• Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    167
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    A new wave of slowdowns is hitting users, with the only resolutions being disabling the ad blocker or upgrading to premium.

    Or just switching to ublock origin.

    Or just switching to newpipe.

    Or just switching to freetube.

    etc

    etc

    etc

    • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I have ublock origin on firefox and it’s really bad for me currently. This has traditionally been the good combo I believe.

      Not just slowing down, but stopping, then restarting after skipping a few seconds that you cannot access no matter what.

      For now the best solution I’ve found is to copy the video url, open potplayer and just hit the paste command and the video runs flawlessly.

      So they’ll have to close that loophole eventually, which means enshittifying the video streaming protocol for everything that isn’t the native web viewer, which will inconvenience more people who were used to something working, leading to another workaround, leading to…

      Youtube is gradually accelerating their enshittification. I’m looking forward to when it comes to a real head. Too many serious interested parties rely on it. I don’t know if peertube will be the first fallback, but I’m sure it’ll get a big bump.

      • nicetriangle@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        Plex does not recognize them in terms of pulling down metadata but you can still organize them in folders and browse that way. I find the Plex route is a healthier way to engage with video content than platforms that just keep serving you whatever the algorithm thinks will keep you peeled to the screen. It’s more intentional and less of a passive consumption kinda thing.

      • quirzle@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        tl;dr: Yes, but probably takes some effort for most content.

        Plex will play the files, but metadata is hit or miss. If it’s something that’s on thetvdb or themoviedb, it can be matched as a series or movie, respectively. With some effort, you could also probably include all the relevant metadata when downloading the videos, then have plex use local metadata, which could cover anything not big enough for the big metadata providers.

        I think it’s also possible to find plug-ins/scripts that will pull metadata directly from youtube, but I’ve had bad luck relying on that stuff and then development stopping, so I avoid it these days.

  • lloram239@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’ll never understand why they spend so much effort pushing ads into people’s faces that don’t want see them and so little making ads more attractive.

    A very large chunk of what people consume these days is effectively already ads. Every Youtuber holding a product into the camera is an ad. And people want to watch that. They want to know what new products are out there. It just has to presented appropriately.

    Forced ads with mandatory 5sec isn’t making people interested in your product, heck, numerous times I might have been interested in a product, but lost interested since I couldn’t rewind the ad or because the ad didn’t link to anything that gave me further information. A 15min video from a Youtuber reviewing a product in detail is way more effective than any regular ad I have ever seen, yet there are almost no ads in that style.

    • Camelbeard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      10 months ago

      Too be honest I was fine with seeing an ad every few videos. But at some point it became unskippable ads before , during and after a video.

      • verysoft@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Ads got too aggressive, people made adblockers, ads got more aggressive because of lost revenue, almost everyone starts using adblockers.

        They did it to themselves, people were content with simple ads on a page, it’s once they started interfering with the content and access of it that they became a problem.

      • Tak@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        10 months ago

        What boils my blood the most is how manipulative marketing is. The number of worthless ass jingles I remember from the 90’s from companies I’ve never purchased anything from is ridiculous.

    • NocturnalEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I never had an issue with YT’s 1-2 skipable ads at the beginning, or even the banner ad. But they got greedy.

      The midrolls and the unskipable ads was the trigger point for me.

      • SeaJ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I was fine with even having a couple very short unskippable ads every other video. Now it is all of them with one in the middle of videos longer than 5 minutes. And then of course the content creator has to put in an ad because YouTube does not pay shit for views.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah and I wouldn’t even mind like 5 minutes of ads at the beginning compared to randomly dispersed in the middle

        • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          10 months ago

          Oh sure, let me watch 5 MINUTES before watching a 7min clip.
          Dedicated 5min are only marginally justified if the content is >60 minutes in length.

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        10 months ago

        I mean, they didn’t get greedy, as far as everyone knows they are losing a ton of money (at least if you can extrapolate anytbing from the fact that twitch is massively unprofitable)

        • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          Pretty sure YouTube has already been declared to be profitable. But frankly I’m pretty suspicious of claims of unprofitability for services being run for over a decade. Why would any for-profit company bankroll them if it wasn’t worth it? There has to be some creative accounting going on.

          • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            Doubt it, if it was profitable, they would be announcing that to everyone as loud as they could. Besides, if twitch is unprofitable, I doubt that google is in a much better situation

        • eskimofry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          If they want to, they can go 100% paywalled. But I guess people like to conveniently forget that YouTube wants to double-dip.

        • takeda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          That was the initially when YouTube was created. Everyone knows that Google has no problem cancelling anything that’s not profitable.

          • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            If it was profitable, then why did google stop posting the financial statistics for YouTube

            • eskimofry@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              to get the benefit of the doubt on unpopular decisions. Same thing with hiding thumbs down counter from videos.

    • minibyte@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      10 months ago

      A very large chunk of what people consume these days is effectively already ads

      That’s what grinds my gears. I understand ads pay bills, but showing multiple ads before a trailer for a video game or movie is excessive.

        • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          10 months ago

          Ads are a way to fill people’s heads with brand names until nothing remains except for those brands and only those brands feel safe and familiar until it becomes a conditioned reflex to choose those products. And it works.

          The Holy Market forbids people would actually choose products based on their own experience and price.

          • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            10 months ago

            I actively avoid brands with annoying ads.

            When unsubscribing from pretty much any service there’s usually little text box asking why. Whether or not it’s the real reason for leaving, I love citing obnoxious ads as the thing that pushed me out, especially for high-dollar moves like banking or insurance.

            I know it’ll never accomplish anything, but it feels good. ^_^

        • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Most ads are about brand recognition and not so much about trying to sell a specific product. Even if you think an ad is stupid, if you still can remember the brand then the ad worked.

      • bitwolf@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        I find it extremely funny that YouTube serving ads also strains the same video infrastructure they’re trying to increase revenue on.

    • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Like for real, you have all the money in the world and you know what I like and don’t, so why don’t tailor the ads to not annoy the fuck out of me?

        • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          But they just get less money from me, because I remove all non organic ads. Would non organic ads be less annoying, they could sell more shit to me.

          • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Paying attention to your needs/desires takes work. They don’t want to work, they just want, “MORE!”

            • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              Not really, they are clearly spending money and resources to grab my attention and it’s not like the work is done by people who are profiting in the end anyway. Than again - I’m rather anti consume to begin with, so maybe people like me are not a valuable market to beginn with, which is fair.

          • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            We are the more aware portion of the public.
            Take a look at public linear tv for a while during prime time.
            Ad breaks every 30min with a cliffhanger in the movie.
            Atrocious.

      • Plopp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’d much much much rather watch ads for products that are not the least relevant to me. I’m not going to be an active participant in my own manipulation. I’d rather be annoyed.

    • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      A very large chunk of what people consume these days is effectively already ads. Every Youtuber holding a product into the camera is an ad. And people want to watch that. They want to know what new products are out there. It just has to presented appropriately.

      I doubt so - Sponsorblock exists. I guess some don’t mind it because it supports the creators they like directly.

      • lloram239@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        I don’t mean the sponsor segments, but the rest of the video. LTT, MKBHD and all the other tech channels, every movie and game reviewer and a lot of other stuff is all ads. Every single channel that is focused on showing you a new product is effectively an ad. And people watch it because they are interesting in seeing what new or interesting products are out there. There is no aversion to ads, there is an aversion to bad and annoying ads.

    • jws_shadotak@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I’ll never understand why they spend so much effort pushing ads into people’s faces

      money

      Also, disappointingly, most people don’t care about the ad all that much.

      • lloram239@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes, but that’s self inflicted. They make the rules. They build the software. They decide how ads are presented.

        • Rediphile@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          Which only has value to the corporation if the people driven there watch ads on said page.

    • gian @lemmy.grys.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      A 15min video from a Youtuber reviewing a product in detail is way more effective than any regular ad I have ever seen, yet there are almost no ads in that style.

      True. But probably that money does not go to Google but to the Youtuber directly, so for Google this is still a cost.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Because that has been tried so many times over the decades.

      The good sites put effort in to curate their ads and make sure they are things their audiences would enjoy. Lots of webcomics STILL have blog posts about doing this. Same with one of the more popular “steam deck” websites.

      The problem is that this doesn’t work. Because people don’t permitlist those sites. They just block everything for the exact same reasons “I pirate it and if I like it I’ll buy it” was always a blatant lie for the vast majority of people (and no, I don’t care who consider themselves exceptions to that).

      So when curated and “good” ads have almost zero benefit over shitty and obnoxious ones? The focus stops being “let’s serve good ads and trust our users to have our backs” and more “What can we do to actually get ANY ad revenue out of this so that we can keep the lights on?”

      • lloram239@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Because that has been tried so many times over the decades.

        When? “Will it Blend?” is about the only time I can think of when a company went in an alternative direction and turned their ads into entertainment and was quite successful at that. How many products do even have as little as an official unboxing video? Stuff like the SteamDeck teardown is what I would love every company doing for all their product. But it’s super rare. Why limit your ads to 30sec fake nonsense when you could have 15min of talking about your product in detail?

        They just block everything for the exact same reasons

        There wouldn’t be a need or even the ability to block anything if it wouldn’t be forced on the user. If Youtube had a “show me a random ad” button, I’d click it. I don’t hate ads. I hate bad ads that are forced in my face when I don’t need them. I have plenty of downtime where I wouldn’t mind seeing what new products are around. Gameify that stuff. Make it interesting. Make it explorable. Make it interactive. You have million dollar budget, mountains of collected data and random garbage forced into the users face is the best you can come up with?

        “What can we do to actually get ANY ad revenue out of this so that we can keep the lights on?”

        You are forgetting that there is an advertiser in all this. People that care about getting clicks on ads will have no problem tricking users into accidentally clicking on ads. But why are the advertisers themselves ok with that? If I want to advertise a product I’d not be interested in paying for accidental clicks users were tricked into, I’d be interested in finding users that are interested in the product I want to sell. And I really don’t see current ads doing that very well. They might be better than literally nothing, but I really don’t see them being better than all the potential ways to make better ads.

          • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Good point

            Even when someone highlights a video as an exemplar of “being an ad”, people still are bombarded with alternatives that hinder the monetization of even that.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          Let’s break that down

          When? “Will it Blend?” is about the only time I can think of when a company went in an alternative direction and turned their ads into entertainment and was quite successful at that.

          I mean, if your goal is for the ads to be entertaining, people REALLY liked Chuck (high concentration of chuds aside) and Community. And Soap Operas literally came out of the idea of integrating advertisements into media.

          Also… it is not just a meme that people are increasingly more interested in the ads than the stoppages during the Super Bowl.

          Also, this was a driving force behind Flash. Ads that were “games”.

          But my point is more the efforts to make less obtrusive ads that are visually appealing AND relevant to the viewers.

          How many products do even have as little as an official unboxing video? Stuff like the SteamDeck teardown is what I would love every company doing for all their product. But it’s super rare. Why limit your ads to 30sec fake nonsense when you could have 15min of talking about your product in detail?

          Sorry. You are talking about wanting 15 minute pre-roll ads? Do you want to maybe rethink that? Please. I beg you. Don’t put that evil into the world.

          Also: What you are describing is literally an infomercial. Ron Popeil’s rotisserie oven and bigass syringe come to mind, but also Vince “I got my ass beat by a prostitute” Offer and Billy “Never met anything I didn’t want to snort” Mays (RIP) come to mind.

          Also… with a word from our sponsor, we have Linus “I can’t have a warranty because people would attack my family” Sebastien and LMG. Or any other heavily sponsored review channel. And… people run “sponsor block”. While watching a fucking ad for the latest Samsung phone.

          There wouldn’t be a need or even the ability to block anything if it wouldn’t be forced on the user. If Youtube had a “show me a random ad” button, I’d click it. I don’t hate ads. I hate bad ads that are forced in my face when I don’t need them.

          This is right up there with “I’ll buy it if I like it after I fully watch all twelve seasons”. Sure there are people who would willingly watch ten ads per hour if it meant that others didn’t have to see any. Uhm… Okay, I actually can’t even pretend that is true.

          Or, to be slightly less mocking: Subscription models. Those have proven to be incredibly lucrative to people who “made it big” already. They are a constant struggle for up and comers. Because I would probably throw a few bucks at J Kenji Lopez-Alt every month if it got me a steady feed of recipes and videos. As much as I like him, I can’t see myself doing that for Ethan Chlebowski because he is still nowhere near as established and is very much a “home cook” in terms of “knowledge”.

          Because, trust me, all your favorite content creators would love it if they didn’t need to do any sponsored content or negotiate with brands/marketing firms and just got a giant check in the mail every week from their fans. Very few can pull that off to the degree required to make “quality” content. Otherwise nobody would have ever heard of Raid Shadow Legends and Better Help.

          Or, if I can move to the greater root problem of “how to make money while making media”, let’s look at video games. Some of the pseudo-live games will have a LOT of DLC. Like literally hundreds of cosmetic skins that have no bearing whatsoever on the gameplay and exist almost entirely as a “tip jar” to fund the free content updates. And… people lose their mind. And they use it as an argument that the game is bad because if you wanted to buy all 500 skins for your player character in an FPS that has been getting steady updates for 4 years now, it would cost you 300 dollars. THE HORROR. FUCK LAZY DEVS!!!

          I have plenty of downtime where I wouldn’t mind seeing what new products are around. Gameify that stuff. Make it interesting. Make it explorable. Make it interactive. You have million dollar budget, mountains of collected data and random garbage forced into the users face is the best you can come up with?

          Again, see the entire concept of sponsored media

          You are forgetting that there is an advertiser in all this. People that care about getting clicks on ads will have no problem tricking users into accidentally clicking on ads. But why are the advertisers themselves ok with that? If I want to advertise a product I’d not be interested in paying for accidental clicks users were tricked into, I’d be interested in finding users that are interested in the product I want to sell. And I really don’t see current ads doing that very well. They might be better than literally nothing, but I really don’t see them being better than all the potential ways to make better ads.

          Because advertisement works.

          A few years back, one of the WWE shows basically ran an ad for “fuck time island” or whatever it was called every single commercial break. It was some sort of reality dating show or whatever. And you could watch in real time as the squaredcircle crowd started off by complaining and mocking and very rapidly changed their rules so they could have a discussion thread on it every single week where people were actually interested.

          Or just think about how many times people have muttered 'eat fresh" while reading up on public transit in many cities.

          They might be better than literally nothing, but I really don’t see them being better than all the potential ways to make better ads.

          Again. Attempts have been made for literally decades. Sites curated really quality ads and people still ran adblock. Youtubers try to work with good companies for their sponsorships and people still run sponsor block. Hell, people often won’t even click the affiliate link to buy the product they just watched a 30 minute review of. The “better” way is something that people either haven’t blocked yet or can’t block.

  • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I really wish government would just come in already and shatter google into a million pieces with the anti-monopoly hammer already.

    Google is far worse than AT&T ever was when it was shattered into the baby bells.

    Just gotta learn from AT&T to not let them re-congeal back together like somekind of fucked up liquid metal terminator 20+ years down the line.

    • debil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Exactly! I started surfin’ da information highway in the 90’s. I remember watching an image unveil itself slowly as a morning sunrise.

    • weirdo_from_space@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      It would be really cool to be able to download YouTube videos withour the sponsorship segments, I wonder if there is a way to do his already?

      • Euphoma@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        yt-dlp has a command-line option to download videos while using sponsor block.

        yt-dlp https://youtube... --sponsorblock-remove all
        
      • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Like the ads surrounding the video and breaking the video up or the spots in the video where the creator hawks their latest wares?

        • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Honestly, I’m ok with at least giving channel ad reads a shot. Those aren’t based on my watch history/search history and the channel owner actually gets a good cut. Almost nobody can make a living with google ads.

    • XTornado@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      My worry with all this is that they might say fuck it and put DRM for all YouTube videos which would block attempts to download the videos. Not make it impossible as seen with streaming services but not as trivial as now…

      • eskimofry@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        The day they go 100% paywalled, is the day their dominance ends. They will never do this because, contrary to the corporate dickriders in this thread they rely on bait and switch tactics to draw the crowd in the first place.

      • gila@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Well the good news is Widevine is very expensive, and doesn’t work. It’s not as simple as right click / save target as, but Widevine decryption is why you can torrent any of the shows/movies on those streaming services.

        Everytime someone requests a video on those services, the service pays a fee to Widevine. $0.50 USD per request for the first 30k requests/month. How much you think Google is willing to pay someone for you to watch cat videos for free?

          • gila@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            You’re right. But then it’s also their cost incurred. Their decryption keys to revoke on exploited devices, and their engineers to try and come up with a software patch for their hardware-level CDM. It’s costly was my point.

  • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Frankly, I’d stop using YouTube entirely before I’d start using it without an adblocker. At least there are no signs of it slowing down for me, yet.

  • TeoTwawki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    “We’ll make our service worse, that’ll show them!”

    Ok google, good luck with that.

    • soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      10 months ago

      Unless you inform those customers with some kind of UI that they’re being throttled because of ad-block how does Google expect them to uninstall it?

      I genuinely believe they are trying to push adblock users off the platform completely

    • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      At this point I’m convinced they’re trying to drive people away to shrink the overhead on bandwidth and servers, but it doesn’t work like that. Not after you got them hooked on videos of cats after years of a steady drip of memes.

  • davemeech@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    So I have YouTube premium but also have ad-blocker, for the first time yesterday I was noticing absolutely abysmal speeds on YouTube and I suspect this is why. I thought my computer was starting to shit the bed initially it was so brutal.

    • Hawke@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I have YouTube premium

      Wow, so you pay them and they still screw you? Glad that’s a product I’ll never buy then!

      • davemeech@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        I know, right? But I suppose their reasoning is that my ads are also blocked across the rest of their ecosystem, my subscription isn’t covering those losses.

        Still though, a model that requires that customers look at something they don’t want to nor will engage with smells like failure.

        • Hawke@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’m generally okay with the idea of “you can get it for free and we’ll include ads to pay for it, or you can pay instead”.

          Where I’m definitely not okay is “you can pay, and we’ll include ads anyway.”

      • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        I have YouTube premium and an adblocker and I don’t have this problem. I’m skeptical that it’s related.

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          I have YouTube premium and an adblocker and I don’t have this problem. I’m skeptical that it’s related.

          I too am a YouTube premium customer, and my video performance is horrible lately.

          Funny enough, on my living room smart TV YouTube app my performance has been bad as well, even though I am logged in to my premium YouTube account.

          Something is going on, and it does effect some (at least) premium customers.

        • PopMyCop@iusearchlinux.fyi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Wasn’t that exactly how the adblock blocks went out in the first place? Only a few areas at a time were affected.

    • atrielienz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      10 months ago

      I was wondering if this was coming. I don’t use YouTube in-browser much if at all, so I don’t see this. But I am not surprised. The fact that they’re slowing down people who pay for premium is kind of an act of war. It shouldn’t be a thing, and the fact that it’s happening at all is a misstep on Google’s part. Not that the whole slowing down people who use ad blockers isn’t. But this will detrimentally affect adoption of premium subscribers which I thought was the last thing they’d want. Because they obviously don’t make enough off ad revenue to support the platform. That’s part of why they push premium so hard. They need more premium subscribers. This is idiocy.

      • davemeech@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        I can’t remember what video I watched that talked about the unsustainabilty and likely the late stages of an ad revenue driven internet content model, and this situation reeks of that.

        I don’t know what new paradigm might replace it if this is the case, but the current model feels like it’s absolutely failing.

    • CrayonRosary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I have premium, uBlock Origin, and Mullvad VPN. In Firefox the other day, the stream was dying every 10-30 seconds. Like it would just stop and give me a spinner. I would have to “Copy URL at current time”, open a new tab, and paste it in to get it to go any further. I do have bad internet, but this was nuts. And then I gave up and used Duck, and it played flawlessly in their embedded player.

      Good job, Google.

      If it happens again, I’ll try disabling uBlock Origin on YouTube and see if it improves.

    • Vlyn@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      After getting premium I just switched the adblocker off for YouTube. Premium would be far too expensive if it didn’t also include YouTube Music :-/

      • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        uBlock Origin works on YouTube Music, too.

        If you want to throw a few bucks at the people providing you a service, then donate to an ad blocker for helping make the Internet a safer, better, and more user-friendly place. …not the big fuckers like YouTube who are contributing to the enshitification of the entire web.

          • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            While uBlock would be most deserving of a donation imo, there are others that do accept. Even if it’s an ad blocker you don’t actively use, you’d still be supporting a developer who’s using their time and skills to improve the web.

            Donating to no one would be better than paying YouTube.

        • Vlyn@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          YouTube already has ways to block users with adblock. They just haven’t fully rolled it out yet.

          Lately they blocked playing videos when I had uBlock Origin running, but it was just a warning I could click away. They might also slow down page loading and playback.

          YouTube has the ability to lock users with adblock out, they are just very careful about using it. Mostly starting with trials in smaller countries and getting more bold over time.

  • net00@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I dusted off an old laptop, put debian on it, put an SSD and now I have my own invidious instance, among other services…

    No ads, no throttling, no bullshit. Google is very welcome to suck it. I’d gladly stop using youtube, but there’s no competition.

    • itsJoelle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      I know it’s a pain, but what’s to stop us from using download-clis? In theory I could “collect” the urls that are recommended to me from my home page, call the clis, click all the videos to update my recommendations then close the browser.

      • Tvkan@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        I know it’s a pain, but what’s to stop us from using download-clis?

        The answer is right there.

      • cartoon meme dog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        using the browser isn’t necessary to keep your watch history up to date.

        yt-dlp can log in as you by reading your cookies from your browser, and, with the optional --mark-watched flag, mark your downloaded videos as watched in your YT account.

        • itsJoelle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          TIL. Thank you very much. Looks like I’m going to be using that if YouTube gets even more painful.

    • Amir @lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      The no competition in the market, is the issue. Hope the situation improves in near future. With it innovations will gradually increase & the demand within the markets will point the directions.

      • 0xD@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        If everyone keeps expecting everything for free there will never be competition :)

        • eskimofry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Let me convince you otherwise:

          1. Who set that expectation in the first place? Don’t all cut-throat corps undercut the previous established companies and gained a lot of market share by being “loss leaders”?
          2. Do you think YouTube would dare to go completely Pay only?
          3. Lack of competition is not an excuse to double dip on both customer data and advertisements.
          4. People who say that we need to pay for server costs should consider that streaming services are now asking for money but also introducing adverts. The money is too lucrative for them to leave on the table.
          5. Everybody is happy to pay when there’s 1 service or 2 services that give them everything for a nominal fee. Cases in point: Netflix, Steam.
          6. A lot of people pay for twitch because it’s the only platform they care about. Paying for A platform doesn’t mean we will pay for ALL platforms.
        • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Or, there is plenty of competition even now, but since users are the product, not the customer, the competition isn’t what people think it is or should be.

    • soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      There is competition when it comes to technology stack. People just don’t want to use alternatives because the amount of content/users is less on others.

      Be the pioneer and help others move across.

      • keyez@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Care to share any of the recommendations? I don’t use YouTube often but would be happy to visit and use an alternative

    • sfgifz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Next step is guaranteed to be limiting the number of views without being logged in.

      • net00@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        The more stuff they do to shoot themselves in the foot, the sooner something else comes in to replace youtube

    • 5redie8@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Thank you for reminding me to get myself an invidious instance set up. It isn’t a huge pain or anything, right?

      • net00@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Not really, they have a docker compose file ready to go, and it works without issue.

  • AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I wish we can fast forward to the part where Youtube completely destroys itself and a new platform takes its place so we can enjoy it for 10 years before the enshittification cycle restarts again.

    • test113@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m not so sure – YouTube is much larger than you might think. It’s not the video platform you grew up with anymore. No one in this world can match the backlog and content density/diversity of YouTube, not even all streaming services combined. People complaining that YouTube is dying because a few YouTubers “retire” from their main gig or that it’s not the same anymore don’t understand how YouTube works. They might not comprehend that the time of their “bubble” has come to an end. When this happens, there are already five new bubbles/niches that are even bigger, and you might not have heard of them, but they are more successful than their “predecessor.” The old bubble is still there to consume in the backlog. Someday in the future, AI will have a field day with the data accumulated via YouTube.

      It is transforming, for sure, but I don’t think it will destroy itself completely. In a sense, you can say it will destroy whatever view you had of YouTube as a platform because it is not what it once was.

      To my knowledge, YouTube will hit the billion-user milestone this year (Netflix currently at ~250 million paid users). If we look at other data trends from streaming services, it suggests that YouTube will grow more over the coming years. I don’t know how anyone can match YouTube as a whole. In certain niches, sure, but as a whole, it would be like fighting windmills. There’s a reason no one tries to tackle YouTube as a platform and only goes for certain niches.

  • tias@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    I don’t have an ad blocker, I just have the standard strict tracking protection enabled in Firefox. What’s more, I pay for YouTube Premium. But still they add a five-second delay every time I visit a web page. It’s infuriating.

    • Thteven@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      10 months ago

      Might as well just stop paying for premium then if they’re going to ding you anyway.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      there is no way the 5 second sleep before loading isnt anti competitive, because last i heard, unless they changed it, it only checks for the firefox user agent.

      Actually insane that someone would willingly implement that.

    • muh_entitlement@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Why pay when you can watch it for free without ads through piped video! Pirate everything, live for free!!

      • fatalError@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        If I were to guess, non-android smart tv. There are very few options if any for these TVs. Since I got my TCL google tv I just put smarttube on it and that was it, no more ads and cast still works. But can’t do that with parents’ old chromecast or lg TVs

        • tias@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          If anyone is curious about the reason, my primary motivation for having Premium is that I don’t want my kids to see more ads than necessary, and they’re on YouTube on their phones, on the Chromecast (connected to a dumb projector) and on the computer.

          The YouTube app has a lot to offer them that they won’t get in other apps and I can’t realistically force them to use other alternatives everywhere. Especially since I have shared custody and they’ll be using YouTube at their mom’s place as well.

        • SeaJ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I love how they have clearly tried to hide that they make their money from porn. They used to be called MindGeek. The private equity firm that owns them is called Ethical Capital Partners.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Ethical Capital Partners

            So I assume they can guarantee none of the women in the porn they show are victims of human trafficking.

            (I can’t know that in the porn I watch either, but I don’t host it.)

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              in fairness, they did delete most of their content base after a minor was found to be on the platform. To the degree that keeps investors happy, i suppose they do.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      People dont really care where their content comes from, so long as it loads properly. But content creators dont want to migrate from the platforms they have all their followers on. If i have a decent YouTube channel that is large enough to be my primary income, I’m locked in because there is no real way to migrate all those followers over to a new platform. Nebula is the closest i think we have to a true YouTube competitor, but it’s a tiny fraction of the user base and most Nebula videos are available on YouTube for free.

  • 000@fuck.markets
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Don’t worry, YouTube, I won’t be using your website anymore. But my yt-dl will be ripping max quality videos by the hundreds, just for shits and giggles.