4 ms·
I think you make a good point but I think part of the problem is that it is difficult to get people to pay for something that they have gotten used to getting f
by bigthymer 3y ago
I think you make a good point but I think part of the problem is that it is difficult to get people to pay for something that they have gotten used to getting for free.
- crop_rotation 3y agoThat is correct, and sometimes such free services go away if they don't make money in the long term. I don't want the same to happen to YouTube.
- Gigachad 3y agoIt makes no sense to pay for YouTube premium when you can use ad blockers. Which is why google is removing that option.
- musictubes 3y agoUnless you want to compensate the creators of the videos. Both Youtube itself and video creators need to be paid for them to keep going.
- midoridensha 3y agoOne thing I haven't seen discussed here is: how exactly are they going to remove that option? Are they going to embed the ads into the video stream on-the-fly somehow?
- crop_rotation 3y agoOne way would be to require logins and then timeout accounts that behave abnormally wrt ads. Given that WASM will be mainstream soon, it will be hard to monkey patch the code to prevent all this.
- HDThoreaun 3y agoYoutube can tell if an ad is blocked. They can then refuse to serve the video. Instead replacing it with an image that says "please turn off your adblocker" or the like.
- spacebanana7 3y agoI imagine they’d prevent the page from rendering and display a warning when an Adblocker is detected. Similar to what some publishers currently do.