Technology

59377 readers

3189 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

661

YouTube’s ad blocker crackdown now includes third-party apps (www.theverge.com)

submitted 7 months ago by misk@sopuli.xyz to c/technology@lemmy.world

338 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] lledrtx@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (4 children)

How do you propose YouTube should pay for infrastructure costs (servers, Internet etc), staff costs (engineers, designers, moderators) and the content creators?

[–] Ginger666@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

Have a paid service that doesn't have adverti...

Oh wait...

[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Google Ads on the webpages of all the webpages on the Internet, similar to their status quo.

I don't think any of us should be concerned about Google's cash flow. It's their job.

[–] lledrtx@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Are you saying that the ads shouldn't be video ads but webpage ads, instead?

It's their job.

Yeah, exactly why they are enforcing anti-adblock rules...

[–] r3df0x@7.62x54r.ru 0 points 7 months ago

If this is how Youtube advertised, I wouldn't block the ads. I refuse to sit through ads when I'm searching through videos and I don't even know if the video is the one I want to watch. It's going to take a three minute search into a 10 minute search.

[–] bigMouthCommie@fe.disroot.org 0 points 7 months ago

stop paying executives and shareholders. liquidate assets. I don't care.

[–] Iceblade02@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I would've been fine paying if the price reflected what I was actually paying for (not being advertised to) which would be <$0.005 per viewed video (let's be generous and call it 1 or 2$/mo) but noo they have to ask for 25$/month like greedy little shits.

[–] lledrtx@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

That price wouldn't even begin to cover it. Infrastructure is expensive at that quality. Engineers to maintain such infrastructure are also expensive. Content creators make a ton of money too. Their profits are much lower compared to peers - https://mannhowie.com/youtube-valuation

Also, 22$/month gets you a family plan for 5 people so wtf are you talking about?

I don't give 2 shits about YouTube, I use ad block where I can too. I'm just saying that people who complain about YouTube's anti-adblock stuff are being unrealistic, you can't fault them for trying to block people from stealing from them.