve never seen an anti-adblocker that didn’t use Javascript, and the great thing about Javascript is that your browser can just… Ignore it.
It would be pretty trivial for them to just block playback completely for any agent that’s blocking their ad scripts. Or make their ad videos indistinguishable from the actually video you want.
The question isn’t CAN they enforce this, it’s WILL they enforce this? Thus far we’ve been succeeding at this cat-and-mouse game simply because the cat is too fat and lazy to chase us. But this cat is looking more hungry and motivated every day…we’ll see.
Ad publishers have been in a war with adblockers for a decade now, were it trivial to detect adblockers, they would have already won. This is the sole reason Google has introduced the idea of DRM for websites.
In fact, the only trivial thing is bypassing anti-adblock. There is no anti-adblock that relies upon Javascript that cannot be bypassed without issue. The way Javascript is executed on the user’s computer, unobfuscated, means it can be altered in whatever way you want before it is ran.
I wouldn’t be absolutely sure about this. In the end, everything on the web still boils down to (mostly) simple HTTP GET requests. If you open a webpage, then you are served the file you requested (usually HTML with CSS for styling and JavaScript for special actions) and your browser handles the display of them and the execution of their scripts. This means that you can program a browser to detect and remove ads directly from the code and also eradicate malicious detection scripts potentially employed by Google that are meant to find out whether the ads are displaying correctly. If Google would want to circumvent this, they would either have to make YouTube available solely over their own app or block such behaviour on the client’s end, for example by manipulating the browser’s code to block ad-blocking functionality. Google is actually pursuing the latter with their Chromium browser, which is also the foundation for some others, including Microsoft Edge. This is why it’s important that people start to move away and use Firefox for browsing, THE free/libre software non-profit web solution since decades. Because then Google is essentially powerless, if they don’t want to take YouTube off the web.
Making YouTube available solely in their app sounds entirely possible and not unlikely here. They already sorta do that with age-restricted videos and videos that have voluntarily disabled embedding.
It drives me mad when I use PCs of friends and relatives and I see AdBlock Plus installed, but they still get ads and they never seem to stop and wonder why this “ad blocker” is not working! I do however enjoy their facial expressions when I install uBlock Origin for them and start refreshing pages.
ad blockers are not “on youtube”, they are on my devices
By the same logic, they can make any changes to youtube they want and that is perfectly OK. Youtube isn’t on your PC. It’s on their server. You don’t own that server. They can reject your connection to their server for any reason they want.
Technically, YouTube runs on your computer as well as their servers. They could put a crypto mining script on there if they wanted,and I think most people would concur that that is unacceptable.
fuck YouTube premium. why would I pay £19.99 a month when literally the only defining feature for me is no ads. all this will do is allow for more complex ad blockers to be made to bypass this
This was news to me so I went looking and couldn’t find it on youtube. Reading articles seems to indicate it is only available in certain regions and at certain times. I finally found the link to the page (www.youtube.com/premiumlite) and confirmed it’s not available for me in the US at least.
I pay for youtube premium because I watch a lot of youtube and it is easily worth the price. I paid $12 to see oppenhimer and that was only 3 hours. I watch way more than 3 hours of youtube every week.
Probably wait until the adblockers update their filters to block YouTube’s attempt to block the adblockers. Twitch tried to do the same thing, and now there’s add-ons specifically designed to block that purple banner.
I’m not sure it’ll be that easy. As far as I know circumventing adblock-blockers is a violation under the DMCA :-( . I know some adblockers / block lists in the past have been slapped with DMCA notifications and they’ve subsequently removed the circumventions. See for example this commit to EasyList that removes functionalclam.com from EasyList. Functionalclam.com at the time was a service to block adblocking.
I’m hoping third-party youtube clients will be able to keep things ad-free.
anything owned by eyeo (which now includes non-Origin uBlock alongside AdBlock and AdBlock Plus) will probably consider these “acceptable ads” after not at all getting bribed by google, and the rest are quite literally malware (except a small handful)
How do the 3rd party clients for youtube work? Can they still circumvent the adblock-blockers or where are the "positioned" inside youtube's code? Sorry for the weird terminology, I'm no programmer.
I think a lot of people would subscribe if they had a lower price tier where they have a reduced amount of ads (like an ad every few videos). Without ad blockers, youtube is unwatchable, you get more ads than you would on TV (where in many places ads are legally capped at around 15mins/hour).
They already solved it. Premium was way cheaper before they started bundling it with Music which is just utter garbage. I’d pay like 5€ / month for YouTube Premium without Music IF the experience was actually good and they didn’t shove shorts in my face everywhere like that non-dismissable panel that breaks up my subscriptions now.
Add comment