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

  • code_is_speech@lemmy.fmhy.mlEnglish
    2073·
    1 年前

    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.

    • crunchpaste@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      1143·
      1 年前

      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.

      • Ragerist@lemmy.worldEnglish
        27·
        1 年前

        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

        • crunchpaste@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          9·
          1 年前

          You’re absolutely right.

          Yeah they are fantastic with new apps and phones.

          I think that’s mostly because most commercial apps have fantastic ui and ux.

      • Seilorks@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        241·
        1 年前

        Most younger people have heard of it. Using what came with their computer is just easier to them though.

      • KinglyWeevil@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        15·
        1 年前

        It’s my preferred mobile browser because you can install ublock origin and other privacy extensions which is pretty unique

        • BigusDickus@vlemmy.netEnglish
          11·
          1 年前

          Firefox on android is really slow. I tried using it, but now I use Vivaldi

          Pros : really fast Cons : chromium based

      • alongwaysgone@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        10·
        1 年前

        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.

      • AndrewZabar@beehaw.orgEnglish
        1·
        1 年前

        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.

  • narc0tic_bird@lemm.eeEnglish
    1252·
    1 年前

    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.

    • alongwaysgone@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      41·
      1 年前

      Eh, I wound up with a YouTube premium subscription years ago when I subscribed to Google play music, way back when it was YouTube Red. I cannot imagine going without at this point. It became YouTube music at some point, and… Yeah.

  • 🍹Early to RISA 🧉@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    933·
    1 年前

    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”?

      • static@midwest.socialEnglish
        352·
        1 年前

        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”

          • 3laws@lemmy.worldEnglish
            51·
            1 年前

            I don’t know what you are talking about.

            Even if our dialects (Mexican) didn’t have vestigial racism and fake dichotomies, permitir y bloquear is as straight forward as you can get.

            IT switched from white/black literally years ago, if your department didn’t, you are quite stuck in time.

      • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.oneEnglish
        295·
        1 年前

        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” 😵‍

      • glorious_albus@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        1 年前

        My company has recently started disallowing these words in code. The funny part though is the first few lines of the Jenkins job responsible for checking this stuff proudly states “Waiting for slave node to start checks.”

        I know it’s a minor fix in the jenkinsfile but I chuckle every time I see it.

    • clehaxze@reddthat.comEnglish
      243·
      1 年前

      Just like “master” in git. WTH is wrong with it. I feed “master” as “the master of kung-fu” is much better then “main”.

      • Kushan@lemmy.worldEnglish
        8·
        1 年前

        In the wider context of computing and technology, “master” has historically often been paired with “slave” as well, such as old IDE hard drives that had to be switched from master to slave depending on which cable they were plugged into on which port of the motherboard. I realise that’s a bit of an odd example, but there are numerous ones.

        Anyway, while I don’t think many people have ever used a branch name of slave, it’s entirely feasible to argue that any branch that isn’t master is in some way subservient to it as opposed to the master branch being the most experienced. The point isn’t to debate that the way you view it is incorrect, your view is entirely reasonable and rational but in order to be inclusive we should take all other views into account and in a very simple way, rather than debate the meaning of the word master in this specific context and telling people that they’re “wrong” for feeling a certain way about it, it’s easy to change the word and thanks to the excellent design of git, there isn’t really any downsides to it.

      • breadcodes@lemm.eeEnglish
        4·
        1 年前

        Because the terminology is Master and Slave. That’s been device terminology for half a century, and has been phased out over the last decade. It’s silly to complain that they would change it.

        I now say Primary and Secondary for device terminology, and Main, Stage, and Dev for branch terminology. It doesn’t impact my daily life enough to be mad they don’t keep Master/Slave terminology.

      • sping@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        62·
        1 年前

        I do think dropping master is absurd, since it in no way implies slavery or any such thing. master mostly has uses that are entirely inoffensive, unless post-graduate degrees are racist, for example.

        But I do think there is some merit in moving off the idea of white is good and black is bad. There are some good arguments that we shouldn’t bestow magic powers upon words, but there is also a lot of merit in the idea that these words affect our perception in negative ways and there is really nothing lost by shifting to equally good alternatives.

        • Kir@feddit.itEnglish
          8·
          1 年前

          The idea of “black list” has nothing to do with black people, to my understending

            • gornar@lemmy.worldEnglish
              11·
              1 年前

              If the terms were reversed, you might think differently! We’re not always aware of our own bias, but we can strive to examine how we think about things instead of making snap judgements

          • sping@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
            42·
            1 年前

            That’s not the issue. The issue is inherently seeing white as meaning good and black as meaning bad.

        • clehaxze@reddthat.comEnglish
          31·
          1 年前

          Maybe it’s my culture. I think of master as the “master of kung-fu/art/sword/”. Something or someone that have earned respect and is at the core of it’s field.

          • sping@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
            2·
            1 年前

            Yes, I entirely agree. A masterpiece, or mastering an art, or more relevant to software branches: master tapes. None of these imply any sort of subjugation etc…

            But… that’s just about the word “master”. I do think there are other terms that it’s a good idea to migrate away from.

      • breadcodes@lemm.eeEnglish
        3·
        1 年前

        Because the terminology is Master and Slave. That’s been a device terminology for half a century. It’s silly to complain that they would change it.

        I now say Primary and Secondary for device terminology, and Main, Stage, and Dev for branch terminology. It doesn’t impact my daily life enough to be mad they don’t keep Master/Slave terminology.

        • zos_kia@lemmy.fmhy.mlEnglish
          3·
          1 年前

          Yeah it’s so funny to feel the need to have a “hot take” on branch naming. It’s like if Joe from my team asked me to file some papers under the green folder rather than the red. I’d be like say no more Joe, green folder it is. I don’t care but if somebody cares then they have their say. How do internet people even function in group with other people, with the constant contrarian attitude they carry around?

    • Andreas@feddit.dkEnglish
      101·
      1 年前

      Yes, it started from this terminology change at Twitter in 2020. They’re the reason that version control systems call the primary branch ‘main’ instead of ‘master’ by default, because ‘master’ comes from the master/slave terminology that is used in electronics hardware design.

      There’s a comment here saying that master/slave in hardware design is being replaced by primary/secondary because of the software trend, which I think is stupid. Master/slave works much better in that context because the master device controls the slave device. Primary/secondary implies that the slave device is a fallback of the master device.

    • Noteleks@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      5·
      1 年前

      I don’t think so. Speaking from help desk, whitelist/blacklist is apparently a confusing concept for anyone that’s never heard of them before. I end up calling them allow list and block list just so to avoid ascertaining, yes, blacklist means blocked, it’s already on there, you can stop trying to re-add it.

  • Tired8281@lemmy.worldEnglish
    902·
    1 年前

    Report issue. You’re not running an adblocker! wink

    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.

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.oneEnglish
      43·
      1 年前

      Somehow I feel like they won’t care, those reports probably go directly into the bin.

        • Perfide@reddthat.comEnglish
          161·
          1 年前

          You’re assuming they’re actually going to respond to the issues reported. Maybe at first they will, but I’d wager that it won’t be long before all reporting an issue does is send an automated “We’re looking into it” email before promptly deleting the ticket.

  • gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    78·
    1 年前

    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.

    • notavote@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      8·
      1 年前

      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.

  • doolittle@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    73·
    1 年前

    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.

    • platypus_plumba@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      40·
      1 年前

      Yeha, if they are pushing this, the least they can do is lower the amount of ads.

      2 ads before a video starts is just too much. Also the constant ads during the videos. Screw that.

      No more YouTube for me I guess.

  • Anon@lemmy.oneEnglish
    721·
    1 年前

    FreeTube/Piped on PC

    ReVanced on droid

    uYou+ on 🍎 phone

    SmartTubeNext on 📺

    Youtube can do the fuck they want on their website

  • trepX@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    701·
    1 年前

    I’d say to you all: get used to bombshells dropping! At some point the investor pyramid scheme will go crashing down. It might be now. All those companies were on borrowed time. Until investors realised that “data” isn’t valuable on its own - it’s what you make of it. There needs to be a product that generates revenue. Spoiler alert, it is hard to come up with a business plan that takes plain usage data and makes the technical challenges worthwhile to squeeze money from it. I can feel it myself as data scientist. The honeymoon’s over, investors want to see ROI.

    I mean this cycle will probably recover in a few years when the markets recover but still - some lessons stick

  • Manticore@lemmy.nzEnglish
    661·
    1 年前

    The more ad-riddled they make the platform to try and monetise users, the more they make adblocks necessary to even be usable.

    I didn’t use to both with adblockers. I didn’t like ads, but they didn’t affect me enough for me to go through any effort blocking them.

    Now I use blockers everywhere, on every platform. Even for creators I like, because I know how little they actually make for ads - so how bout instead of watching 12 hours of ads so they can get 2c, I just send them a dollar or buy their merch every once in a while to not watch ads at all? Etc.

    Ads could have had a place. There are ads that serve a purpose, that have minimal disruption but still give businesses a way to develop awareness for those who might want to use them.

    Movie trailers (including when they stopped trailing movies and started leading them) are examples of ‘acceptable ads’ to me. When I purchase something from a store and they include a printed card from their sponsor. When sports teams have logos for being sponsored. A work van with the business logo parked while out on call. Etc.

    But the internet’s online ads? Email spam? Telemarketing? These are forms of advertising that are actively hostile, and they’ve become the default. So now a user that wants to be on the internet at all is best served by block all ads, including the ones that would’ve otherwise been reasonable.

    Google will never make me feel guilty for blocking ads when they’re already making their search engine unusable, too.

    • Manticore@lemmy.nzEnglish
      641·
      1 年前

      And while I’m at it, here’s the filters to add to your uBlock Origin’s MY FILTERS settings to block YT’s blocker:

      youtube.com##+js(set, yt.config_.openPopupConfig.supportedPopups.adBlockMessageViewModel, false)

      youtube.com##+js(set, Object.prototype.adBlocksFound, 0)

      youtube.com##+js(set, ytplayer.config.args.raw_player_response.adPlacements, [])

      youtube.com##+js(set, Object.prototype.hasAllowedInstreamAd, true)

      • themoonisacheese@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        1 年前

        Wait, surely that doesn’t work? It might block the "disable your adblocker popup but there’s no way this is all it takes for yt to continue serving videos?

        • Manticore@lemmy.nzEnglish
          13·
          1 年前

          It’s feasible that there are other variables that have been missed, but essentially this works. The server asks us a question, and we answer it. We just skip the bit where we provide evidence.

          It’s like looking up the answers in the back of the textbook on a test. The only thing the server sees is the paper we’re handing in, it has no idea if we cheated or not.

          Boring technical explanation:

          For a server (in this case, YouTube) to see what a client (your computer) is doing, it has to reach out and ask it. When a request is made, the two points will ‘handshake’ to confirm that they heard the request, then when they’ve done it. It looks something like this:

          • Client to server: are you prepared?
          • Server to client. Yes, I am prepared. (503 if failure)
          • Acknowledge. Client requests [data].
          • Request received.
          • (Server processes request.)
          • Server to client. Are you prepared for response?
          • Yes, I am prepared.
          • Acknowledge. Response sent.
          • Response received. Close connection.
          • Connection closed.

          These steps can be repeated any number of times in response to a single user mouseclick, depending on what you’re trying to do. A ‘request timeout’ error is what happens if client/server asks “are you prepared?” and it takes too long for the server/client to answer “yes, I am”, so you hang up the phone.

          For the server to treat clients differently at all, it needs to contact them for feedback. For adblocking, it has to ask your client if you’re adblocking. Usually the server does this by sending the client a request to serve an ad - if your client never answers back to confirm it was loaded, then the server knows you blocked the ad. The devs can tell the server that if it doesn’t get a certain answer, to enable the punishment effects. (They’ll technically be sent anyway; they’re just hidden/disabled by default if your client handshakes the ad.)

          What these scripts do is lie to the server. The server asks the client if we received the ad, we ignore the script that checks whether the ad is loaded and instead directly change the answer to claim it has. Since all the server sees is the confirmation, it doesn’t know the difference.

  • Fontasia@feddit.nlEnglish
    59·
    1 年前

    I just don’t get how these providers (Specifically Reddit with the API lockdown and now the stranglehold on mods, Twitter’s new login requirement, and YouTube now cracking down on adblockers) are missing the point that their sites live and die by user generated content.

    I understand these sites are hugely expensive to run, but if you keep alienating those who are bringing users to your site in the first place, people will stop submitting and people will stop visiting.

  • prtm@lemm.eeEnglish
    58·
    1 年前

    To everyone who is saying they use adblock and haven’t seen this yet: YouTube probably rolled this out to a smaller percentage of users first. It allows them to understand how this change impacts user behaviour, e.g. how many users comply and disable their adblocker, how many more users close YouTube than usual etc. Most tech companies do this type of analysis before releasing a high impact change to all users.

    • abbadon420@lemm.eeEnglish
      91·
      1 年前

      I do close youtbe much quicker than I used to. I can watch one video and rhan I’m done. The next video starts with a full minte of ads and I’m out. I know there’s stuff like ReVanced, but I keep wondering wether it’s all worth it.

  • DrummyB@lemm.eeEnglish
    8528·
    1 年前

    Probably get shit for this, but…

    I just pay for Premium.

    YT has literally become my cable. I listen to music, watch movies, documentaries, stand up comedy, news, sports… and cat videos, obviously.

    To me it’s just worth it to pay a bit of money each month and have the whole thing just available to me.

    I feel like if you were to put a money value on all the complaining, stomping of feet and trying to side-step the ads I’ve seen over the last several years, you’d probably find it’s actually less to just pay and enjoy it.

    Just my opinion, of course…

    • mr_right@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
      652·
      1 年前

      you do you if you use it that much and you think it’s worth your money then good for you ( i honestly mean it ) we don’t like youtube ads, YES that is true but it is not the only reason :

      • some of us hate youtube ( and google by extent ) for tracking
      • some of us hate youtube because it’s algorithms tricking us into forcing certain agendas and ideals upon us
      • some of us hate youtube because the hypocrisy around how they treat content creator differently yet claiming they are all under the same “rules”

      the list goes on but what i want to say is that we don’t hate people who pay for youtube we hate those who defend the platform like it’s a white knight and nothing shady happening in it

    • ExistentialOverloadMonkey@programming.devEnglish
      222·
      1 年前

      Google sucks and YouTube is evil.
      If they were not such an explicitly and overtly shitty company, I’d pay for premium no qualms.
      As it is, I wouldn’t give them a dollar if the CEO would personally suck me off.

    • Perfide@reddthat.comEnglish
      20·
      1 年前

      It’s the principle of the matter to me. Google became the multibillion dollar corporation it is by selling my data, your data, everyones data. To then come around and demand I pay to continue using their service the way I have for over a decade? But also still continue selling our data? Nah, fuck that. When they cut me in a percentage on the data selling business, maybe then I’d consider premium.

    • Arcenus@lemmy.worldEnglish
      211·
      1 年前

      Given that we are in the piracy subreddit, you can change your Google account to Argentina or similar and pay Argentinian prices for premium. I’m from Europe and I pay 2€ for a family subscription for 5 people.

    • K3zi4@lemmy.worldEnglish
      201·
      1 年前

      Nah, can’t do it on principle. I know they already make money from me for selling my data, I’m not going to also pay them to do that.

      • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.caEnglish
        6·
        1 年前

        I agree if they charged around half price of Netflix I would be more interested.

        And the part with supporting the creators. I don’t trust Google to give more than pennies to them regardless if I pay or not, I use other ways to support the ones I follow.

        • suddenlythequietrose@beehaw.orgEnglish
          41·
          1 年前

          As for the last part, if Linus from LTT is to be believed (I usually trust his opinions), on the WAN show they were discussing this just last night and he said that the majority of YouTube premium revenue goes to the creators. Or, rather he said that YouTube doesn’t pocket the majority so there could be some tricky nuances in there somewhere but he seemed to indicate that the creators get more than YouTube does in that deal.

      • playertw02@lemmy.fmhy.mlEnglish
        21·
        1 年前

        Well, just use a vpn and subscribe in another country. You can even make a family account and add your current account and maybe some friends to your „family“. Turkey seems pretty cheap, like 1,50€ / month. That’s the route I will follow when YT is showing me this message on my account.

    • whatsarefoogee@lemmy.worldEnglish
      186·
      1 年前

      You’re paying for premium, but you’re not paying it to people producing the content you enjoy. You’re paying it to a middle man parasite. Content creators get a tiny fraction of your money.

      Paying because they made it deliberately difficult to use without paying is akin to giving the bully your lunch money because it’s better “money value” than standing up for yourself. That’s not something I can do without losing respect for myself.

      And my “trying to side step the ads” has so far taken a total of 30 seconds - installing uBlock origin, which I would have done anyway.

      Besides, to use premium you need to be logged in. Being logged in Google outside of a contained environment is idiotic if you have a shred of respect for your own privacy.

      • IronKrill@lemmy.caEnglish
        81·
        1 年前

        That middle-man parasite enables those creators to upload their content for free and provides the bandwidth and discovery for everyone here to watch them. It’s a give and take relationship. I don’t see the problem here, especially as creators get more money from Premium viewers than they do ad-supported viewers. Sure you would get more from a direct payment from the viewer, but you’re not subscribing to every creator you watch either.

      • 🅵🅴🅳🅴🆁🅰🅻🅰🅻🅸🅴🅽🆂🅼🆄🅶🅶🅻🅴🆁@feddit.deEnglish
        12·
        1 年前

        You know that this parasite in the first place enables creators to make a living? Youtube also has the best revenue split between it and the creators. They’re storing exabytes of data for you, watchable at any time, in any resolution you’d like. Google has been running Youtube at a loss for a long time and ads are not going to cover the costs. They need paying users. 12.99$ a month for more videos than Netflix, Amazon Prime etc… , unlimited music streaming and even giving your favorite creators more money (they get more revenue from premium members than from free “ad-viewing” members) is not a lot to ask for. Stop your Spotify or Netflix or Hulu or Sky subscription and get youtube premium.

    • PyroNeurosis@lemmy.worldEnglish
      10·
      1 年前

      The likening to cable is noteworthy because cable started as a means of “tv without those pesky ads” and then…

    • fuzzyspudkiss@midwest.socialEnglish
      94·
      1 年前

      I also have been paying for Premium the last couple years and I completely agree. I get more value out of my premium subscription than I do Netflix or Max. Plus premium supports the creators more than ads do.

    • FurtiveFugitive@lemm.eeEnglish
      5·
      1 年前

      I had your same mindset for years but the cost of premium went up this year and when looking at the new price vs other streaming services, it didn’t make sense for my family any more. If their AdBlock thing starts screwing with my account, I just might be done with all Google products.

  • zos_kia@lemmy.fmhy.mlEnglish
    531·
    1 年前

    Honestly I think I’ll go full hoarder with YouTube archivist and find a way to stream/synchronize on my devices. I mostly use YouTube to go to sleep so there is no way I go back to videos being interrupted by loud ass ads.

    • mr_right@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
      332·
      1 年前

      i don’t want to be a buzz kill but if this train continue its course i am afraid that they gonna do something about youtube-dl

      • TwilightKiddy@programming.devEnglish
        17·
        1 年前

        And then there will be another fork that does something about their something. Just like what happened to Vanced, for example.

      • salarua@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        17·
        1 年前

        they wouldn’t be able to do anything. youtube-dl doesn’t use an API or anything like that, it just streams the video like a browser would and rips the stream. if they somehow actually managed to selectively block youtube-dl, all youtube-dl would have to do is send a different user agent. the only defense against stream ripping in general is to not stream anything at all, which Youtube obviously cannot do

        • Potato@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          7·
          1 年前

          No, when they decide to end yt-dl (and similar tools) they will just enable DRM on all videos, rather than just the pay-per-view videos. The infrastructure already exists for Netflix-like DRM on YouTube. If they are serious about cracking down on ad blocking then it is a matter of time before they throw that switch.

          • fadedmaster@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            3·
            1 年前

            And yet somehow you’re still able to rip video from places like Netflix.

            There’s always a way around it. It’s simply a cat and mouse game.

            • Potato@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              2·
              1 年前

              There are tools to record mediocre quality video from Netflix (flixgrab) and there is an exploit that the scene groups use to nab webdls but there’s nothing quality for normal users.

          • iod@lemmy.mlEnglish
            2·
            1 年前

            Do you have some links about this new DRM for youtube? If it’s true its very sad indeed.

            When will the internet bless us with a good yt competitor

            • Potato@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              3·
              1 年前

              No, I’ve seen no plans to expand DRM on YouTube but the paid videos have been DRM from the start, so they very much have the software internally in place to do it. And third party apps using a YouTube-dl backend provide a workaround against ad blocker bans so if they’re serious about this…

        • mr_right@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
          4·
          1 年前

          i agree that stopping stream ripping is indeed impossible ,what i am afraid (and think) that they gonna put small hurdles in the way until they become a big shore to overcome and this is a worst case scenario but may be they gonna implement DRM like netflix does in the future

    • SJ_Zero@lemmy.fbxl.netEnglish
      81·
      1 年前

      Protip: On Peertube (at least for now), you can sync channels really easily so you can get a full archive of a good channel.

    • apigban@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      2·
      1 年前

      This is what I’m doing since the elsagate scandal, and a recent one where there was an ad of an obese dude jacking off (I’m in the middle east, this happened about 6 months ago).

      I just automate the downloads of new youtube videos and let use jellyfin to watch it.

      I don’t use youtube much, but I had to selfhost because the youtube kids app is fucking nasty. I have my pihole block youtube domains for my kid’s device (firewall does captive dns/redirection of all dns requests to pihole).

      My child likes dr binocs and brave wilderness.

  • Kinglink@lemmy.worldEnglish
    565·
    1 年前

    If you’re demanding I watch ads, it’s not “free”. you’re demanding my time and probably attention.

    I really think we need to stop with this idea that “Something is free” because no money is exchanged. Some stuff ARE free, there are repos on git, where you can download software, there are websites that ask for nothing. However Gmail, Youtube, reddit, and the rest are not “Free” just because they aren’t directly asking for money.