Lad ( @AFC1886VCC@reddthat.com ) 81•2 months agoIt’s funny that free third party apps literally have more features and are more user friendly than the official app with premium.
Why the fuck would I pay for less when I can get more for free?
helenslunch ( @helenslunch@feddit.nl ) 1•2 months agoNot really “funny”. The YouTube app is ass because it’s goal is to extract value from you and provide it to Google. Not the other way around.
Ænima ( @mjhelto@lemm.ee ) 67•2 months agoI’ll give up on YouTube before I give up my ad blocks or 3rd party apps. Fuck off Google.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 9•2 months agoYou could just pay for premium. Then you wouldn’t have ads
inetknght ( @inetknght@lemmy.ml ) 45•2 months agoOTA TV: with ads
OTA TV: if you record you are pirating
Cable TV: you pay a fortune to have no ads!
Cable TV: now with extra premium stuff!
Cable TV: now with ads!
Cable TV: if you record, you’ll be prosecuted
Cable TV: pray we do not alter the deal further
Cable TV: why is everyone moving away from Cable TV?
Youtube: your own videos!
Youtube: your own videos are actually ours
Youtube: our videos with ads!
Youtube: now pay a fortune to remove ads!
Youtube: pray we do not alter the deal further
Youtube: if you download or remove ads you’ll be banned
This isn’t the pattern you’re looking for. Move along.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 3•2 months agoOh, we’ll see at that point I would just like stop paying for it. That’s how I deal with services that no longer meet my expectations.
CileTheSane ( @CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ) 9•2 months agoThat’s exactly what people are doing.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 3•2 months agoKind of, people are not quitting YouTube, I’m off them are still using it, but bitching that their free video streaming service needs to get paid.
They are still using it and costing YouTube money in aggregate
CileTheSane ( @CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ) 12•2 months agoThey are still using it and costing YouTube money in aggregate
The poor company only making $31.5 Billion a year has to eat the streaming cost for someone using as ad blocker? Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the billionaires?!
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 1•2 months agoOh no won’t someone please think of the people so entitled they believe they should get everything for free.
Like, I just don’t understand the thought process behind people like you.
Do you ask for free everything else?
umbrella ( @umbrella@lemmy.ml ) 13•2 months agohumanity would be better off if google went bankrupt
RandomException ( @RandomException@sopuli.xyz ) 11•2 months agoWeird to see this downvoted. Youtube is actually a good service that also isn’t cheap to run, and it also pays good(?) money to the people producing popular content on the platform so why not pay for using it? Or, you know, live with the ad infestation. Businesses need money to run, and if you don’t pay for the content, then either it’s the ads or eventually the whole platform needs to be shut down.
It is a separate discussion if Premium pricing is appropriate etc. But it’s quite horrifying to see people around the world having been taught into thinking that everything should be “free” even though at the same time everyone is complaining about privacy violation and ads being everywhere all the time.
CileTheSane ( @CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ) 12•2 months agoBut it’s quite horrifying to see people around the world having been taught into thinking that everything should be “free”
Maybe the businesses shouldn’t have created the expectation that everything was “free” then.
YouTube used to be 1 skippable ad at the start of the video. Now it’s multiple unskippable ads throughout the video. If the 1 skippable ad wasn’t a viable business model then they shouldn’t have been pretending it was and then changing things later once people have gotten used to the “free” system.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 2•2 months agoSo you would like a plan that uses the same amount of bandwidth and power as they used back then, with one skippable ad, for free?
CileTheSane ( @CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ) 2•2 months agoYup.
YouTube could easily avoid AdBlockers by simply having ad part of the video itself. Not pulling it from a different server, not hijacking your video player to prevent user controls, just part of the video like any other part of the video and AdBlockers would not be able to detect it. They’re not going to do that though, because then users won’t be forced to watch an ad they have no interest in.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 2•2 months agoDo you realize how low quality your stuff would be?
Then people would bitch that they can’t get the high quality version for free
CileTheSane ( @CileTheSane@lemmy.ca ) 3•2 months agoDo you realize how low quality your stuff would be?
YouTube makes $30 billion a year. They’ll be fine.
Then people would bitch that they can’t get the high quality version for free
Reducing the max resolution for people who aren’t on YouTube Red will come next once they stop focusing on AdBlockers.
“Service quality will continue to decrease until profits improve!”
octopus_ink ( @octopus_ink@lemmy.ml ) English8•2 months agoBut it’s quite horrifying to see people around the world having been taught into thinking that everything should be “free” even though at the same time everyone is complaining about privacy violation and ads being everywhere all the time.
That is exactly the issue, but you are placing quite a bit too much of your disapproval on the audience.
Google (and others) have built business models off of data mining because so many people didn’t give a shit for so long about it. They have monetized their users for the entire time they have owned the platform. They have trained their own users to feel like the product was free while using those people for advertising dollars.
People have always hated ads, but you had generations of folks who were born before the internet who mostly just accepted the ads were going to be there, and also have never given a single thought to privacy. That slice of the pie is getting smaller, for various reasons.
Now Google have decided since they can’t reliably exploit enough of their users, it’s time to start charging them directly. They are fighting against their own inertia. It is they who have trained users with “we aren’t asking you for $$, so don’t worry about how we’re paying for all this, trust me bro.”
The modern audience is increasingly made up of people with both the will and capability to set up ad blocking and/or privacy protecting measures. Sorry Google, we aren’t going down quietly.
RandomException ( @RandomException@sopuli.xyz ) 2•2 months agoYou are absolutely right! Part of the horribleness is exactly companies like Google who were the ones teaching people that everything should be “free” as in usable without explicit money transaction, and now they are the ones who are (thanks to EU I guess) trying to revert that and make the business model viable through subscription.
So I do get why the problem exists and I feel no empathy for the companies that are to blame for that. But, I do worry that we have a whole generation of people who think that stuff should just exist and have no monetary value like it just materialized out of thin air without anyone working on it before and neither having to keep it running. That is not a healthy mental model and it will contribute to predatory companies being able to harvest data out of these people in the future meanwhile privacy-first companies can’t get them as customers because they have to actually ask for money for their services.
octopus_ink ( @octopus_ink@lemmy.ml ) English2•2 months agoBut, I do worry that we have a whole generation of people who think that stuff should just exist and have no monetary value like it just materialized out of thin air without anyone working on it before and neither having to keep it running. That is not a healthy mental model and it will contribute to predatory companies being able to harvest data out of these people in the future
I see where you are coming from there, and I don’t disagree with your opinion, but I do still think that while that may objectively be a mindset that is potentially harmful, I feel the net impact in this context is more likely to be increased contribution to and support of things that really are Free (gratis and libre), nudging reality closer to a place where a lot of those sorts of services are free or donation-supported, and less likely to be in corporate hands unless those corporations improve their behavior.
A hard to summarize version of that sort of path and mindset is what initially pushed me away from Windows, but over more than a decade I’ve developed lots more reasons than cost for why I’d never go back, and for why I’ve become a Free Software enthusiast and advocate.
verdigris ( @verdigris@lemmy.ml ) 4•2 months agoStuff should be free. We live in an age where every one of us could be living a life of comfort and reasonable luxury with a modicum of work. In the meantime those of us who aren’t being showered by the excesses of capitalism are fully entitled to stand in the splashes.
RandomException ( @RandomException@sopuli.xyz ) 1•2 months agoWell I mean stuff always has some costs assigned to it. Even if we are talking about Google or software in general, there are still people needed to create and maintain the software itself for the products, who in part also need to put some food on the table and get a roof above their heads. Then there are the infrastructure costs which are enormous on a global video streaming service like Youtube. Now, I do acknowledge that Google engineers are usually insanely well-paid, but that’s the way life is when you absolutely need the people working for you. Other companies might choose to cut features while searching for cheaper developers but it is what it is. In the end, nothing is free and you always end up paying for services in a way or another. And I’m not sure if I would like to continue on the “free” services path that we saw in the last 15 years.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 1•2 months agoIs it downvoted? I’m on kbin so I can’t see anything but kbin votes and I have nothing but upvotes. lol
Edit: downloaded to downvoted
monobot ( @monobot@lemmy.ml ) 1•2 months agoIt is, it has -9 points right now. While unpopular opinion, I agree with it if you like the content.
I use it, but I am trying to move to podcast and other platforms as much as possible.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 1•2 months agoPodcasts have their place in my routine.
Ænima ( @mjhelto@lemm.ee ) 11•2 months agoI’ll pass, thanks. Too many streaming platforms already.
Lettuce eat lettuce ( @Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml ) 1•2 months agoLol!! Imagine if xD
Reawake9179 ( @Reawake9179@lemmy.kde.social ) 1•2 months agoNo ads? What is with sponsor #1-#5 planted all over each video?
You’re just paying premium for free content, that doesn’t go away.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 1•2 months agoSo you are mad at the video creators for putting sponsorships in?
Reawake9179 ( @Reawake9179@lemmy.kde.social ) 1•2 months agoNo, i don’t care, because i don’t pay anything for it.
They advertise ad-free access, when in fact the ads are in the video themselves.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 1•2 months agoSo you’re upset that they don’t tell you that creators can choose to put sponsorships in?
Reawake9179 ( @Reawake9179@lemmy.kde.social ) 1•2 months agoI’m not upset at all, if you want it written again.
I don’t pay for shit and it will stay that way.
At the meantime ads will get blocked and sponsors will get skipped, i’m not obliged to support anyone and i couldn’t care less.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 1•2 months agoOK, have fun not supporting the things that you like?
B0rax ( @B0rax@feddit.de ) 6•2 months agoIt will go the way of Reddit…
helenslunch ( @helenslunch@feddit.nl ) 2•2 months agoLOL what are you talking about? The users had a hissy fit but after that Reddit got everything they wanted. The users mostly all returned a few days later and it was business as usual. Since then they opened up about selling user data and IPO’d and still nothing.
It’s become abundantly clear now that there’s level of abuse these users won’t endure.
i_am_not_a_robot ( @i_am_not_a_robot@discuss.tchncs.de ) English61•2 months agoAre they going to officially allow third party apps at all? The stock app is terrible, and not just because of excessive, unskippable advertising and bizarre restrictions around background play. When you search for anything, at least half of the results are completely unrelated to what you searched for in an attempt to increase user engagement metrics. It keeps trying to get you to watch shorts in its bad TikTok clone. Sometimes it recommends unrelated shorts with disturbing thumbnails in the middle of your search results. It keeps autodetecting that the video quality should be 360p on a connection easily capable of 4k, and resetting back to 360p at the start of every new video. The UI for live streams puts things on top of other things that are more important.
datavoid ( @datavoid@lemmy.ml ) English16•2 months agoAs soon as I have to see shorts, YouTube is dead to me. I hate the format with a passion.
Alien Nathan Edward ( @reverendsteveii@lemm.ee ) English5•2 months agobizarre restrictions around background play
there’s nothing bizarre about it - the free version is shitty on purpose
0x1C3B00DA ( @0x1C3B00DA@fedia.io ) 57•2 months agoIt’s funny how this comes after Chrome’s switch to Manifest V3, which makes ad blocking not possible on Chrome and was purely for security reasons and not for disabling ad blockers. Now that Chrome users can’t block ads on the first-party site, they’re going after third-party clients. Such coincidental timing.
Dymonika ( @Dymonika@beehaw.org ) 4•2 months agowas purely for security reasons and not for disabling ad blockers.
I had not heard of Manifest v3 and actually can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not. I guess you are.
QueerQuery ( @QueerQuery@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) 21•2 months agohttps://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/googles-manifest-v3-still-hurts-privacy-security-innovation
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/chrome-users-beware-manifest-v3-deceitful-and-threatening
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/11/google-chrome-will-limit-ad-blockers-starting-june-2024/
They’ve been trying for years to implement this at a large price to the users. They always try to hide under the guise of security.
https://www.ghacks.net/2024/04/16/google-intensifies-fight-against-youtube-adblockers/
ivy ( @1917isnow@lemmy.ml ) 1•2 months agoMan they’re fucking out of their minds!!!
I only care about how this will affect Floorp’s user agent spoofing abilities thought 😶🌫️🌫️
macaroni1556 ( @macaroni1556@lemmy.ca ) 6•2 months agoThey’re not being sarcastic, they are repeating Google’s (bs) justification
Sneezycat ( @sneezycat@sopuli.xyz ) 7•2 months agoThey are being sarcastic, with the emphasis on “purely”, while saying Google’s justification. It’s exactly to point out it’s bs.
0x1C3B00DA ( @0x1C3B00DA@fedia.io ) 5•2 months agoyes exactly what sneezycat said. I was being sarcastic and pointing out that Manifest V3 was always a crackdown on ad blocking and nothing else.
macaroni1556 ( @macaroni1556@lemmy.ca ) 2•2 months agoSure, I guess I maintain its that’s not what sarcasm is but we do agree on the point
Sneezycat ( @sneezycat@sopuli.xyz ) 2•2 months agoIf it is not sarcasm then the justification is not bs. And OP agrees it is sarcasm.
𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬 ( @Dirk@lemmy.ml ) 55•2 months agoNot again … Well, let’s wait a week or so for the clients to fix that.
Lettuce eat lettuce ( @Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml ) 45•2 months agoPlease download and archive your favorite channels and videos!
Host them yourself to watch them locally.
Especially do this for educational material, share it wide and far!
We are entering a very dark age of techno-dystopia, we need to fight it with everything we have. Pirate, seed, screen-record, download, archive, share, never give up.
ℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃 ( @name_NULL111653@pawb.social ) 7•2 months agoThis is the way.
Onihikage ( @Onihikage@beehaw.org ) English36•2 months agoThe problem with YouTube Premium is the pricing tiers are completely out of touch with what people are willing to pay and what services they’re willing to pay for.
Let me compare to Discovery+. For $9 a month, loads of shows that ran on TV for decades can be streamed at 1080p (or whatever resolution they were available in), on up to four devices at the same time. They still have some original shows that they spend money to make. This service does not have ads.
Let’s also compare to Nebula, which like Discovery+ also has original content funded by the platform. Every content creator there is also an invited owner of the platform, so their cost structure is a bit different, but they still have to sustain the costs of running a streaming platform while compensating the creators of said content for views. Nebula is a microscopic $5 a month per user with no ads.
YouTube is a platform with entirely user-generated content (costs YT nothing except bandwidth) that is already supported at the free tier with a gratuitous amount of ads. This service has been available completely free with ad support for nearly two decades. The lowest “premium” tier they offer is $14 a month for one person to stream ad-free, at a better 1080p bitrate, be able to download videos or watch them in the background in the official app, pay creators for every view, and have a music streaming app thrown in for good measure. The only other tier is all the same stuff in a $22 monthly family plan for six users, but they all have to be in the same “household” or you’re technically breaking TOS, so in practice it’s often more like $22 for three people, and heaven forbid any of you travel for work.
Two of the “premium” features should be free anyway. You can’t watch a video without downloading it at least once, so the bandwidth cost is the same. If you download it and play it more than once, that actually saves YouTube bandwidth, and therefore cost. Any video that’s played more than once is probably going to be played a lot more than once, so this would add up, especially if the app downloads the ad spots ahead of time. Background play doesn’t cost them any bandwidth at all and is a trivial feature to implement, so it’s put behind a paywall as an artificial restriction for no other reason than to annoy users for not paying. Both of these are anti-features; to charge for them is anti-consumer. They engender spite in users, making them less willing to pay for Premium and more determined to find alternatives.
Instead of trying to figure out what people are actually willing to pay for, which is the expected behavior of a market actor, Google continues to behave like a monopoly that can dictate terms to its users. This is why people refuse to pay for Premium. If they made the anti-features free, and introduced a Premium tier that is $7 a month to one user for nothing more than better bitrate streaming with no ads, people would sign up in droves. There could be a $9 tier for streaming boxes like Roku or Chromecast that offers Premium service for any account viewed from that one specific device, without having to sign up each individual account for premium, which satisfies another niche. The $14 tier could remain for those who also want music streaming (an extra $7 is still much cheaper than Spotify premium), and the $22 tier could still be a significant value proposition for actual families.
It’s not that the price offered for the $14 premium plan isn’t reasonable for what it offers - the issue is that what it offers doesn’t match the actual needs of many people who use adblockers or third-party clients, on top of insulting users with anti-features. Until YouTube management can be made to understand this, they will continue to screech impotently about ad-blockers while driving users away and leaving potential revenue on the table.
EddoWagt ( @EddoWagt@feddit.nl ) 10•2 months agoOfcourse you always get youtube music with the subscription, which they claim ads extra value. But I dont want youtube music, I already pay for another service. So for me it would be a waste of money
PsychedSy ( @PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 2•2 months agoI pay for the family plan and they use google music. I use pandora because my station is older than my 16yo niece that’s on my yt plan.
Shurimal ( @Shurimal@kbin.social ) 36•2 months agoThird party apps: “OK. We’ll show ads. Muted. Behind a black overlay. If we really can’t find a workaround.”
AlexWIWA ( @AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml ) English1•2 months agoI think YouTube wouldn’t care as long as they got paid
RBG ( @RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de ) 27•2 months agoAs soon as 3rd party clients don’t work as they do anymore, I am stopping going to YouTube. Simple as, I know it doesn’t matter as a singular thing, I am just one user. Was the same with reddit, now I am here but reddit is still going (how well we don’t need to debate now).
penquin ( @penquin@lemm.ee ) 9•2 months agoYou’re not alone. Don’t think that. A lot of people will do the same. I’m right there with ya. Fuck YouTube
ComradeSharkfucker ( @sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml ) English25•2 months agoMy newpipe 😔
Jeena ( @jeena@jemmy.jeena.net ) 25•2 months agoDamn, I got my setup so perfect on the TV with SmartTube. But I will not be able to tolerate ads. Then I’d rather only watch on Firefox with uBlock on my laptop.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 8•2 months agoThen pay for premium?
Jeena ( @jeena@jemmy.jeena.net ) 15•2 months agoI did for many years. But then I moved to Korea and they don’t allow family plans and paying 4 individual ones is just not in our budget. Then probably just no YouTube for me.
belated_frog_pants ( @belated_frog_pants@beehaw.org ) 11•2 months agoThen youtube wins. No.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 3•2 months agoSo you want to use YouTube to stream videos, but don’t want to pay or watch ads?
You just want people to give you shit for free?
ReversalHatchery ( @ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org ) English14•2 months agoOn one hand, I think that by now it is by far a public service, in private hands.
On the other hand, yes you do already pay by providing them information on your interests and other personal matters.
Sneezycat ( @sneezycat@sopuli.xyz ) 10•2 months agoNot OP, but heck yeah free stuff! Special thanks to the people providing us Lemmy for free :)
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 3•2 months agoYay free stuff for sure, but what happens when no one is paying for something?
lemmyreader ( @lemmyreader@lemmy.ml ) English5•2 months agoHow did Google manage to buy YouTube, and then make YouTube the video monopoly it currently is ? One of the pillars of that foundation is open source software used by Google, for free. Some of that open source software maintained for a long time by unpaid and sometimes burned out software developers. All the YT video watchers commenting here in this post wanting to pay content creators and wanting content creators live off that : Google is run by a few laughing billionaires who probably care most about shareholders and being able to make more money by exploiting ads on the billions of hooked end users. Besides paying YT and content creators consider supporting small scale open source projects as well. Help out wherever and whenever you can with open source software. Take back your digital sovereignty. Big tech is not your friend. Open source empowers and shares with others as in sharing is caring.
Scary le Poo ( @Scary_le_Poo@beehaw.org ) 6•2 months agoThat content does not belong to YouTube. And they also do not pay for 99% of it.
YouTube depends on people to use it for it’s existence. They also depend on those users to upload content so that YouTube can then treat that content as if it is its own and monetize it.
If I was in such a precarious position I wouldn’t go about making the experience crappy for those users that I’m desperately dependent upon.
NoIWontPickAName ( @NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth ) 1•2 months agoWell, it seems like you aren’t part of the target audience.
Luckily there are other options out there for you!
NutWrench ( @NutWrench@lemmy.ml ) 24•2 months agoYoutube isn’t some one of a kind miracle. There’s at least a dozen already-established streaming platforms that would take its place. There are thousands of websites that have no problems hosting gigs and gigs of porn, so it’s not as difficult as people think.
sweetpotato ( @sweetpotato@lemmy.ml ) 20•2 months agoFuck them. I’d rather donate quadruple the money for premium to my favourite creators directly than give a single penny to this parasitic mega corporation.
The issue is not only the ads, it’s the stupid shit it throws you to keep you hooked, it’s the stupid shorts that literally no one asked for, it’s every stupid little thing that fights for your attention. Basically the app doesn’t work for you, it works against you. That’s not the case with third party apps, they have you, the user, in mind, not their profits.
Zerush ( @Zerush@lemmy.ml ) 17•2 months agoShowing it the middlefinger since >half a year
https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/489585-ultimate-youtube-ad-remover-and-detection-bypasser/code
https://openuserjs.org/scripts/Kraust/Youtube_Embed_Redirect
Yardy Sardley ( @yardy_sardley@lemmy.ca ) 17•2 months agoHonestly, huge shout out to the wave of enshittification crashing through Google and reddit and forcing me off their platforms. Decade-long debilitating addiction solved.
theshatterstone54 ( @theshatterstone54@feddit.uk ) 2•2 months agoIndeed. They’re solving our issues for us! Go enshittification!