They don’t want to send us videos, they want to serve us ads and annoy us into buying Youtube Premium, which someone using adblocker won’t see, or need. From their point of view they would win either way - if they successfully block adblockers it either converts us into ad watchers, premium subscribers, or we fuck off and stop using their bandwidth.
Comment on Google admits it's making YouTube worse for ad block users
Chickenstalker@lemmy.world 9 months agoExcept they want to send you videos. The power is with you, the viewer. Without you, advertisers will have no reason for buying ads. Google can’t collect your data either. Realise that you have this power. Youtube is not like electricity or clean water. We can live without it if push comes to the shove.
JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 9 months ago
ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 9 months ago
It’s funny because I pay for premium and have noticed a worse experience since this was revealed. They don’t seem to check if a user has adblock and pays.
lastweakness@lemmy.world 9 months ago
They don’t seem to check if a user has adblock and pays.
They definitely seem to have checks in place for it. I have Family Premium and so far no issues at all.
ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Weird. It’s not happening to me today. Maybe it was something else.
voidMainVoid@lemmy.world 9 months ago
The article says that this isn’t happening for all users, which indicates that they’re still experimenting with it and haven’t fully rolled it out yet.
Malfeasant@lemm.ee 9 months ago
Well, I don’t pay for premium, and I use an adblocker, and I haven’t had any problems. Not having a problem doesn’t prove anything if they’re only targeting a subset of their users…
BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 9 months ago
You have no value to advertisers if they can't serve you ads. By not doing so, they'll also cut down on bandwidth costs, so it's a double positive for them.
CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 9 months ago
By not doing so, they’ll also cut down on bandwidth costs, so it’s a double positive for them.
When you take your comment to its logical end though your comment makes no sense, as hence there’s now no one to watch the videos and earn money from them doing so.
You can’t force someone to consume your content, and if you earn money by people consuming your content, then the power is ultimately with them.
cole@lemdro.id 9 months ago
this assumption is only correct if EVERYBODY is using as blockers. They aren’t - so it makes sense to cut off the proverbial leeches
CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 9 months ago
this assumption is only correct if EVERYBODY is using as blockers. They aren’t - so it makes sense to cut off the proverbial leeches
That’s why I said logical conclusion.
My bet would be the vast majority of people (what you call leeches) would eventually use ad blockers, as people in general usually do not like to watch commercials. (Again, speaking in endgame scenarios, AKA ‘logical conclusion’).
ElectroNeutrino@lemmy.world 9 months ago
To be fair, what they want is to make money off of you, be it through metadata or through advertising. It’s just that sending you videos happens to be the model which they use to get the metadata or advertising income.
gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 months ago
If they wanted to make money off of me then they should have kept the Pixel Pass as a thing so I’d have a reason to have YT premium
Or make YT premium worth it
But nah, they’d rather ruin the product I was paying for, so now they get nothing. At least then I’m not paying for it to get worse