Skip to content

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

Technology
275 158 108
  • It costs money.

    Having money is better than not having money.

    Citizen, that sounds like communist anti-consumption talk.

    Now go back to working 60 hours a week so you can buy things to feel better about having to work 60 hours a week.

  • 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!

    • I ask a website for content.
    • The website gives me content and a side of shit.
    • I instruct my intelligent butler to discard the shit and only give me the content I requested.
    • I get only the content I requested.

    If a website wants to run ads that's fine, I'll just remove them. If they want to gate their content behind a paywall that's fine, I'll just make a determination about whether or not what they offer is worth it.

    Removing ads is not "breaking a website" if anything it's the exact opposite--restoring a cleaner layout, faster loading, less privacy invasion, and a reduced chance of malware.

  • Agree. I was just citing the article.

    The Internet is full of people who can't understand irony unless they're slapped in the face with the /s.

  • 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.

    Additionally, I'm not paying that evil company a dime. All the people I follow on YT get way more money from me on Patreon.

  • It costs money.

    Having money is better than not having money.

    I mean, I'd never buy anything by that logic alone.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Oh yeah, well ublock blocks the blocking of their blocks!

  • 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.

    People keep forgetting that Google is quite literally the largest ad company in the world. That’s the vast majority of their revenue.

    They’re never going to do something that fucks with ad income.

  • Or even better, Librewolf.

    As much as I like Librewolf as concept and ideology, I can't keep thinking that if there's a Firefox 0day, Firefox gets patched first, Librewolf later, and I'm potentially exposed for longer. That's why I prefer to stick with upstream.

  • 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.

    To be fair all the "dancing around and jumping through hoops" is enabling developer mode (which is just a switch in the extension settings) and turning back on manifest 2 in chrome://flags then just reloading the extension.

  • But a Chromium fork called Chromite still uses it

    At least they've zapped the acceptable ads out of it 🙂

    Ironfox is my current pref for mobile, backed by uBO & a VPN to a box running pfsense.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    If someone is fixated on using chrome, so far there is still a workaround:

    Other than that, just switch to Firefox.

  • Sure, but what about in 2 years from now?

    I used IronFox for a couple years and it suddenly stopped getting updates, and it took me a few months to realize and switch to something else. I don't want that to happen again.

    I like the idea of librewolf, especially that it's just a patch set on top of Firefox, but someone needs to maintain that patch set. This would be fine for simpler software, but browsers are complex and I just worry that updates will stall out with little warning.

    Certainly a valid concern, but it's true with any software. I think enough people (techies especially) are using LibreWolf that a lack of updates would be visible quickly.

  • Sure, but what about in 2 years from now?

    I used IronFox for a couple years and it suddenly stopped getting updates, and it took me a few months to realize and switch to something else. I don't want that to happen again.

    I like the idea of librewolf, especially that it's just a patch set on top of Firefox, but someone needs to maintain that patch set. This would be fine for simpler software, but browsers are complex and I just worry that updates will stall out with little warning.

    Two years is enough time for Firefox itself to cease to exist. Cross that bridge when you burn it

  • 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.

    (I get that corporate environments are often off the table for this).

    FYI in case anyone needs to hear this, but Firefox can be installed as a user in windows if you just decline the admin prompt when installing.

  • 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.

    About YouTube premium :

    1. I don't like the idea of spending money for Google. I don't find it very ethic to use their services in the way I do but no replacement has come up for years. I try to mitigate by donating to some content creators and I would love to pay a subscription to something like Nebula if there were at least 3 people I follow in there.
    2. I would use an adblocker even if I paid. On my phone Tubular is just a much better experience : multi platforms, aggregates my subscription, no addictive low quality suggestions and lightweight while still featurefull (and it integrates sponsorblock 🤫)

    Also on my previous phone the YouTube app was super slow and would regularly crash because of RAM shortages. This was 6 years ago though.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I'm gonna get a load of grief for this but Brave works fine...

  • This post did not contain any content.

    It’s strange that they go to this much effort to ban ad blockers. What’s the percentage of their user base watching on devices with ad blockers? I bet it’s low — especially when including smart tv viewers in those numbers.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    The internet hasn't noticed yet

    Says article on the internet shared with others on the internet and linked to from many internet places.

    Article titles are fucking garbage. At least it didn't pul the "Here's why" bullshit.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    No, author of this article, paying for premium is not a workaround.

  • Sure, but what about in 2 years from now?

    I used IronFox for a couple years and it suddenly stopped getting updates, and it took me a few months to realize and switch to something else. I don't want that to happen again.

    I like the idea of librewolf, especially that it's just a patch set on top of Firefox, but someone needs to maintain that patch set. This would be fine for simpler software, but browsers are complex and I just worry that updates will stall out with little warning.

    I've been using IronFox since it came out and I don't think it has been out for 2 years yet... are you thinking of Mull from which it was forked when DivestOS stop being maintained?

    Also, I've been using Librewolf since its early days too, and their updates are always only 1 to 2 days behind an updated Firefox. I know cuz ai update daily on my Artix Linux machine and have both browsers. Whenever Firefox is updated its usually the same day or a day later that Librewolf is also updated to the same version number.

    I get the concern, but honestly the Librewolf devs have proven themselves at keeping pace with the upstream for quite a few years now. Hopefully the Ironfox devs can do the same.

  • UK police treated to 10 new LFR vans in fresh expansion

    Technology technology
    7
    1
    69 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    A
    That's awesome! There were some sunglasses I saw that did something similar but they were very expensive
  • 86 Stimmen
    31 Beiträge
    286 Aufrufe
    A
    You don’t have the power to decarbonize all electricity From the article: Location also affects how carbon emissions are managed. Germany has the largest carbon footprint for video streaming at 76g CO₂e per hour of streaming, reflecting its continued reliance on coal and fossil fuels. In the UK, this figure is 48g CO₂e per hour, because its energy mix includes renewables and natural gas, increasingly with nuclear as central to the UK’s low-carbon future. France, with a reliance on nuclear is the lowest, at 10g CO₂e per hour. This is a massive difference, and clearly doable, nothing that would be limited to the distant future. So I get this right? I'm naive for expecting govt regulations to put companies' behaviour under control, whereas you're realistic by expecting hundreds of millions of people deciding to systematically minimise their Youtube/Tiktok/Spotify/Netflix/Zoom usage? Hmm, alright. And yet in an another comment you also expect that Spotify shouldn't introduce video streaming, without any external regulation but out of pure goodness of their hearts?
  • Wallora - Your Screen, Reimagined

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Bubble Trouble

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    46 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    144 Aufrufe
    1984@lemmy.today1
    Yeah that would be the logical end game since companies have invested billions into this trend now.
  • The End of Publishing as We Know It

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    50 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    82 Aufrufe
    beejjorgensen@lemmy.sdf.orgB
    Lol.. I wanted "DRM". But it's been a long day.
  • Building a slow web

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    175 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    512 Aufrufe
    I
    Realistically, you don't need security, NAT alone is enough since the packets have nowhere to go without port forwarding. But IF you really want to build front end security here is my plan. ISP bridge -> WAN port of openwrt capable router with DSA supported switch (that is almost all of them) Set all ports of the switch to VLAN mirroring mode bridge WAN and LAN sides Fail2Ban IP block list in the bridge LAN PORT 1 toward -> OpenWRT running inside Proxmox LXC (NAT lives here) -> top of rack switch LAN PORT 2 toward -> Snort IDS LAN PORT 3 toward -> combined honeypot and traffic analyzer Port 2&3 detect malicious internet hosts and add them to the block list (and then multiple other openwrt LXCs running many many VPN ports as alternative gateways, I switch LAN host's internet address by changing their default gateway) I run no internal VLAN, all one LAN because convenience is more important than security in my case.
  • 18 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    153 Aufrufe
    freebooter69@lemmy.caF
    The US courts gave corporations person-hood, AI just around the corner.
  • 236 Stimmen
    80 Beiträge
    890 Aufrufe
    R
    Yeah, but that's a secondary attribute. The new ones are stupid front and center.