Comment

Comment on YouTube just quietly blocked Adblock Plus — the internet hasn't noticed yet, but I've found a workaround

Soup@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

Honestly, I just did that. YouTube has costs, storing and sharing all that data at high resolution and speed, so expecting that service for absolutely nothing is a little weird. We can find reasons that they’re bad, that’s fine, but good or bad they do have to pay for things.

I also pay for the Patreon of one of my favourite mandolin players because I want him to keep making content and I wanted access to backing tracks and the Discord server. He can’t do it at that level for free, and that’s ok.

source

Sort:hotnew top

ordnance_qf_17_pounder@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
I don’t care what YouTube’s costs are, I don’t want to pay. I’ll leave that to people like you.

source
- somerandomperson@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  I care about making google lose money. They deserve it. I will only make accounts on big tech just to abuse them.
  
  All of big tech deserves to be bankrupt, convince me otherwise.
  
  They only care about money. No ethics, no rights, no environment, just money. And money **IS NOT more important than ethics, rights, etc.
  
  source
  - ordnance_qf_17_pounder@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    Image
    
    source
    somerandomperson@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    Image
    
    source
- mhague@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  Guns n Jesus mentality. Someone’s got to shoulder the burden and it ain’t gonna be the cool guys.
  
  source
FauxLiving@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
I understand your reasoning, and you’re not wrong.

However, the amount that they charge you FAR outweighs the cost of compute, bandwidth and storage. The few tens of GB of bandwidth that you use and the storage costs of the video may cost them $1/user/month or less.

Their costs have been easily covered by ad revenue for decades. This subscription service is only because they’ve purchased all meaningful competitors and can now turn the screws and juice their customers for more money because they have no other options.

source
- Soup@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  Sure, though they also need to pay people, run the platform, run Youtube music, pay for rights to things, and a bunch of other stuff. I’m not about to say that they aren’t another greedy corporation, that would be crazy, but ya’ll expecting to pay nothing are flatout ridiculous and.
  
  source
  - FauxLiving@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    Their costs have been easily covered by ad revenue for decades.
    
    This subscription service is only because they’ve purchased all meaningful competitors and can now turn the screws and juice their customers for more money because they have no other options.
    
    source
ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
Sure, if paying them ment that they also didn’t data mine the shit out of you and sold it to 3rd parties…but no they insist on double-dipping so they can get fucked.

source
Arghblarg@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
We already pay with all of the personal data they steal from us (adblocks or no), and all the lifetimes wasted watching ads for those who don’t or can’t block them (and the ad revenue paid to them by corps who buy those ads) so no, Google doesn’t deserve our money for Premium.

Same thing as when cable TV was new, they said paying for it was to require fewer ads… how long did that last?

source
MrQuallzin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
For my wife and I, whose main background noise/entertainment is Let’s Play style videos on YouTube (Markiplier, Jacksepticeye, RTGame and such), paying for premium just makes sense. Like you said, we can and should criticize them for how they handle things, but everyone making a fuss about premium existing just makes no sense.

source
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
I don’t watch enough YouTube to make premium worth it. If they had a lower tier with a cap on ad-free watch time, I probably would pay.

source