8 ms·

To be fair, YT Premium is one of the few subscriptions I think is a no-brainer and good value for money. Sometimes when I've forgotten to log in and see what i

To be fair, YT Premium is one of the few subscriptions I think is a no-brainer and good value for money. Sometimes when I've forgotten to log in and see what it's like without, it's amazing anyone can watch videos on there. Like a lot of people I've generally been OK to watch ads in exchange for free content but it seems over the years instead of ads getting better and/or more relevant to my interests (even broadly), they're getting much worse. I assume this is the result of companies just accepting ££ for anything rather than having more quality control?

runtime_blues 3y ago
As the old saying goes, good ideas shouldn't require force. If they have a "no-brainer" offering, no need to strong-arm people into using it, right? I get it that they are not a charity and can monetize or paywall their platforms as seen fit, but there's something just sad about the model where you build a customer-friendly and open platform, then progressively crapify it once you capture a niche and eliminate most alternatives, and then start penalizing users for trying to work around that.
- DanielHB 3y ago
  Pretty much all big tech companies figured out this is the recipe for infinite money Only Microsoft seems to be aware this causes Dutch Disease, min-maxing your monopolistic platform revenue is terrible long-term for you company
  - gordian-not 3y ago
    Google is pretty far from maximizing their monopolistic platform What about selling your gmail data? Selling your search queries directly to third parties? Forcing your maps navigations to route near advertisers?
iLoveOncall 3y ago
> To be fair, YT Premium is one of the few subscriptions I think is a no-brainer and good value for money. I cannot think of any subscription that offers literally no upside beside what a free browser extension that you install in 1 click already provides. Youtube Premium is literally the worst value for money that I can think of, because I can get effortlessly the same for 0 cost.
- raincole 3y ago
  By this logic, buying e-books from Amazon is the worst value I can think of, because I can get them effortlessly from libgen and other "sources", and a single book can cost as much as the whole year of YouTube premium.
  - iLoveOncall 3y ago
    You are comparing something perfectly legal with something absolutely illegal, this makes no sense.
    - raincole 3y ago
      Except ad-blocker is literally just stealing bandwidth. Just because it's legal (under the current law), it doesn't mean it's morally right. Why should Youtube or any hosting service serves a user when they refuses to view the ads? YouTube is not a public service.
      - SantalBlush 3y ago
        It is morally right, not because it is legal, but because I was never asked to make a market transaction for the content. By your reasoning, it would be theft to close your eyes during a TV commercial. I completely reject your line of reasoning.
      - iLoveOncall 3y ago
        Ah! Well guess what? Showing me ads that I did not request is stealing MY bandwidth. And much worse than that, it's stealing my time.
        raincole 3y ago
        Yes, this is why YouTube should just refuse to serve you and other adblocker users. This way it can no longer steal your time, and it's the only fair solution.
  - 3y ago
barneygale 3y ago
uBlock Origin is literally free
- jeffbee 3y ago
  The cost is you have to give another party total access to all of your data on all sites.
  - dnedic 3y ago
    Except it's open source and anyone can audit the code any time.
    - bagacrap 3y ago
      If the developer's extension store account were compromised or sold, they'd push an update to you that stole your data before you could react.
      - HWR_14 3y ago
        You don't have to auto-update extensions.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - StrangeATractor 3y ago
    What? You download a blocklist. What gets sent back to ublock?
- baby 3y ago
  how does it work on iPhone or on the TV?

runtime_blues 3y ago

As the old saying goes, good ideas shouldn't require force. If they have a "no-brainer" offering, no need to strong-arm people into using it, right? I get it that they are not a charity and can monetize or paywall their platforms as seen fit, but there's something just sad about the model where you build a customer-friendly and open platform, then progressively crapify it once you capture a niche and eliminate most alternatives, and then start penalizing users for trying to work around that.

DanielHB 3y ago
Pretty much all big tech companies figured out this is the recipe for infinite money Only Microsoft seems to be aware this causes Dutch Disease, min-maxing your monopolistic platform revenue is terrible long-term for you company
- gordian-not 3y ago
  Google is pretty far from maximizing their monopolistic platform What about selling your gmail data? Selling your search queries directly to third parties? Forcing your maps navigations to route near advertisers?

iLoveOncall 3y ago

> To be fair, YT Premium is one of the few subscriptions I think is a no-brainer and good value for money. I cannot think of any subscription that offers literally no upside beside what a free browser extension that you install in 1 click already provides. Youtube Premium is literally the worst value for money that I can think of, because I can get effortlessly the same for 0 cost.

raincole 3y ago
By this logic, buying e-books from Amazon is the worst value I can think of, because I can get them effortlessly from libgen and other "sources", and a single book can cost as much as the whole year of YouTube premium.
- iLoveOncall 3y ago
  You are comparing something perfectly legal with something absolutely illegal, this makes no sense.
  - raincole 3y ago
    Except ad-blocker is literally just stealing bandwidth. Just because it's legal (under the current law), it doesn't mean it's morally right. Why should Youtube or any hosting service serves a user when they refuses to view the ads? YouTube is not a public service.
    - SantalBlush 3y ago
      It is morally right, not because it is legal, but because I was never asked to make a market transaction for the content. By your reasoning, it would be theft to close your eyes during a TV commercial. I completely reject your line of reasoning.
    - iLoveOncall 3y ago
      Ah! Well guess what? Showing me ads that I did not request is stealing MY bandwidth. And much worse than that, it's stealing my time.
      - raincole 3y ago
        Yes, this is why YouTube should just refuse to serve you and other adblocker users. This way it can no longer steal your time, and it's the only fair solution.
- 3y ago

barneygale 3y ago

uBlock Origin is literally free

jeffbee 3y ago
The cost is you have to give another party total access to all of your data on all sites.
- dnedic 3y ago
  Except it's open source and anyone can audit the code any time.
  - bagacrap 3y ago
    If the developer's extension store account were compromised or sold, they'd push an update to you that stole your data before you could react.
    - HWR_14 3y ago
      You don't have to auto-update extensions.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- StrangeATractor 3y ago
  What? You download a blocklist. What gets sent back to ublock?
baby 3y ago
how does it work on iPhone or on the TV?