• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    32 hours ago

    What is it about the line " Billy, Noo!" that always kills me?! Its so stupid but it fills me with joy when I hear it or read it.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    6
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Got adblock and yt premium, that way the creators I watch still benefit

    Also especially if you get a family plan and split the cost it’s really not too bad, £5 a month seems pretty reasonable to me for yt plus music

  • patak
    link
    fedilink
    135 hours ago

    -Grayjay/libretube/fluxtube/pipepipe/skytube -Piped (web) -Ytdlnis -Ytdlp -Brave -Firefox + ublock -Spotube/simp/bloomee

    Stop using chrome already.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    57
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    Ironically this Meme is an AdBlock Plus advertisement.

    I Recommend ...

    uMatrix and uBlock origin ::: spoiler

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4212 hours ago

    But if you pay for YouTube premium you won’t have ads… for the first couple of years until they corner the market, and change the terms of services several times to maximize profits. uBlock and donating to open source FTW. shout out to yt-dlp

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      136 minutes ago

      And they’re cornering several markets, e.g. also the browser markets, which if we let them will make your adblocker no longer work either.

      Don’t use Chrome or Chrome-based browsers people. (So basically, use Firefox.)

      (Yes there are a couple of others too. Do what you want, I’m not your boss.)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      35 hours ago

      Also ad lock blocks ads on all of the platforms you use. YouTube plus just removed them from YouTube… I ain’t paying 20 different places for ad free use when they charge like $15+ each, maybe if it were $1 each for nah they are all greedy.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14 hours ago

        Good point. And it wouldn’t surprise me if google was still using YTP subscriber viewing data to target them on other platforms and websites. Actually, I’d be surprised if they weren’t doing that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      189 hours ago

      This is exactly it.

      Cable TV was originally meant to be TV with no ads, see where that has come.

      Streaming services were meant to be on demand shows/movies with no ads, see where we are now.

      YouTube premium will enshittify the exact same way. How do I know this? They already won’t listen to paying customers and content creators who bring customer to the site. They do customer unfriendly moves like removing dislikes to make a quick buck from big corporations. They will make it shittier given the chance.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1310 hours ago

      Jeez I’m old enough to remember paying to go to the theater so I could watch a movie without commercials

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 hour ago

        I mean we had VHS, I went to the theater because I had a 20" zenith in the living room with 2" speakers.

        And the broadcast movies were crap. You’d have something really nice once every few years.

        HBO really was a ready of light back then, but my TV was still tiny and sad by today’s standards.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      310 hours ago

      Sure, but for now you can still go through the settings and disable that whitelist

      Or you can use a better ad block plugin

      Or a pi-hole

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        46 hours ago

        Sure, but for now you can still go through the settings and disable that whitelist

        ok, i honestly had no idea, i am just happy with ubo.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -2115 hours ago

      That is true and false. Adblock plus takes money for the acceptable afs program, yes. But there are clear guidelines about the ads. Containing criteria for privacy, size in relation to content and more.

      I work in IT for 20 years now. Half this time my salary was paid for by ads:

      My company hosted big german news outlets. All money they made online was from ads.

      More adblockers meant less income so their required more ads just to come out without losing money.

      ABP tried to break this cycle.

      Now we are having paywals, and paywal breakers. And at this point this is outright stealing.

      If adblockers would allow ads that adhere to the acceptable ads criteria, the world would be a better place. Less paywals, less ads and maybe some companies would pay their employees a little bit more.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1912 hours ago

        If adblockers would allow ads that adhere to the acceptable ads criteria, the world would be a better place. Less paywals, less ads and maybe some companies would pay their employees a little bit more.

        I disagree. The system may have began in earnest goodwill, but financial incentive inevitably erodes goodwill. ABP becomes incentivized to adapt its definition of “acceptable” based on potential revenues they stand to gain from increasingly persuasive advertisers. Your vision of a better world under this system is at best temporary.

        The alternative model, simply paying for goods and services directly, is a far more robust solution.

      • TheTechnician27
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3014 hours ago

        AdBlock Plus takes money to whitelist ads.

        This is true and false, for in fact, you see, AdBlock Plus takes money to whitelist ads.

        ???

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        23
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        Using proper ad-blockers that actually let you block ads and not just some that they don’t get paid to show, is no more stealing than me walking away from the TV during commercials (if I still had flow TV). It’s just more convenient for me. If I can not use a site without allowing their shitty ads, they can go fuck themselves, I will go somewhere else.

        I’d also happily pay for content, if the prices they charged were reasonable. But greed always gets In the way and subscriptions just go up-up-up, manipulative pricing strategies that change the prices according to number of views etc. just to keep that infinite growth going. Companies that incorporate those kind of things can go to hell.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            I added to my comment, maybe after you replied.

            Like I mentioned in the edit, I don’t mind paying for content. But the way they manage the pricing makes me defy them out of spite. When they want to manipulate the pricing like that, they themselves started the immoral behaviour. When your opponent fights dirty, you level the playing field by circumventing their efforts.

      • Red Army Dog Cooper
        link
        fedilink
        412 hours ago

        I would hardly call any of this steeling, The authors of the articles and the people needed to maintain the website are not being given the full value of there labor, they are already being stollen from, I do not care if the big company cannot make as much money, there profit is the theft of employee wages

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          210 hours ago

          I am with you regarding the big ones. But what about smaller media outlets and journalists to try to make a living on their own ? We need them. More then the big ones. Then the solution is to just ignore all the big ones and read the smaller ones. With ads or paying for it.

          • Red Army Dog Cooper
            link
            fedilink
            19 hours ago

            I would say nither, agian there profit is direct theft from there workers I see no reason to enable said theft by turning off my add block or not bypassing a paywall

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        514 hours ago

        Even if you go with the “acceptable” part of that whole thing it’s still shady.

        It’s one thing to boycott ads as an individual user (and to “steal” ad revenue from websites) but a completely different thing if you run an external service that steals (without quotation marks) from the revenue pool.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        415 hours ago

        Out of curiosity, what was your CEO and other executives making while claiming “it’s cause ad blockers”?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          We didn’t care. We were the hosting provider nor the news outlets. But we had close contact to our customers. And a lot of the smaller customers had a hard time to even survive. The primary source of income was print until paywals came around. Some customers never had print and had to close down with the surge of ad blockers

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        015 hours ago

        You delivered some good points. I also work with publishers.

        Ad blockers have had an impact, but I think the bigger driver is that premium demand has migrated spending to connected TV (CTV, showing ads on an Internet connected large screen). Publishers just don’t get the rates they used to for web and mobile inventory, even if they’re doing everything right.

        I think when another trendy channel like AI ads straight to your brain or whatever pops up we will see another migration.

      • @Tja
        link
        35 hours ago

        And shares revenue with content creators.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      9619 hours ago

      I remember when ABP started whitelisting ads as part of some twisted business model. I switched to uBlock so fast and haven’t looked back.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          314 hours ago

          “p-please, shit in my mouth, daddy g” -abp

          It used to be the defacto extension, everyone used it. I remember when the dev sold out. I get it, money can be exchanged for goods and services, but now they can’t show their face in many places as they are ‘the lowlife piece of shit who sold out abp’ and that’s basically a death sentence in tech hub places.

      • TheTechnician27
        link
        fedilink
        English
        6
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        I really don’t agree with this. AdBlock Plus is a technically inferior, directly competing standard that sucks up to advertisers by doing something only marginally less scummy than taking bribes to look the other way. These two extensions are both licensed under the GPLv3, but I seriously doubt Gorhill, the developer of uBlock Origin, sees much if any benefit from ABP’s source code. uBO uses ABP’s filter list syntax, but if ABP ceased to exist, the lists would work just the same.

        If ABP had their way, they would monopolize adblocking as effectively a protection racket, and being given funding to create that sort of ecosystem is toxic to an open Internet. Giving ABP any money is worse than losing it down a sewer grate. uBO at this point in time should be the only adblocking extension anyone is using, because it’s the one that’s actually working toward a better Internet.

        • Red Army Dog Cooper
          link
          fedilink
          29 hours ago

          Look man he is a kid he is trying to suport adblocking, I do not expect him to try to find a way to anonomusly send it to uBO, he will search adblock and pay it… not saying its a good choice, I am saying its a choice I would expect a child who is trying there best to make

          • TheTechnician27
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            9 hours ago

            I don’t blame Billy for being naive. I am not saying Billy should instead track down Raymond Gorhill and mail them cash.

            Nonetheless, what Billy has done – in good faith and thinking he was helping – is make the Internet a very slightly worse place and spent money to do so.

    • @Tja
      link
      25 hours ago

      Family plan is around 5 bucks per person. Even the individual plan is cheaper than one trip to the movies.

        • @Tja
          link
          13 hours ago

          Yep, that sounds similar to Europe. A movie ticket is easily 15 euros, plus transport, pop corn, etc.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 hours ago

        That depends on how many people are in the family and how many people are paying their fair share. Odds are that the children won’t pay because, well, they’re children. Teenagers might pay their way depending on if they have a job or not. And many households only have one primary source of income (with maybe a side job providing just a little extra). Which means most people would probably be footing the bill themselves for the whole family.

        • @Tja
          link
          13 hours ago

          When you go to the Zoo, do the kids pay for themselves? The price per person is that, price per person, not who pays.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            12 minutes ago

            The price per person doesn’t help me if I’m living alone, and they start enforcing “only people in your home count as family”. If I’m the only one that can use my account, the price per person is the full plan price.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1113 hours ago

      It used to be like 3€ without music bundled into it. I don’t want Music. Give me that plan back.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    712 hours ago

    Do any YouTube blockers work anymore? The last two I was using just stopped working a few weeks back

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      195 hours ago

      Firefox + uBlock. Hasn’t failed me once, not even when they recently tried to push back against adblockers.

      Revanced on mobile as well.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        13 hours ago

        The problem with Revanced is the installation. Most users don’t want hear “go to the GitHub” or “definitely don’t get it from the .io site because that’s malware” which is an install I’ve seen linked on Reddit.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        14 hours ago

        On mobile I use NewPiped. Different UI, and it’s not perfect, but it works more as an RSS feed (with optional recommendations), so no algorithm trying its best to get as much attention from you as possible.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          For TV, assuming you have an Android TV, you can use SmartTube.

          For mobile, use ReVanced. It’ll ask you to provide an APK of a specific version of the YouTube app, which you can download from here.

          For PC, use Firefox and the uBlock Origin adblocker. I know you said you don’t use Chrome, but I’ll explain why people are saying not to use it specifically with uBlock Origin: Basically, with Chrome’s update to Manifest v3, that’ll greatly impact uBlock Origin and its ability to do its job.

          All three options above also include the ability to enable/ install something called SponsorBlock. SponsorBlock uses community submissions to (based on the user’s preference) either skip or give the option to skip portions of a video such as sponsorship segments or “like and subscribe” segments among other things.

        • smokebuddy [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          14 hours ago

          Yeah I haven’t had any problems the last couple of weeks. Currently using version 0.27.2 on a Pixel 7. I used to use ReVanced but had issues with it

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      310 hours ago

      I use SmartTube on my android tv sticks, no problem. I do wish autoplay had better intelligence though.

  • RBG
    link
    fedilink
    12220 hours ago

    This is an ad in itself. Hilarious.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2317 hours ago

    Get F-Droid, and go use NewPipe. Export your subscriptions from YouTube and load them into NewPipe. Problem solved.

        • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          Thank you! I’m switching to iPhone today whenever It gets here, and the loss of newpipe is one thing I’ve been really worried about. I’ll check out the app you recommended after I’m done setting up my new phone

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1119 hours ago

    I’ve just started using AdNauseum, which I think builds off of uBlock Origin, but also silently clicks and hides ads instead of just the latter. So far it seems to work pretty well, although I did have to set some sites to strict blocking.

    • ArchRecord
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 hours ago

      Just keep in mind the possible cons of using AdNauseam.

      With traditional adblockers like uBO, the ad content never gets loaded. With AdNauseam, it does, it’s just not shown to you.

      That means the ad network is likely to get:

      • Your IP
      • Your Browser Header
      • Possibly the site you’re on

      And it also makes you heavily identifiable, because to any ad server, a single user mass-clicking their advertisements by the thousands is going to make you very easy to track across sites, just by behavior alone.

      So while it’s good if you just want no ads and to do a little monetary harm to surveillance advertising, it’s not good if you want privacy. (Unless you set it to show ads, but still click on all of them, and you’re the type that does sometimes click on ads, then it does become good for obfuscation)

      I’d definitely recommend the same team’s other work: TrackMeNot, as it does a decent job of obfuscating your search queries. (Just make sure that if you use a privacy-focused search engine like DuckDuckGo, you disable any auto-searching on Google, since that just gives them your IP, without obfuscating the searches you aren’t making there anyways)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      513 hours ago

      THERE IT IS!! I remember a thread on reddit about a year ago where someone linked that and I forgot what it was called and couldn’t find it for my life. Ty!

      • TheTechnician27
        link
        fedilink
        English
        614 hours ago

        In the short term it ought to make money for advertisers like Google from those who choose to place ads, but ideally in the long-term, it loses them money by dramatically devaluing clickthroughs if enough people use it.

        I don’t necessarily know if this is true, though, and whatever case, it seems like AdNauseum’s mission statement is to prevent profiling by blanket clicking everything, not to devalue ads. I just don’t personally use it because I’m content with blocking everything and don’t foresee much personal benefit in AdNauseum.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          I like your answer more than what I was gonna type up :P

          Up until a couple days ago, I was using uBO & PrivacyBadger in tandem. Maybe I’ll back to that, as I sit closer to your viewpoint vs giving ads any revenue stream. It’s kinda in the same realm as why I’d buy a game using CDKeys vs pirating/torrenting. It’s a morally grey area that makes it somewhat redeemable, but the point still stands. In AdNauseum’s case, you really can’t tell what ads are clicked on and therefore don’t know what any revenue stream is going in to which pockets you can inspect the ads it clicks on after the fact, but the money for said clicks still go somewhere, even if it’s in the fraction of a fraction of a cent.

          Heh, I may just switch back. Thanks?.. Yeah, thanks!