Skip to content

YouTube is now flagging accounts on Premium family plans that aren't in the same household

Technology
283 165 92
  • Ahh classic, punishing paying costumers while pirates don't have to deal with any of this shit. I guess the beatings will continue until profits increase!

    punishing paying costumers

    Time to dress up as a pirate I guess.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    My entire extended family shares a single household and a single Internet connection. /s

  • While steam has historically been "good", doesn't mean it'll stay that way...

    It's mostly that a feature on it went from "okayish" to "far more consumer-friendly", which was incredibly unexpected of them to do. Everyone figured Steam library sharing would die but instead they roll out Family that has far looser restrictions than the system they'd had for over a decade.

    Can't play the same game at the same time unless both own it, and DLC isn't shared, but my partner being able to play anything I own that I'm not playing is pretty rad of a positive change.

    Meanwhile Nintendo's system got worse instead.

  • Gabe Newell is 62 years old. Gonna enjoy this gravy train while we can...

    My understanding is that gaben has already put an action plan in place for when the company moves on from his leadership.

    From what I've heard of it, the people in line behind Gabe will be upholding the same values.

    We should have at least another ~40 years or more of this before sometimes entitled brat inherits the company and sells it off to a foreign interest.

    With all that being said: long live gaben.

  • Good thing I am never going to go youtube premium.

    I think that's the point.

    They've had such trouble even selling YouTube premium that now they're making it even less worthwhile, and expecting people to still buy it...

    I don't know what companies don't get. Family means so many different things and they're trying to dictate and control what it means to be a family. They don't get to decide that. Many people I consider to be family, have zero blood relation to me, but they've stood by me like brothers and sisters when shit goes down, often staying to help long after my blood relatives, have abandoned me. The people I share a bloodline with are simply not as much of a family to me as these people I grew up with, and have stuck with me through thick and thin.

    If I buy a "family" plan of anything, I expect that the family I've chosen can be among the people I can share that plan with. If I'm paying for a personal plan and sharing it with others, I get it, fair game. But if I'm specifically buying it because I can share it with family, then let me share it with family, or fuck the fuck off with that bullshit.

    Sorry, bit of a rant, I know everyone here already knows this so I'm preaching to the choir.

    Be well.

  • If you pay, the platform remains great. I get a discounted YouTube premium membership through my mobile phone company. I think YouTube is great, I never see ads, lots of features.

    Just to offer an alternative view.

    I'm OK with your opinion and I appreciate hearing an alternate view to offset the echo chamber effect.

    But for a lot of us, or at least me, its far deeper than just cost and ads.

    It's the fact that steps keep being taken to make the platform worse. They don't want the platform usable unless you pay, and in this case they're even taking a stab at the people who pay...you don't pay enough in their mind.

    If they had balls, they would just make it a closed platform. Pay to access, and restrict that per account IP. But they'd rather gaslight everybody and slowly turn up he heat so the frogs don't jump out of the pot. This way they maximize their profits for longer.
    Point of all of that is, they don't care about he platform or service at all.

    For me, its not even about that. Their algorithm was so jacked up I was sick of being fed videos I didn't want to see over and over, and videos I've already watched over and over. That's why they added the subscription bell...because you would subscribe to things you wanted to watch and they never showed it to you. It wasn't "you" tube it was "their" tube.

    I bailed on them years ago. I still watch some content on there because there really isn't a viable alternative. I use a scraper that gives me a feed of just what I want and without ads. I watch what I like and move on with my day. I'm back in control of my video viewing.

  • you need certificates on iOS which suck

    I can still sideload whatever I want

    ??

    ergo, there are extra steps, which is a pita, but not insurmountable.

  • 🙂

    Top web search results for “adblock test”—the top two, both, are usually good to both run (though I’ve never been too scientific about it)! One tries to show ads for your review, the other gives a % blocked.

    I’m getting the same scores/results for Safari + uBOL and Orion + uBO but I’ll stick with safari for a bit just for a change in pace.

  • If you pay, the platform remains great. I get a discounted YouTube premium membership through my mobile phone company. I think YouTube is great, I never see ads, lots of features.

    Just to offer an alternative view.

    Weird number of downvotes here -- I thought they were meant for low-effort or non contributive comments, not an "I disagree" button. This person is giving a unique perspective as a subscriber (in this thread, anyway) and should be met with curiosity, I think. It is helpful to know that there are people who enjoy paying for it, so thanks for giving your opinion here.

    I disagree because they have a dominant position for reasons other than having a good product -- they squash competition trying to make the space better while themselves actively making it worse. Subscribing means supporting that style of inhibiting innovation, not to mention the other user-hostile practices they embrace (extend, extinguish). They are an ad company and obligated to make a profit, I get that, but I refuse to abide this style of using investor money to operate at a loss for years while deceptively capturing the market before raising prices. If your product is good, it shouldn't need to be artificially propped up.

  • Amazon is doing the exact same thing. Just got an email today that they're shutting down the family Prime sharing thing. Had that for ten years now.

    I really think corporations are starting to overplay their hands here. People don't need Prime as much as Amazon thinks they do, people don't need YouTube as much as Google thinks they do, and so on. Especially in the case of YT, yeah, turns out it's easy to compete when your service is free. But once it gets freemium enough, things like Peertube start to take a place on the optimal frontier. Right now Peertube only competes with YouTube if you're sensitive to the dimension of a service being centralized or not, most people don't give a shit about that. But the dimension of cost and ads? Enshittify YouTube too much and suddenly Peertube has its place for anyone who cares about money or time (i.e everyone).

    And Prime? Don't think people won't start just going to stores again, or buying directly from producers. At least if I go to an actual website to buy my stuff I don't need to worry about getting ripped off by some drop-ship fake brand garbage.

    People love their little conveniences and will try to hang on to them, sure...but I think this could really start to backfire if they push it much further.

  • Firefox + ublock origin still works to block all YouTube ads

    Invidious is a frontend for YouTube that blocks all their trackers and ads

    PeerTube is an alternative community ran platform to replace YouTube in the future

    I really wanted to like and use Peertube more, but it's so devoid of any content aside from political podcasts, as far as I can tell. I can't tell if the search function is bad, or I'm using it wrong, or there really is just that little content. Any recommendations for Peertube content?

  • Weird number of downvotes here -- I thought they were meant for low-effort or non contributive comments, not an "I disagree" button. This person is giving a unique perspective as a subscriber (in this thread, anyway) and should be met with curiosity, I think. It is helpful to know that there are people who enjoy paying for it, so thanks for giving your opinion here.

    I disagree because they have a dominant position for reasons other than having a good product -- they squash competition trying to make the space better while themselves actively making it worse. Subscribing means supporting that style of inhibiting innovation, not to mention the other user-hostile practices they embrace (extend, extinguish). They are an ad company and obligated to make a profit, I get that, but I refuse to abide this style of using investor money to operate at a loss for years while deceptively capturing the market before raising prices. If your product is good, it shouldn't need to be artificially propped up.

    but I refuse to abide this style of using investor money to operate at a loss for years while deceptively capturing the market before raising prices.

    Indeed, no company should be praised or rewarded for emulating the moves that made companies like Walmart and Amazon big.

    This capitalist hellscape would be slightly more tolerable if there was ample competition in every space. Companies need to be motivated to make their profit in ways that please the consumer, but also in ways that are increasingly more ethical.

    But truly, as they say, there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Modern slavery and third-world exploitation...even literal child slavery are rampant in our supply chains and offshore manufacturing.

    Even Google indirectly uses child slavery. The court threw the case raised against them (and other giants) out last year because these companies simply purchase "unspecified amounts" of cobalt through "global supply chains" - never mind how it came to be on the global supply chain to begin with and how much obscene profit these companies make off these resources.

  • I really think corporations are starting to overplay their hands here. People don't need Prime as much as Amazon thinks they do, people don't need YouTube as much as Google thinks they do, and so on. Especially in the case of YT, yeah, turns out it's easy to compete when your service is free. But once it gets freemium enough, things like Peertube start to take a place on the optimal frontier. Right now Peertube only competes with YouTube if you're sensitive to the dimension of a service being centralized or not, most people don't give a shit about that. But the dimension of cost and ads? Enshittify YouTube too much and suddenly Peertube has its place for anyone who cares about money or time (i.e everyone).

    And Prime? Don't think people won't start just going to stores again, or buying directly from producers. At least if I go to an actual website to buy my stuff I don't need to worry about getting ripped off by some drop-ship fake brand garbage.

    People love their little conveniences and will try to hang on to them, sure...but I think this could really start to backfire if they push it much further.

    Shipping is still free if orders are over $35. Add to cart, order when you have enough. Their 2 day shipping has become bs these days anyhow. "It's 2 days from when the order is processed." I bought the shit, money came out of my account, it's processed. I have made a legal exchange with the expectation that your mutli billion company can place an order and box shit near immediately from 50+ warehouses. I order in the morning, and you're telling me it took you 2 days to get that order with a preprinted label onto a truck?

  • I really think corporations are starting to overplay their hands here. People don't need Prime as much as Amazon thinks they do, people don't need YouTube as much as Google thinks they do, and so on. Especially in the case of YT, yeah, turns out it's easy to compete when your service is free. But once it gets freemium enough, things like Peertube start to take a place on the optimal frontier. Right now Peertube only competes with YouTube if you're sensitive to the dimension of a service being centralized or not, most people don't give a shit about that. But the dimension of cost and ads? Enshittify YouTube too much and suddenly Peertube has its place for anyone who cares about money or time (i.e everyone).

    And Prime? Don't think people won't start just going to stores again, or buying directly from producers. At least if I go to an actual website to buy my stuff I don't need to worry about getting ripped off by some drop-ship fake brand garbage.

    People love their little conveniences and will try to hang on to them, sure...but I think this could really start to backfire if they push it much further.

    I think it's important to keep expectations realistic though..

    in the case of Youtube there are very few groups/companies/whatever that could keep up with that kind of bandwidth. Federation helps here but it's still a pretty niche thing for 99% of people who don't know/care and just want their social media/forum/video site to work.

  • I think it's important to keep expectations realistic though..

    in the case of Youtube there are very few groups/companies/whatever that could keep up with that kind of bandwidth. Federation helps here but it's still a pretty niche thing for 99% of people who don't know/care and just want their social media/forum/video site to work.

    Yeah no denying YouTube is particularly hard to replace, hence why there's been nary a competitor even after all this time. I think paying for server upkeep could be a model that ekes out a victory...it would be drastically cheaper to users, and would come without ads or any of that other annoying junk. Ultimately someone needs to pay the bills, so it's not like I even blame YouTube for making you choose between ads or subscriptions. It's just when they push it further than that, always further, forever further and further...

  • For those select few that have an iPhone

    You have a few options:

    • be EU citizen and sideload a cracked YouTube (similar to vanced, but you need certificates on iOS which sucks)
    • pay for a dev account and sideload regardless of above
    • buy two apps: vinegar and AdGuard. AdGuard speaks for itself, vinegar is a tool that forces YouTube to use the html 5 player inside of safari and thus forcing it to your will

    I know iPhones are hated here, but I saw the android will stop sideloading coming from a mile away. At least here in the eu apple can suck one and I can still sideload whatever I want

    You can sideload up to three apps without a paid dev account, they just expire in 7 days. Use something like AltStore (or better yet SideStore) and you have an easy way to install and re-sign two other apps. They also have the ability to essentially “offload” apps so you can have more than two other sideloaded apps, but only two can be active at a time (other than the signing app)

  • Gabe Newell is 62 years old. Gonna enjoy this gravy train while we can...

    Gaben is gonna be the first person to digitally upload their consciousness.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I'm on my brother's premium. I told myself if my brother stopped wanting to pay for it I'd pay for it myself because I hate ads that much.

    On the other hand, if Youtube itself takes it away from me I'm going to just stop watching Youtube.

  • Yeah no denying YouTube is particularly hard to replace, hence why there's been nary a competitor even after all this time. I think paying for server upkeep could be a model that ekes out a victory...it would be drastically cheaper to users, and would come without ads or any of that other annoying junk. Ultimately someone needs to pay the bills, so it's not like I even blame YouTube for making you choose between ads or subscriptions. It's just when they push it further than that, always further, forever further and further...

    I've been using Nebula, and I dig it. It's owned by the creators and there's no algorithm. Only sucks you can't really share since it's all paywalled. They have a guest pass but the person has to sign up so I doubt people would bother.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Gotta give it to them. They are extremely innovative in coming up with ways of enshitifying stuff.

  • 124 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    34 Aufrufe
    fenririii@lemmy.worldF
    I think you mean 20%. Math costs more.
  • Cool at the Edge: Europe’s Cooling System for Edge Computing Market

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 34 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    75 Aufrufe
    O
    She didn’t call herself a libertarian and explicitly said she isn’t And North Korea calls its self democratic. Yet we don't call it a democracy. No, we define these categories by what they are/do/believe in/etc... and like it or not, Ayn Rand's Objectivism is 100% a component of libertarian ideology, Ayn Rand's beliefs are very much a core component of Libertarianism, and i'm sorry to inform you that many on that list of yours ARE libertarians, such as Milei. In the same way the Marx&Hegel were a cornerstone of communism. But you are correct about Zelenskyy, he is not libertarian. Bullshit. You might also want to think who’s “we” and what externalia does giving that “we” an ability to “put limits on these things” possess. Standard Libertarian response that basically ignores the existence of anything outside the individual Also, from the person who you believe isn't a Libertarian: The source of the government's authority is "the consent of the governed." This means that the government is not the ruler, but the servant or agent of the citizens; it means that the government as such has no rights except the rights delegated to it by the citizens for a specific purpose. -Ayn Rand, Galt's Speech. A government is large scale organized violence and warlords. Spoken just like Rand herself! "Only a government holds that power. The nature of governmental action is: coercive action. The nature of political power is: the power to force obedience under threat of physical injury—the threat of property expropriation, imprisonment, or death." The Virtue of Selfishness "The Nature of Government," The Virtue of Selfishness, again Ayn Rand. Lastly, on privatization: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257%2Fjep.20.3.187
  • 61 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    81 Aufrufe
    gsus4@mander.xyzG
    At least they're good at imagining all the ways in which you can hurt yourself way beforehand...and making sure you don't do them...or anything else
  • 802 Stimmen
    385 Beiträge
    6k Aufrufe
    F
    Thank you for your suggestion. I didn't think of building a cabin. Our land is collective and we can't just build a house casually. That's why we have to save money to build a house. Thank you always, I hope we can all have a bright future~
  • Microsoft Tests Removing Its Name From Bing Search Box

    Technology technology
    11
    1
    52 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    126 Aufrufe
    alphapuggle@programming.devA
    Worse. Office.com now takes me to m365.cloud.microsoft which as of today now takes me to a fucking Copilot chat window. Ofc no way to disable it because gee why would anyone want to do that?
  • Taiwan adds China’s Huawei, SMIC to export blacklist

    Technology technology
    43
    1
    61 Stimmen
    43 Beiträge
    621 Aufrufe
    R
    Based decision.
  • Why Japan's animation industry has embraced AI

    Technology technology
    12
    1
    1 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    142 Aufrufe
    R
    The genre itself has become neutered, too. A lot of anime series have the usual "anime elements" and a couple custom ideas. And similar style, too glossy for my taste. OK, what I think is old and boring libertarian stuff, I'll still spell it out. The reason people are having such problems is because groups and businesses are de facto legally enshrined in their fields, it's almost like feudal Europe's system of privileges and treaties. At some point I thought this is good, I hope no evil god decided to fulfill my wish. There's no movement, and a faction (like Disney with Star Wars) that buys a place (a brand) can make any garbage, and people will still try to find the depth in it and justify it (that complaint has been made about Star Wars prequels, but no, they are full of garbage AND have consistent arcs, goals and ideas, which is why they revitalized the Expanded Universe for almost a decade, despite Lucas-<companies> having sort of an internal social collapse in year 2005 right after Revenge of the Sith being premiered ; I love the prequels, despite all the pretense and cringe, but their verbal parts are almost fillers, their cinematographic language and matching music are flawless, the dialogue just disrupts it all while not adding much, - I think Lucas should have been more decisive, a bit like Tartakovsky with the Clone Wars cartoon, just more serious, because non-verbal doesn't equal stupid). OK, my thought wandered away. Why were the legal means they use to keep such positions created? To make the economy nicer to the majority, to writers, to actors, to producers. Do they still fulfill that role? When keeping monopolies, even producing garbage or, lately, AI slop, - no. Do we know a solution? Not yet, because pressing for deregulation means the opponent doing a judo movement and using that energy for deregulating the way everything becomes worse. Is that solution in minimizing and rebuilding the system? I believe still yes, nothing is perfect, so everything should be easy to quickly replace, because errors and mistakes plaguing future generations will inevitably continue to be made. The laws of the 60s were simple enough for that in most countries. The current laws are not. So the general direction to be taken is still libertarian. Is this text useful? Of course not. I just think that in the feudal Europe metaphor I'd want to be a Hussite or a Cossack or at worst a Venetian trader.