- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
I just stood up a selfhosted Invidious instance the other day, and I replaced YouTube ReVanced with Clipious (an Invidious client for Android) on my phone. No ads, SponsorBlock built-in, no need for a YouTube/Google account to create subscriptions, playlists, etc. And it’s highly performant since I run it behind a reverse proxy with some custom caching configuration for things like thumbnail images, static assets, etc.
Clipious can also be installed on an Android TV (has an actual Android TV interface). I’m going to end up installing it on mine, but I’m also using SmartTubeNext at the moment, which does require a YouTube/Google account for subscriptions, playlists, etc, but does have no ads, built-in SponsorBlock, and a slew of other great features. I’ll be keeping both around, since I do sometimes like to cast to my TV, and SmartTubeNext allows for that (Clipious does not, at least at this time).
Unless YouTube somehow starts dynamically splicing in ads as part of the actual video stream, there’s always going to be a way to block ads, unless they do something pretty elaborate. But that’s probably not worth the effort on their end to go that far, since the vast, vast majority of people won’t know what to do to get around that, nor will they probably care enough to try. But I think it’s clear that DNS blocking using services such as AdGuard Home, PiHole, etc, are going to become less effective over time.
I’d be happy to pay for video content/video hosting, but I’m not happy with any of my money going to youtube or google. Peertube is the future. 😎
I like the idea of peertube and hopefully it’ll be the future with more and more bandwith being available but the risk of ending in jail right now is too high in my country.
If you get fined for downloading a movie it would be a relatively small amount of money I’d say not more than 200 € but if you torrented a movie you are now fined as a distributor and the 200 € will get multiplied by the amount of people you potentially shared the movie with and that’s a shitload of money.
I could be wrong in some details because torrenting died about a decade ago in my country but in the end the risk of getting sued for xx,xxx € is not worth it. And if I understood the peertube system right, I would be torrenting every video I watched and couldn’t know if I am violation the law
Could a subscription to a decent VPN solve that for you?
Sure but then it’s a question of convenience. You have to set up the VPN and make sure you don’t use peertube without it because the last thing you want is to realize that you torrented videos for 30 minutes and you VPN client wasn’t running probably. Also you have to pay for a good VPN service and could potentially have lower bandwith.
On the other hand Youtube is free and perfectly legal
This will lead to an increase of ad-blocker-blocker-blocker development.
They already exist and are quite effective, I wonder whether YouTube is able to detect those too
Wait really? Is there a recommended extension for this?
There is Nanodefender for Firefox. Just be aware that there are different versions of this for Firefox and chome but those will actually track you. The original developer sold their code to people with bad intentions, this is a fork.
Yet another platform to boycott? Excellent!
I’ll say something unexpected: I pay for YouTube. With money! Why?
- I use it every day and I’m a human who likes boosting the things that I enjoy
- I think YouTube’s content recommendations are a genuine value-add and not easily replaced
- A cut of my subscription fee goes directly back to the video creators that I watch
- The “premium” encoding levels are actually a substantial improvement to video bitrates
- Important: the premium bitrate is higher than anything previously offered and probably would not have been otherwise practical to serve for free
So yeah. I personally like YouTube enough to pay for it and I have the financial means to do so. Am I a clown for expressing personal appreciation towards a faceless megacorp? Yes. Yes I am. Constantly trying to win at every transaction in life is a drag though, so I think I’ll continue to enjoy getting swindled.
I didn’t know that you also get higher bitrate with premium. That might change things for me. Most of the time I watch YouTube on a desktop where I can use uBlock but when I watch on my iPad the ads get really annoying and I have already thought about getting premium just to get rid of the ads while watching videos during breakfast. Having higher bitrate would be a nice bonus.
Eh, I’m not here to hawk product. The higher bitrate is nice to have, but the impact of bitrate on video quality is perhaps a bit overblown. In a lot of situations, you’d have to pixel-peep to spot the improvement – youtubers are pretty good at making videos look nice under the core quality settings.
On the other hand, ads suck. I’d have never watched enough YouTube to buy premium without years of heavy adblocking (shoutout to ReVanced Manager). Getting an ad-free experience out-of-box is very convenient and could possibly be worth the value of the subscription depending on your usage & means.
If you watch YouTube videos on a small smartphone screen, sure, the bitrate does not matter that much. But whenever I watch it on my 55" 4k TV I cringe every time the image gets a bit busy and suddenly there are blocking artifacts everywhere
What I find most annoying is that it’s still not possible to get Premium Lite (Premium without music, offline and background play) because I already have Spotify and don’t really need background and offline play. 12 EUR/month is a steep price for just removing ads.
Fair enough, you need to look out for you. If the money would be missed, don’t pay the bridge troll. Block ads and be free.
FWIW: YouTube Red was basically what you’re asking for and it cost the equivalent of 9 EUR/month. Red wasn’t available in Europe so this is a moot point, but that’s the rate that YouTube previously valued itself at as a standalone product if you’re curious.
They had a pilot project in benelux and nordic countries called Premium Lite for 6,99 EUR/month
Oh! I’d never heard of Premium Lite so I thought you were speaking hypothetically. TIL.
Yeah, that is a lot lower. If they offered that option I’d definitely use it over the $12 one… but I suppose that explains why the pilot never took off, eh?
Probably, such a shame really
Well, this certainly explains my difficulty with YouTube over the last few days. Ironically, the piped instances still seem to be fine…
This might just be enough to push me primarily over to Rumble. There are fewer and fewer reasons to use YouTube and more and more reasons not to.
Hadn‘t heard of Rumble. At first glance, it looks like it‘s run by Elon Musk. Andrew Tate on the frontpage, far-right political channels and crypto bros. I think I‘ll pass.
Same, a lot of YT alternatives seem ripe with alt-right garbage. I’m a leftist myself, but I can stand liberal content, however platforms like Rumble and Odysee’s feeds look awful right now
My odysee feed looks good. No right wing stuff there. I’m only missing a few channels that haven’t moved over.
Just checked it out and of course one of the first videos on the front page is by thequartering. Certainly right wing stuff there
If they really block adblockers, I will subscribe. To Nebula. It’s got everything I want, adfree (including sponsored segments), extra content and is cheaper. And the content creators get a bigger share of the money.
There is nothing stopping you from subscribing to nebula right now. Since I haven’t gotten any ads on YouTube in many years and even use sponsorblock to skip those annoying video segments I started thinking about how I am basically leeching off of most content creators. Subscribing to nebula was a no-brainer. It’s about $4.16 per month on the yearly plan and lets me support all content creators I watch on there at once rather than subscribing to each and every one of them on patreon and I still don’t see any ads
I’ve been considering nebula for a while, but I also use Patreon to support creators that I appreciate.
I only support one channel on patreon because it is quite niche and at this point I am pretty invested in that parasocial relationship. I find it difficult to justify supporting many different content creators, but I am also still a student so I don’t exactly have money to throw away.
I subbed there for a bit but the app wasn’t where it needed to be, I might go back now too. The double offer with curiosity stream was great but I didn’t get thebuse out of it.
Yeah, I sadly missed out on that offer. I was waiting for too long.
I pay for Prenium. But that’s only because I also use YouTube Music. Otherwise, I wouldn’t pay for it and I would do everything that I can to get rid of the ads. YouTube with ads is just hell now. There are so many of them now, it’s ridiculous.
Don’t get me wrong, I recognise the value that YouTube provides. Most things I watch and listen to are on YouTube. It’s the website I use the most and I’ll be glad to pay for it. I understand that it costs money to run and I want to support the creators that I watch.
HOWEVER.
I refuse to be strong armed into paying for it. Music brings me the value that I want and comparing with other prices, such as Spotify and so on, the actual “YouTube” part of the package just cost me 1€ per month which is one hell of a deal if you ask me.
But if you don’t care for YouTube Music, 11€ a month (worst in the US apparently), just to get rid of ads is… ridiculous. I’d happily pay 5€ a month. It’s not much and for the thing that I use the most? Yeah, I’m willing to! And I know that there is YouTube Prenium Lite. However, it’s not available everywhere and it comes with a giant “fuck you” to the costumer.
You see, YouTube Prenium Lite is YouTube without ads. And that’s it. So, no Background Play (which I use ALL THE TIME), no downloading of videos, none of that. You want that, well, you have to pay full price. Even though these are basic features.
Paying for getting rid of ads is one thing, and maybe accessing special features is one thing. But paying for artificial limitations that are put into place? Absolutely not. And I know the line between what’s a prenium feature and what’s an artifical limit is blurry. But for me it’s basically this: If I can do something for free on desktop, but can’t on mobile without paying. Such as background play.
I am convinced YouTube Prenium would be way more appealing if YouTube weren’t being such dicks about it.
It’s simple:
- Get your prices back to normal (I hear that in the US, prices have been going up for… no reason).
- Roll out YouTube Prenium Lite to everyone and rename it YouTube Prenium. So it has all the features of current Prenium except YouTube Music (put ads and disable background play only on music videos?).
- Make it at like 5 bucks a month.
- Make a variety of plans based around that. So a Prenium Family and also, a Prenium Duo, just like Spotify, for just two people. Reasonably priced.
- And you make a YouTube Prenium Music plan, which includes YouTube Music as well. So on top of all of that, for 11 bucks a month, you now have a really compelling offer because you can go, Hey, for just 5 more bucks a month, you get all of the features of YouTube Prenium AND you get a complete music streaming services.
- Oh and also: STOP DOING THIS SHIT.
Bam. All of the sudden you have compelling options. Some people will say: “Uuuh, jUsT uSe an AdbLocKeR!” and whatever. Those people are not the majority, so many people watch YouTube from their phones and their TVs now, they will be much more inclined to buy it…
…I think.
That last part is important. I recognise I’m just playing armchair business developper here and that I don’t know shit, but still. I’m convinced this could work. The real issue comes down to YouTube being a monopoly and thinking that they can do whatever the hell they want, which… they likely can, due to the position they’re in. It’s an issue but this comment is already long enough and that is another discussion entirely, but basically: Monopolies sucks.
I’m sorry, I know this isn’t a constructive comment, but I had a real good chuckle seeing your autocorrect (?) writing Prenium every single time 😂
Try YT subscription from Argentina…😎
how much does that cost?
Less than 15 USD a YEAR.
well, thats a steal. I guess one needs a vpn and a local credit card?
VPN, yes. For some reason your regular credit card works just fine. They don’t check at all.
That’s funny, I’m testing YouTube alternatives.
Suggestions?
My issue is that the content creators i watch probably arnt going to leave… and im sure ad blocks will find a way around it after a month or so
Nebula. Most of they content creators I watch are there.
Yep, got selected for this test and I thought my network went down.
Had to do nearly 30 mins of debugging until I realized it was youtube actively withholding JUST the video. Took some effort but managed to get them to send the videos again after resetting a bunch of things.
I refuse to view ads and will go to the ends of the earth to make that happen.
Paying is most certainly an option, but only when that becomes the ONLY option.
I’ve been using an adblocker since ads starting becoming more intrusive and the internet has progressed so much that it’s become generally unusable without one. I remember when a mobile ad popped up on my phone and it straight up startled me.
My problem is that the money given to Youtube only very marginally gets to the creators…
I’d happily pay for the content on youtube, if the user experience was not as miserable as it is.
Search is basically non functional, sort by oldest is gone, search in channel is only available on desktop not on mobile, filter videos by date range is not possible, video quality is mediocre, everyone and their dog makes titles that leave no clue at all about whats actually in the video because “they do better for the algorithm”, if you want to actually read the comments or video thescription on mobile you’ll have to click “show more” and “expand” until your finger hurts, video caches only a few seconds ahead, which makes watching on flaky connections miserable, video quality defaults to 480p even on gigabit internet, subtitles have become almost completely useless, etc., etc., etc.
If they would actually care about the user experience, I’d pay. Instead they just make the ads as annoying as humanly possible, in the hopes that users pay just to get rid of the annoyance, instead of paying for an actually good service.
YouTube is going to have a lot of trouble enforcing this. Lots and lots of people out there are going to be immediately at work finding ways around this limitation.
We’ll make some plugin that downloads the ad and tells Google it was “totally watched and stuff”.
“Say the product name into the mic to continue viewing the video”
Oh God!
You might be thinking it’s a joke but it’s real
https://www.techradar.com/news/sony-patent-would-have-you-yell-at-your-tv-to-skip-commercials
That’s pretty funny. I’d watch a movie where they show this as normalized in the future.
I do understand that if companies running ad-supported models, they need to make sure users are actually watching those ads. Seems logically to me - no ads mean no money, and no money means no sustainable business model.
On the other side, as a user, I just can’t browse the internet without an ad-blocker any more. They just got so annoying and sometimes even break the actual website.
But to be honest, I don’t see an alternative to ad-supported models except paying money directly via subscriptions plans etc. But this also will not work in the long term. I just can’t pay afford to pay a subscription for each website I visit during the day.
Honestly, I’ve always been surprised as to why YouTube even tolerates adblockers. It’s basically a no-brainer for them to bake ads into the stream and disable skipping
Sponsorblock: allow us to introduce ourselves
If YouTube wanted to, they could disable that.
Because it’s impossible to block adblocking. The server can’t know whether the client plays the video. The best they could do is have you wait the ad-time even if the ad is blocked but that would just mess with their analytics - they want to be sure the ad is being watched.
The only reason adblock blocking works for smaller websites is because adblockers need to catch up with each implementation. People will easily catch up with Youtube as there are thousands of people working on Youtube programming.
I think the commenters intention was that YouTube could stream you the video with embedded ads. They would have to stream the content though and skipping ahead would have to be guarded serverside by some clever checks on if you received (and therefore likely seen) the section of the video with the ads.
What probably speaks against this is that it would significantly increase their costs, since they couldn’t cache as easily anymore and always need “clever” services/servers along the way. A dumb CDN wouldn’t cut it anymore.
I fear it’s still just a question of when it’s either cheap enough for Google to do it or when the expected returns are high enough to offset the increased costs.
The clever check is impossible. The server can’t know the client is showing the video even when playing DRM content. I could literally mute the sound and put a black box over the ad until it’s over. The problem is as old as the internet itself.
That’s why Apple and Meta pushing eye tracking so hard. It’s the only solution to the ad blocking problem.
I think YT is doing well with YT premium and that’s the way to go for them. It’s one of my favorite subscriptions and I’d probably stick around even if they raise the price unless they hurt the creators so badly they bounce and I’d bounce with them.
The clever check is impossible. The server can’t know the client is showing the video even when playing DRM content. I could literally mute the sound and put a black box over the ad until it’s over. The problem is as old as the internet itself.
They also can’t force you to look and listen to the current ads. So the “clever tracking” doesn’t need to be better than the status quo. What it could avoid is completely skipping ads as if they are not there. The server could reject giving you further frames until the time the ad runs is over. If you suppressed the ad, you still had to sit it out. Which in turn means that it’s (almost) futile for the user to do that. If I have to wait 2 minutes to watch, I might as well leave the ad running.
Exactly.
We’ll find a way around it, if not go to hell YT. Apart from posters in the real world, I am living a 100% ad-free life and I’m super happy about it.
Okay but I don’t understand. Isn’t paying to remove ads a fair deal? I don’t know, I pay for YouTube Premium and I’m kinda happy about it. The price seems fair; you get no ads, you get to download stuff, enables picture-in-picture and background playback. YouTube has been my main source of entertainment for the last couple of years so it’s the only subscription I have alongside Spotify.
Absolutely, you are free to make every kind of contract if you like. Personally, I am not very invested in youTube, I don’t watch any streamers or youTubers, it’s just a video hosting platform for me. I am boycotting Google wherever I can, it is a privacy desaster and dystopia-like enterprise. NewPipe has all the ‘features’ as well, if it breaks I just let YouTube go…
