Skip to content

Ads on YouTube

Technology
47 39 0
  • I know many people, including me, that fall victim to the manipulation of advertising.

    Back in the olden days, it was "here is my product, and this is the price, if you like it buy from this store"
    Now it's not just the actual ad, it's product placement in tv and movies, celebrity endorsement, influencers, and all that.

    Just remember that advertising costs money, and that is in the price of the product. Products that don't advertise can easily be better value.

    There are lots of local brands that don't advertise that are better than nationally-known brands, at a much lower cost.

  • to me I still use the paid version because, for me it's not that expensive on the family plan, and I do want the content creators to get paid. I do hate the monopoly etc... but as far as I can tell it's one that can't really be broken. Far as I can see no other site can actually arrange a system in which creators get paid any substantial amount.

    also do have to note the inevitable put up or shut up part of nature. There's basically only 2 options of systems when it comes to the internet, either we deal with ads or we pay for services. Until a magical extra option appears I'm OK with paying to avoid ads.

    I pay to avoid ads on Amazon Prime... Now i have to endure unskippable ads every 10 minutes, and my annual fee is up over 50% since i started.

    Fuck them. No matter what, these mercantilists will extract everything they can, and they will break any promise or contract they sign as soon as it bemefits them. We, however, cannot do the same.

  • Just out of curiosity, what is it EXACTLY about ads on YouTube that you dislike? Is it that they exist at all? That there are too many of them? That they're unskippable? What would you, specifically, find to be a tolerable amount of ads? If you were Chief Ad Engineer at YouTube, how would you structure the ads system?

    I have my thoughts on the matter, but I want to know what YOU think.

    Ads are a brainwashing technique designed to turn my baser instincts against myself for someone else's gain. And they're unwanted content that disrupts the flow of the content I've chosen to watch.

  • Just out of curiosity, what is it EXACTLY about ads on YouTube that you dislike? Is it that they exist at all? That there are too many of them? That they're unskippable? What would you, specifically, find to be a tolerable amount of ads? If you were Chief Ad Engineer at YouTube, how would you structure the ads system?

    I have my thoughts on the matter, but I want to know what YOU think.

    Ads bad. If I want to support a creator I will do so personally not via watching ads. I'll stop watching YT before I suffer through a single ad.

  • Just out of curiosity, what is it EXACTLY about ads on YouTube that you dislike? Is it that they exist at all? That there are too many of them? That they're unskippable? What would you, specifically, find to be a tolerable amount of ads? If you were Chief Ad Engineer at YouTube, how would you structure the ads system?

    I have my thoughts on the matter, but I want to know what YOU think.

    • The ads aren’t targeted properly for one thing. I see ads for stuff that would never apply to me. Such a waste of money.

    • Many of the videos already have a sponsor, so they are double-dipping.

    • Also I’m not going to sit through 60 seconds of ads for a five minute video. Get real.

    • And don’t lie to me about “Watch this long ad break and we won’t show you more ads during this program.”

    I think Prime has the right idea of front loading the ads at the beginning of the program instead of interrupting thinks every few minutes.

    I’d pay for ad-free YouTube if it didn’t cost as much as HBO. Charge $3 to $5 a month and I’d consider it. Otherwise I’ll just mute the TV, or skip the programming altogether.

  • Just out of curiosity, what is it EXACTLY about ads on YouTube that you dislike? Is it that they exist at all? That there are too many of them? That they're unskippable? What would you, specifically, find to be a tolerable amount of ads? If you were Chief Ad Engineer at YouTube, how would you structure the ads system?

    I have my thoughts on the matter, but I want to know what YOU think.

    The ad industry is parasitic. I have avoided ads since they first hit the web. Initially, I would not visit or remain on any web page with an ad. When that became untenable, I installed ad blockers. I presently download YT videos to view locally to avoid ads. When that stops working, I will stop watching YT videos.

    I pay to skip ads on podcasts if I like and enjoy the content. I skip them on the ones I don't pay for. If the ad model is particularly obnoxious and I don't like a show enough to pay, I stop listening.

  • I know many people, including me, that fall victim to the manipulation of advertising.

    Back in the olden days, it was "here is my product, and this is the price, if you like it buy from this store"
    Now it's not just the actual ad, it's product placement in tv and movies, celebrity endorsement, influencers, and all that.

    Just remember that advertising costs money, and that is in the price of the product. Products that don't advertise can easily be better value.

    Back in the olden days, it was "here is my product, and this is the price, if you like it buy from this store"

    When exactly are these olden days you refer to? I ask because most "modern" advertising practices have long-since been in place for over a century now; the only things that've changed are the delivery method and frequency.

  • Just out of curiosity, what is it EXACTLY about ads on YouTube that you dislike? Is it that they exist at all? That there are too many of them? That they're unskippable? What would you, specifically, find to be a tolerable amount of ads? If you were Chief Ad Engineer at YouTube, how would you structure the ads system?

    I have my thoughts on the matter, but I want to know what YOU think.

    Is it that they exist at all? That there are too many of them? That they’re unskippable?

    Yes, and they're in the middle of the video. And they spy on my internet use to manipulate me through targeted ads.

    If you were Chief Ad Engineer at YouTube, how would you structure the ads system?

    There should be more ways to avoid them. I don't use YouTube enough to justify a premium sub, but I would be interested in paying either for specific channels or watch time.

  • to me I still use the paid version because, for me it's not that expensive on the family plan, and I do want the content creators to get paid. I do hate the monopoly etc... but as far as I can tell it's one that can't really be broken. Far as I can see no other site can actually arrange a system in which creators get paid any substantial amount.

    also do have to note the inevitable put up or shut up part of nature. There's basically only 2 options of systems when it comes to the internet, either we deal with ads or we pay for services. Until a magical extra option appears I'm OK with paying to avoid ads.

    If it we weren't Google, I'd be ok with paying too. As it is, the content creators will have to get by with their individual sponsorships, rather than getting ad revenue from me.

  • Just out of curiosity, what is it EXACTLY about ads on YouTube that you dislike? Is it that they exist at all? That there are too many of them? That they're unskippable? What would you, specifically, find to be a tolerable amount of ads? If you were Chief Ad Engineer at YouTube, how would you structure the ads system?

    I have my thoughts on the matter, but I want to know what YOU think.

    What would you, specifically, find to be a tolerable amount of ads?

  • There is no tolerable amount of ads, because not only are they an awful experience, they explicitly drive user hostile growth and decisions in the future (ie enshitification).

    I used to pay for YouTube to avoid ads, before I got sick of Google and refused to give them any more money. Now I use a pihole and a browser based adblocker, as well as 3rd party front ends, because fuck Google. I don't give a shit if I'm denying them income.

    I hate the official YouTube app. I have YouTube Premium but that's because I use YT Music mostly (have been using on and off since GPM days). But shorts shoved in your face, subscription page jumbled with updates, comments and videos (I only want videos) ; no way to choose a system wide video quality (app only has High or Data Saver option; one needs to manually toggle for each video ; contrary, NewPipe has this basic feature).

    There is also the donate button on multiple YouTube videos (Atleast give me the option to remove/customize that button/other buttons on that ribbon). Why are paying users subject to worse UI?

    Oh, and these people throttle stuff on Firefox and have probably been doing since times immemorial.

    I have been wondering if I should let YT Premium lapse and not renew it. I tried Spotify Premium once and whilst it's 3rd party support is phenomenal, it has its own bugs (and they are similarly slow despite their forums being full with bug reports as well). Almost like I should hoard my own music from ahem, sources.

  • Products that don’t advertise can easily be better value.

    This is exactly my reasoning in refusing to do business with service providers that (in my view) over-advertise (looking at you Geico, Progressive, United Health, Taco Bell, other major advertisers)...

    Any service provider doing that much advertising is telling me 2 things with every ad: First, you already obviously have too much money and, Second, you obviously don't need my money.

    Fuck you and your "brand recognition".

    🙄 🤡 🖕 💩

    Don't forget the third thing ads tell you: 'Our product is, at best, no better than our competitors', and quite possibly much worse, otherwise we wouldn't have to spend so much on controlling our reputation.'

  • Back in the olden days, it was "here is my product, and this is the price, if you like it buy from this store"

    When exactly are these olden days you refer to? I ask because most "modern" advertising practices have long-since been in place for over a century now; the only things that've changed are the delivery method and frequency.

    Asking a question and answering it in the next sentence... is there a word for that?

  • The inability to rewind without activating ads was what really got me back in the day. Nobody wants to call over their friend to watch something cool/funny, only to have the clip trigger an ad when they restart it.

    Fuck I hate this.

    I run into this most often on sites for TV shows and movies myself.

  • Just out of curiosity, what is it EXACTLY about ads on YouTube that you dislike? Is it that they exist at all? That there are too many of them? That they're unskippable? What would you, specifically, find to be a tolerable amount of ads? If you were Chief Ad Engineer at YouTube, how would you structure the ads system?

    I have my thoughts on the matter, but I want to know what YOU think.

    this is like a soulless manager or some ai bot trying to figure why the human brain hates terrible interruptions

  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 107 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    S
    So it's good, but nit perfect. I feel like that's a lot more than I dare hope for nowadays.
  • 1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 99 Stimmen
    47 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    P
    One of the greatest videos ever.
  • Selling Surveillance as Convenience

    Technology technology
    13
    1
    112 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    E
    Trying to get my peers to care about their own privacy is exhausting. I wish their choices don't effect me, but like this article states.. They do in the long run. I will remain stubborn and only compromise rather than give in.
  • 85 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zoneC
    i like how ask photos is not just a dumb idea but it's also a dumb name
  • 272 Stimmen
    80 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    S
    that sub seems to be fully brigaded by bots from marketing team of closed-ai and preplexity
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.