wow just wow while i can’t say i didn’t see this one coming but it always amazes me where greed could lead someone
Google is an ad company. To them, a web browser is nothing more than a tool for collecting user data and delivering ads.
When you use a chromium based browser you are allowing google, an ad company, to decide what the future of web browsing should look like. And this is the result.
Firefox is the ONLY browser which is genuinely competing with google. Do you think ad and tracking blockers are going to get better or worse once they die out, and literally every major browser is running on chromium?
Use firefox and u-block origin. Enjoy a superior, ad free, browsing experience, and support the future of an open web.
It’s so encouraging to hear so many pro Firefox opinions lately. Then I remember I’m logged into the pirate instance of a federated platform and anti-corporate sentiment is probably as high as it gets.
Sadly most younger people haven’t even heard of Firefox.
Most young people are basically tech illiterate. Yeah they are fantastic with new apps and phones. But have zero idea how any of it works under the hood.
Ask them to transfer a file from a computer to a USB drive, most will not know how. They have no idea how a file system is structured or even that an app has to specifically made for different platforms… e.g. Facebook app on Apple is completely different from Facebook on Android and the two will contain different bugs and different settings.
We are almost back to default browser = internet
Young people seem to proudly go along with the biggest name, which is really sad. They think there’s merit in that, conforming means acceptance.
Meanwhile, anytime I encounter a young non-conformist doing something very contrarian, it gives me some hope for the future. Because 99% of society is open-armedly embracing dystopia because the one thing they hate more than anything is the burden of independent thought and self-determinism. To intelligent freethinking individuals, seeing it play out is a waking nightmare.
Right? After years of feeling like the only pro-firefox person left on the planet, the pro Firefox sentiment lately is a breath of fresh air, to say the least.
Most younger people have heard of it. Using what came with their computer is just easier to them though.
I agree, most of the younger people use browsers that are bundled with the operating system.
- Android = Chrome
- Windows = Edge
- Mac/iOS = Safari
> most of the younger people
You mean most people. Specifically anyone who isn’t a power user
Report issue. You’re not running an adblocker! wink What’s an adblocker??
Google already has trouble with support, if they have a million lightly befuddled users who are getting blocked and “don’t know why”, that will be a problem for Google.
Somehow I feel like they won’t care, those reports probably go directly into the bin.
They’ll care if enough people do it. Being flooded with reports is just as time consuming
Me who uses piped and all:
I know this may be blasphemy but if you use a VPN to sign up from certain countries you can get YouTube premium for like 25 bucks for the year. Haven’t tried it personally but I’ve seen it mentioned a million times.
If they go to war with adblockers though some one smarter then me will probably come out with a way to just download the video and cut out ads post.
But then you have to pay for vpn to access the countries where prices are low.
Firefox
This. I’m pretty sure this is a result of the ad engine changes they made to chrome a few months ago. Manifest V2 is what enables uBlock Origin to be so effective iirc and they’re removing it in chrome in favor of Manifest V3.
Firefox on the other hand still supports V2.
I haven’t had this happen using ublock origin, but if they do figure out how to block ublock origin, adnausiem (ublock origin fork) might work. It’s a fork of ublock origin that tricks the ad providers into thinking you clicked on every ad, which not only bypasses a lot of adblock detectors, it Actively costs them money by polluting their ad data with garbage.
If they really want to prevent us from watching videos without ads, they can. They know of the ad is watched or not, we can have some kind of auto-mute-during-ad but that’s it.
Question is if they will kill network effect with it.
I have already drastically reducedy yt watching because of too many sponsors… watching two minutes of sponsored material, plus two ads just to see that I don’t even wanna watch the stupid video is too much.
Not to mention those laud ads in the middle of relaxing and quiet video… few months ago one ad was starting with screaming, that’s when I said no way.
No way I’ll use YouTube with ads. The amount of your lifetime they waste is what I’d consider disrespectful to their users. Even if the ads were bearable, I wouldn’t turn off my ad blocker on any Google site for tracking alone.
I also don’t see myself subscribing to YouTube Premium, firstly because it’s too expensive (stop including your music streaming service and make it cheaper maybe?), but also because YouTube is just a platform with a lot of not curated content that YouTube had no part in creating.
Let’s see how the cat and mouse games between YouTube and ad blockers and alternative frontends go. If it’s too much of a hassle, I’ll just stop using YouTube. I don’t miss Twitter, I don’t miss Reddit, and I won’t miss YouTube.
Really not worth watching a 10 minute video that has four minutes of YouTube ads and a minute of a sponsor pitch by the creator.
Does this affect viewing youtube videos through external players, like mpv?
Greed? I mean they are not a charity and ads pay for the service. Don’t get me wrong I use ad block but to call it greed…
Yes, greed. Google is an extremely profitable company, wanting more money than they already have is completely unreasonable.
Holy cow, is the real? On YouTube desktop? Or just on mobile?
Must say I’m glad they’re doing this. Helps me stay off the platform and be more productive after the 3 videos, and requires me to plan which 3 videos I want to watch. If all addictive platforms had these self-moderating features, I’d definitely use them.
Not the main point, but this is the first time I’ve seen “allowlisted”. Lol
…are they trying to avoid saying whitelisted because of the word “white”?
Yeah, at my company we switched to allow/block listed last year. Whitelisted and blacklisted are verboten
The best reasoning I saw for this change was for clarity for non native English speakers. If you’re learning the language “allowlist” is definitely more clear in meaning than “whitelist”
Not really, at least in Spanish we’ve always said “listas blancas/listas negras”.
In Spanish you have https://eslemmy.es/
A lot of companies seem to be doing this, personally I think trying to make a connection between race and tech is a bit far fetched. Nobody thinks of race when talking about whitelists and blacklists…
In public repos where these changes are merged in to FOSS projects, they get little resistance too - although I could see concern of a potential backlash if anyone questioned the alleged benefit of such a change.
Imagine if this approach was taken with the (now outdated) IDE interface? Instead of “Primary Master, Primary Slave, Secondary Master, Secondary Slave”, there’d maybe be “Primary Primary, Primary Secondary, Secondary Primary, Secondary Secondary” 😵
Hasn’t Kubernetes already replaced master-slave with master/manager-worker? Seems like there are plenty of alternatives.
Manager-worker seems classist and problematic /s
I really don’t think it’s greed. Can’t blame em for trying to win the cat/mouse game of adblocking. I’m sure it’s not the end of the world, and new ways to circumvent this will show up.
Can’t blame em for trying to win the cat/mouse game of adblocking.
IDK; I blame them.
YouTube has become part of the world’s social infrastructure. In a way, it is the town square.
Frankly it should be publicly owned.
I will still use invidious while having muy subscriptions saved as RSS feeds so this change will go over my head
let me bring you up to speed a couple days ago YouTube legal team threatened invidious devs saying they are abusing their API ToS ( trems of service ) which the devs said that the claim does not hold any truth to it since invidious is just youtube proxy\scraper and does not depend on API
This just tells me that invidious is in their crosshairs but it is legally safe until YouTube tries taking them to court to create precedent over scraping webpages
