6 ms·

Most likely. I understand the appeal of these types of applications but it really just comes off as entitled IMO. Just watch the ads to support the content crea

• jedimastert 6y ago
  That's why I'm on YouTube Premium. I definitely watch enough youtube to get $10 out of it.
  • sjroot 6y ago
    I think most people get enough benefit out of YouTube to warrant the fee. But advertisements allow the platform to be available to anyone with an internet connection. Fair trade off I’d say.
    • izacus 6y ago
      Except for all the entitled people in this very topic who demand this service to work for free, refuse to pay for subscription and still don't want ads either.
      • shirshak55 6y ago
        I agree with your statement but there are other sides too. Regarding ads: Showing ads like "Girl Mobile Video Talk" with description "Girl Mobile Number Live Video Call" with "Install Link" in a youtube ads is unacceptable. And the worst thing is you cannot even turn off that ads without being turning on ads personalization. Regarding Money: 10$ may be a cup of coffee for you but in other side of world people are earning 200$ of salary so they just can't afford it. So many people don't have privilege like average Americans have? Regarding supporting creators. Sure ads pay creator but showing ads every 10minute , beginning of video and end of video is total BS. And even creator are already using their own ads like "This video is sponsored by Brilliant.org" so I don't mind blocking ads.
      • leppr 6y ago
        It's not simply about the consumers. Google is playing a balancing game between pushing ads on enough people to make the service sustainable, while still willingly allowing the people who want to block ads to do so. With their resources and the nature of the service, they could easily win the cat-and-mouse game against ad-blocker devs if they wanted to. The reason they don't, is because they actually want to keep those "entitled people" on their platform, in order to avoid giving competing platforms an opening to grow their own communities. They know there is a substantial part of their userbase who would simply not use their service if they had to either pay or endure the vanilla experience.
  • bsdubernerd 6y ago
    I'm happy to support content creators with patreon when they offer a way to do so. _Especially_ when they offer a way to see their videos off YouTube. I'd never pay a dime for YT itself due to their policies and overall platform. I mostly use YouTube to discover niche content, but only because I've been running an ad-blocker since forever. I cannot fathom how anyone could enjoy it in any other way currently. When I see how IT works at friend's houses I'm horrified. If YT blocked access for browsers with ad-blockers (or make it inconvenient enough) I would essentially stop using it.
    • kbenson 6y ago
      > I'd never pay a dime for YT itself due to their policies and overall platform. You're supporting them just by using them, whether they are showing you ads or tracking you or not. You're reducing demand on other platforms for this content because you're letting YouTube provide it for you. If you really want to stand against YouTube, don't use it. Otherwise, you're still supporting their platform, you've just decided to do so in a way that saves you time, money and convenience at the expense of YouTube and the content creators on YouTube. If you're going to do it, you might as well own it.
      • bsdubernerd 6y ago
        You're absolutely right of course. But it's still a chicken-and-egg problem. YT is frequently the only platform where content creators publish because of network effects. I guess it's too easy for me to continue using YT for discovery.
        • kbenson 6y ago
          Yep, and it's those network effects which are strengthened through using YouTube even if they aren't making revenue from ads through you. It's similar to disliking Walmart and Amazon but still using them because they are cheap, convenient, a known factor, etc, which many do (including me, in the case of Amazon). The first step is acknowledging the trade-off you're making and being aware of it. At least then people are making a conscious choice, so if they want to re-evaluate at some point, they can do so with better facts.
• GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
  Counterpoint: the amount of advertisements needed to sustain video production ultimately hinders the value of the video. If I'm watching an hour long video about X, and I have to watch 40 mid-roll ads, I'm way more likely to turn it off. I'd much rather directly support creators via Patreon, and Adblock everything else.
  • izacus 6y ago
    YouTube Premium will not show any Ads. You just need to pay for the service you're receiving. Since when is that an unreasonable ask?
    • pas 6y ago
      [Could anyone who downvoted izacus' comment explain why?]
      • gcb0 6y ago
        i did not but i do not pay youtube premium. Mostly because all that money will go to RIAA and other DMCA backers, not content creators. Specially not the ones everyone here watches. Nobody uses youtube because they love it. Everyone uses youtube because google effectively killed all the competition by sliding billions of investor money to DMCA backers. And well, this one time it worked out nice for them, i guess. But it is not a business practice I will support. Fortunately, i'm technical enough to play their cat and mouse game to consume creators who are hostage to their monopoly on discovery.
      • drbacon 6y ago
        Ha! People are downvoting your comment too. I am also interested in a civil discussion about why people believe they are entitled to the content and service without contributing back. Maybe downvotes are easier than thoughtful replies.
        • ferzul 6y ago
          See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880582 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23880582
• WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
  If I could guarantee the ad revenue went to the creator and not a company hitting the creator with bullshit strikes, sure!
  • Sebb767 6y ago
    You mean the company paying for the storage, conversion, bandwidth, global availability and upkeep? I mean, the creator should have its share, but it's not like YouTube does nothing.
    • sudosysgen 6y ago
      No, a company such as Sony Entertainment or the like that takes all of the ad revenue from a melody that vaguely resembles a copyrighted song. Yes, that happens. Otherwise, there's no issue with YouTube getting add money.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
• zem 6y ago
  a good trick is to mute the sound and focus on the countdown button on the right hand side. that way you don't really see the ad at all but if anyone is collecting metrics on whether the ad was displayed they will register it
• keb_ 6y ago
  It's certainly not a popular opinion, but it's definitely an uninformed opinion. The aim of NewPipe is not to "stick it to the man" or even to advertisers, it's to create a superior viewing experience that removes much of the bloat of Youtube's official app, and also being light on system resources. Whereas the official app used to crash and warm up my Moto G5 Plus, NewPipe has been running like a dream for years.
  • namdnay 6y ago
    Well yeah but it also removes ads... which are how content creators and the people who build and maintain the platform infrastructure make a living.
    • keb_ 6y ago
      Well yeah, but the parent comment was missing the forest for the trees. The value of using such an app exceeds beyond its ad-blocking features.
    • tux1968 6y ago
      Not that it addresses paying for the infrastructure, but many of the creators I watch are now reading ad copy within their videos and are otherwise sponsored directly.
    • anoncake 6y ago
      It doesn't remove ads, it just doesn't play them. Why do you expect the developer spend effort on funneling money to Google while degrading the viewing experience?
      • namdnay 6y ago
        Because they’re the ones hosting and serving the video?
        • anoncake 6y ago
          No one forces them to do that. They're free to charge for their services.
• II2II 6y ago
  As entitled as it may be, I will assert my right to limit the data I send to Google. It is a mistake to assume that everyone blocks ads because they do not want to watch ads. In my case, it is playing a game of damage control with a major corporation that has the ability to connect my activities across much of the web. Other people legitimately point to the cost of bandwidth. I am sure that other reasons exist. It is also to the benefit if creators if they diversify their revenue streams. At the moment, they are far too dependent upon decisions made by Google. Some have realized this by requesting donations from users, merchandising, baking in ads from sponsors, and promoting alternate distribution mechanisms. While seeking out other sources of revenues creates problems for people who are just starting out, it is pretty much a necessity for people who are seeking to earn money from their work.
  • kbenson 6y ago
    > It is also to the benefit if creators if they diversify their revenue streams. Watching content on YouTube while blocking ads does not encourage creators to go to other platforms. You've already consumed their product, thus lessening demand, so there's less reason to put it on another platform. It's not likely you'll go watch it on Vimeo after they upload it there when you've already seen it on YouTube. Creators may be better off with a donation and merchandise revenue stream. Describing your actions as "benefitting" them by helping them see this by depriving them of revenue from you for their content is a slightly odd take though.
    • II2II 6y ago
      > Describing your actions as "benefitting" them by helping them see this by depriving them of revenue from you for their content is a slightly odd take though. The claim was that creators would benefit from diversifying, not that my actions were benefiting them. I was quite clear that my motivations were related to Google.
      • kbenson 6y ago
        Fair enough, I was focused on the first part of that sentence to the exclusion of the rest of it, which is my mistake.
• rv-de 6y ago
  > I imagine this will be an unpopular opinion here though. I don't like it one bit -> down vote
• Krasnol 6y ago
  Oh we can discuss payment for google services as soon as they pay me for all the data they collect on me all over the internet and my phone - it isn't that hard.