1239
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 56 points 1 year ago

The YouTube ad-blocker ban isn't stupid at all.

Something isn't a bad business decision just because you don't like it. That's now how business works.

"I won't watch videos at all if I can't view them without watching ads or paying money."

....Yeah. That's the idea. From a business perspective people who don't pay or view ads are leeches they're perfectly happy to burn off.

[-] snuff@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But but everything on the internet should be free! /s

[-] Helluin@lemm.ee 32 points 1 year ago

most people dont take issue with the fact that there is ads but with how intrusive they are.

[-] sfgifz@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

Idk browsing Lemmy often makes me think that many of these people expect software devs to literally work for free.

[-] Auli@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago

And it costs nothing to host YouTube don't youj know. We should have a foss version and get ride of it.

I don't think polel realize how much bandwidth and storage YouTube uses.

It's called PeerTube. It's getting more content, but anything that isn't completely wacked out is poorly produced and there doesn't seem to be any sort of decent search to find the rare interesting content.

I caught the sarcasm, and don't disagree. Just saying that a FOSS version does exist.

[-] OwlYaYeet@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

And how inappropriate some of them are and the sheer number of them

[-] zbyte64 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you view people as purely advertising receptacles then this business move is logical. But if you view people as agents that can build their own alternatives or advertise your services then this would seem to be a dumb business move.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

If you view people who actively cost you money while bringing nothing to your business as assets you're bad at business.

If 100% of people who used adblockers decided to stop using YouTube entirely over this, the only result would be YouTube saving money. Video hosting is simply too expensive for anyone to make a website where anyone can host and view for free without ads.

[-] zbyte64 4 points 1 year ago

bring nothing to your business

Well that's the contention. Your example starts and ends with people leaving YouTube. If YouTube is the limit of consideration then yes, no value exists outside YouTube and this is a silly argument.

[-] F4lcon@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

People will find alternatives. You can't stop people witj adblockers from using YouTube by blocking adblockers - no more than you can stop piracy. People just build better, more resilient ways to bypass things. This decision has good understanding of business but not psychology.

The only real way is to make it more convenient to use YouTube with ads, so no one goes for adblockers anyway.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

They absolutely can, and I suspect the day is coming soon when they do.

Instead of simply putting ad breaks in the video, they'll be able to splice in a few ads to the video and re-render it to include ads each time someone clicks on the video.

this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
1239 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59993 readers
1702 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS