Skip to content

YouTube just quietly blocked Adblock Plus — the internet hasn't noticed yet, but I've found a workaround

Technology
275 158 101
  • I think you stopped scrolling too early

    That said though, there is one ad blocker that still works. Two words: uBlock Origin. Yes, I know that Google has blocked it from its Chrome Extension store, but there is still a way to get uBlock Origin on Chrome that our how-to extraordinaire Kaycee has detailed.

    They even link to what I assume is that process.

    But...

    It costs the same as Spotify

    I used Google Play music and it was awesome, when it shuttered I tried Spotify and didn't like it.

    YouTube premium is worth it just for music on your phone/car, getting YouTube ad free is kind of just a bonus. But there's a couple podcasts I watch on there, and I've found a couple really good channels for all the crazy science stuff that's been happening. Not to mention a lot of UK shows upload full episodes, and there's more than one account that somehow uploads full runs of shows after being upscaled to 4k.

    I really don't understand why so many people are against YouTube premium. It makes sense if someone just pirates all their other media. But people pay for a music streamer and a couple TV streamers.... It seems like an arbitrary line.

    Edit:

    The article is from "toms guide" not "toms hardware".

    The guide has every article like this where it reads like paid advertising. The "hardware" one is a good resource.

    But yeah, pretty much anything from "tomsguide" is going to read like paid advertising for something. I legit don't know if they're affiliated or it's a ripoff site built to confuse people with the "hardware" site.

    I read that. But the way the article is written suggests that the workaround they're implying is to buy YouTube premium.
    I am not per se against YT premium, after all its normal business to take money and serve a product, but what my biggest cons are

    1. The price
    2. I already use all of the mentioned premium features and more but for free

    For example:
    YT music -> ReVanced (background play, no ads)
    YT App -> ReVanced (no ads, Sponsorblock, no shorts)
    YT on browser -> Extensions (uBlock, Sponsorblock, block yt shorts)

    If I were to pay for premium and use the regular app, I would lose that functionality and 130€ per year. This money would support a company whose business model involves extensive collection of personal data, which is then sold to third parties, effectively contributing to the global surveillance infrastructure.

    I would rather not use YouTube than pay for it.

  • I am willing to completely ditch YouTube and not access it, but there are a couple of channels that just aren't anywhere else that I do enjoy watching.

    Currently, I use RSS feeds in order to stay up to date with their videos, and I use new pipe to actually watch the videos, but still, it's annoying. I would like to stop using them and cannot. I feel as though I'm being held hostage.

    I have this running on a local server: https://github.com/alexta69/metube

    It’s a frontend for yt-dlp and whenever I want to watch something I just download it and have a copy saved locally. It makes it harder to binge youtube feeds that the algorithm tries to shove down my throat, and that’s a good thing.

  • Honestly, I just did that. YouTube has costs, storing and sharing all that data at high resolution and speed, so expecting that service for absolutely nothing is a little weird. We can find reasons that they’re bad, that’s fine, but good or bad they do have to pay for things.

    I also pay for the Patreon of one of my favourite mandolin players because I want him to keep making content and I wanted access to backing tracks and the Discord server. He can’t do it at that level for free, and that’s ok.

    We already pay with all of the personal data they steal from us (adblocks or no), and all the lifetimes wasted watching ads for those who don't or can't block them (and the ad revenue paid to them by corps who buy those ads) so no, Google doesn't deserve our money for Premium.

    Same thing as when cable TV was new, they said paying for it was to require fewer ads... how long did that last?

  • Yes. I consider it better because it's preconfigured for privacy, includes UBlock Origin by default, and rips Mozilla's telemetry out. So you never have to worry about them sneaking something new in a later update.

    I'm more worried about the updates not happening in a timely fashion. Is it just a passion project by a handful of devs, or is there some kind of funding?

  • I don't care what YouTube's costs are, I don't want to pay. I'll leave that to people like you.

    I care about making google lose money. They deserve it. I will only make accounts on big tech just to abuse them.

    All of big tech deserves to be bankrupt, convince me otherwise.

    They only care about money. No ethics, no rights, no environment, just money. And money IS NOT more important than ethics, rights, etc.

  • Honestly, I just did that. YouTube has costs, storing and sharing all that data at high resolution and speed, so expecting that service for absolutely nothing is a little weird. We can find reasons that they’re bad, that’s fine, but good or bad they do have to pay for things.

    I also pay for the Patreon of one of my favourite mandolin players because I want him to keep making content and I wanted access to backing tracks and the Discord server. He can’t do it at that level for free, and that’s ok.

    Sure, if paying them ment that they also didn't data mine the shit out of you and sold it to 3rd parties...but no they insist on double-dipping so they can get fucked.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Everyone breaking the website so they can watch gigabytes of content without ads or subscription: You're not allowed to break things just because you disagree with the other party! You should find an amicable alternative!

  • Honestly, I just did that. YouTube has costs, storing and sharing all that data at high resolution and speed, so expecting that service for absolutely nothing is a little weird. We can find reasons that they’re bad, that’s fine, but good or bad they do have to pay for things.

    I also pay for the Patreon of one of my favourite mandolin players because I want him to keep making content and I wanted access to backing tracks and the Discord server. He can’t do it at that level for free, and that’s ok.

    I don't watch enough YouTube to make premium worth it. If they had a lower tier with a cap on ad-free watch time, I probably would pay.

  • That said though, there is one ad blocker that still works. Two words: uBlock Origin. Yes, I know that Google has blocked it from its Chrome Extension store, but there is still a way to get uBlock Origin on Chrome that our how-to extraordinaire Kaycee has detailed.

    Or..... You could just ditch Chrome altogether!

    I don't know why people are so fixated on using Chrome. It's a crippled browser made by an evil company that is actively looking to screw the user at every turn.

    I switched to Firefox when Google essentially killed uBlock Origin on their browser. At first I ran into some problems with some sites not rendering correctly. But it seems like that's become much less of an issue with later updates. And the best thing is that there are some phenomenal extensions for blocking ads - like a fully-fledged uBlock Origin to name just one. I don't even see sponsor promotions in YT videos now.

    And if you don't want to deal with Mozilla directly you can use Waterfox instead.

    All this dancing around and jumping through hoops to get uBlock Origin working on Chrome is kind of absurd. Just ditch Chrome (and all Blink-based browsers) altogether where you can (I get that corporate environments are often off the table for this).

    Collectively we should be sending a message to Google whenever we can that we are done with their browser bullshit.

    Or at least use a Chrome fork, if you must use it for compatibility or something.

    TBH I think it's just an accessibility issue. It's easier to install an extension than find another browser and swtich to it for most people. Hence Internet Explorer lasted as long as it did.

  • I care about making google lose money. They deserve it. I will only make accounts on big tech just to abuse them.

    All of big tech deserves to be bankrupt, convince me otherwise.

    They only care about money. No ethics, no rights, no environment, just money. And money IS NOT more important than ethics, rights, etc.

  • I don't care what YouTube's costs are, I don't want to pay. I'll leave that to people like you.

    Guns n Jesus mentality. Someone's got to shoulder the burden and it ain't gonna be the cool guys.

  • Everyone breaking the website so they can watch gigabytes of content without ads or subscription: You're not allowed to break things just because you disagree with the other party! You should find an amicable alternative!

    Honestly, if not for security purposes and safety then I wouldn't really have any argument against the blocking of ad blockers.

    Cuz at the end of the day it's their property their service and they get to make the rules and it's their money paying for your free entertainment.

    But we live in a world where ad blockers are a fundamental to save online activity and basic security. So they can f*** off I'm going to use my ad blocker

  • I experience the same issue. All the elements on the page load extremely slow or sometimes not at all.

    I noted an experimental rule in uBO to address delays, but have not tried it yet myself.

    Under settings, Filter lists, Built-in, uBlock filters - Experimental

    Code has a comment:

    ! fake buffering on the initial load

  • I think you stopped scrolling too early

    That said though, there is one ad blocker that still works. Two words: uBlock Origin. Yes, I know that Google has blocked it from its Chrome Extension store, but there is still a way to get uBlock Origin on Chrome that our how-to extraordinaire Kaycee has detailed.

    They even link to what I assume is that process.

    But...

    It costs the same as Spotify

    I used Google Play music and it was awesome, when it shuttered I tried Spotify and didn't like it.

    YouTube premium is worth it just for music on your phone/car, getting YouTube ad free is kind of just a bonus. But there's a couple podcasts I watch on there, and I've found a couple really good channels for all the crazy science stuff that's been happening. Not to mention a lot of UK shows upload full episodes, and there's more than one account that somehow uploads full runs of shows after being upscaled to 4k.

    I really don't understand why so many people are against YouTube premium. It makes sense if someone just pirates all their other media. But people pay for a music streamer and a couple TV streamers.... It seems like an arbitrary line.

    Edit:

    The article is from "toms guide" not "toms hardware".

    The guide has every article like this where it reads like paid advertising. The "hardware" one is a good resource.

    But yeah, pretty much anything from "tomsguide" is going to read like paid advertising for something. I legit don't know if they're affiliated or it's a ripoff site built to confuse people with the "hardware" site.

    My reasons:

    • I don't want a YouTube account, that just makes it easier for Google to track me
    • premium costs too much relative to how much I use it (Nebula is more reasonable, which I do pay for)
    • I can support my favorite creators in other ways (merch, patreon, etc)

    I don't pirate. I buy movies and TV shows and rip them to my media server, I buy lots of video games both physical and digital, and I buy books if my library doesnt have it or I want to keep it on my shelf. I'm not against paying for things, I'm against my privacy being violated.

    I watch a few hours of content a week, and I'd be happy cutting down a bit. I don't follow any of the big names, rarely listen to music, and really only watch videos from a handful of channels, most of which are a waste of time anyway. If Google blocked my ad blocker, I'd be fine just not watching YouTube anymore.

    $14 is too much, I think $5 is about as much as I'd be willing to pay, or $1/channel. Give me that and I'll consider signing up, despite my misgivings about Google.

  • Honest question, but what makes librewolf BETTER?
    In firefox you can easily toggle off the studies telemetry bullshit in the settings. Librewolf is just firefox with those things ripped out right?

    In firefox you can easily toggle off the studies telemetry bullshit in the settings.

    They're abusing the default and making privacy settings require user intervention rather than defaulting to the most private settings and allowing the option of opting in.

    It's abusing consent, so people move to browsers where privacy is the default option.

  • What about the UI elements? Because they take a long time to load too

    Thats fine for me. Just make sure to always "Reject all" on the cookies. If you accept then the whole site sometimes breaks for me.

  • I'm more worried about the updates not happening in a timely fashion. Is it just a passion project by a handful of devs, or is there some kind of funding?

    Update frequency/latency hasn't been an issue in the 2 years I've been using it.

  • This is caused by not allowing the website to access your html canvas data. You can fix this in the address bar by clicking the icon on the left of the URL to grant permissions.

    To add to this.

    This isn't a bug, it's a feature.

    Canvas data gives a lot of datapoints that websites can use to fingerprint your browser. This allows them to track you across multiple sites even if you're blocking ads and pi-holing tracking services.

    There is an unavoidable tradeoff between convenience and security/privacy. Privacy features are inherently less convenient than allowing everyone access to everything.

    You could disable canvas blocking globally (I'm assuming, I haven't looked) and the problem would go away, but you've then weakened the privacy protections that were built in to the browser.

  • I sometimes get a popup warning from YouTube that my account will be blocked from viewing videos if I keep running an ad blocker. But the warning goes away after a while and YouTube still works. I don't see ads except on mobile.

    Oddly, they also keep begging me to "return" to YouTube Premium, though I have never paid for YouTube Premium.

    Oddly, they also keep begging me to “return” to YouTube Premium, though I have never paid for YouTube Premium.

    This is just 'normal' commercial psychological manipulation.

    Returning sounds better than starting, so a small percentage of people would sign up that wouldn't have otherwise if it was worded accurately.

  • What Does Palantir Actually Do?

    Technology technology
    16
    1
    191 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    D
    Fear Peter Thiel and his gangbuster crew of excel homies and consultants Don't get me wrong, they're enablers of authoritarianists, but let's not give them too much credit. Magic? 🫧🧐🪠
  • Thinking Is Becoming a Luxury Good

    Technology technology
    30
    65 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    313 Aufrufe
    S
    In political science, the term polyarchy (poly "many", arkhe "rule") was used by Robert A. Dahl to describe a form of government in which power is invested in multiple people. It takes the form of neither a dictatorship nor a democracy. This form of government was first implemented in the United States and France and gradually adopted by other countries. Polyarchy is different from democracy, according to Dahl, because the fundamental democratic principle is "the continuing responsiveness of the government to the preferences of its citizens, considered as political equals" with unimpaired opportunities. A polyarchy is a form of government that has certain procedures that are necessary conditions for following the democratic principle. So yeah, you are right. A representative "democracy" is not a democracy. It's a monarchy with more than one ruler. A gummy bear is as much a bear as representative democracy is a democracy. I didn't know that, because i was taught in school that a representative "democracy" is a form of democracy. And the name makes it sound like one. But it isn't. It's not even supposed to be in theory. I am sure 99% of people living in a representative "democracy" don't know this. I hereby encourage everyone to abandon the word representative "democracy" in favor of polyarchy or maybe oligarchy. This makes it much clearer what we are talking about. Also i doubt the authors of this article know this, because they imply that representative "democracy" is desirable, but it is obviously undesirable.
  • Twitter in EU and UK

    Technology technology
    34
    2
    268 Stimmen
    34 Beiträge
    338 Aufrufe
    thegreenwizard@lemmy.zipT
    You're right, I just couldn't resist
  • 168 Stimmen
    27 Beiträge
    185 Aufrufe
    P
    Already seen it I've watched his videos almost since the beginning when he had his "why people laugh at creationists" series, very recommendable!
  • Meta snubs the EU’s voluntary AI guidelines

    Technology technology
    7
    1
    75 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    101 Aufrufe
    S
    If only, how many businesses have whatsapp functionality, instagram shops and facebook for opening hours. As someone who shuns meta it is hard to see menus and opening times of local businesses.
  • 141 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    257 Aufrufe
    P
    That would be 1 in 4 users and that's just not accurate at all. What you mean to say is 25% of Windows users still use windows 7. Its still an alarming statistic, and no wonder bruteforce cyberattacks are still so effective today considering it hasn't received security updates in like 10 years. I sincerely hope those people aren't connecting their devices to the internet like, at all. I'm fairly sure at this point even using a Debian based distro is better than sticking to windows 7.
  • 133 Stimmen
    80 Beiträge
    2k Aufrufe
    glizzyguzzler@lemmy.blahaj.zoneG
    Indeed I did not, we’re at a stalemate because you and I do not believe what the other is saying! So we can’t move anywhere since it’s two walls. Buuuut Tim Apple got my back for once, just saw this now!: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/27197259 I’ll leave it at that, as thanks to that white paper I win! Yay internet points!
  • 21 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    42 Aufrufe
    B
    We have to do this ourselves in the government for every decommissioned server/appliance/end user device. We have to fill out paperwork for every single storage drive we destroy, and we can only destroy them using approved destruction tools (e.g. specific degaussers, drive shredders/crushers, etc). Appliances can be kind of a pain, though. It can be tricky sometimes finding all the writable memory in things like switches and routers. But, nothing is worse than storage arrays... destroying hundreds of drives is incredibly tedious.