6 ms·
Show HN: Tell YouTube Ads to Fuck Off
- hatingisok 3y ago[dead]
- mooncakes_ooohh 3y agoIt's a pity that using uBlock Origin means I'll never see this.
- artursapek 3y agoPay for YouTube. It’s worth it.
- Waterluvian 3y agoIf only YouTube gave the creators a reasonable share.
- tomschwiha 3y agoFrom my knowledge a lot of YouTubers get paid by advertisers and they don't even let the viewers know. The single view is not much worth - I estimate the streaming costs are quite high (think of all the bandwith you need for 4k/8k streaming with low latency). Sadly I couldn't find numbers for YT profit.
- Euphorbium 3y agoHere is a solution: make high res streaming separate price tier, or remove it.
- kirab 3y agoThey do, AFAIK creators get much more money from Premium viewers than ad-supported viewers. And not just relatively, sometimes in absolute numbers as well.
- Waterluvian 3y agoThat’s the kind of comparison YouTube hopes you do. Compared to patronage systems, it’s a pittance. You may as well try to pay your favourite shows directly rather than give your money to Google and have them redistribute it on your behalf.
- artursapek 3y agoGoogle is providing a service here. I think people have gotten so used to the internet they forget the massive costs involved in running a website like YouTube.
- Waterluvian 3y agoThe cable companies wish to convey the same.
- jsnell 3y agoWhat revenue share split do you think they have right now? What share would you consider reasonable?
- pacifika 3y agoThe payments will increase until we get ads with them
- dwighttk 3y agoThe payments and ads will increase until morale improves
- fullarr 3y agoIf you've been paying attention to the industry you'd know we're going to have ads on the paid tier also - Netflix - Hulu - Prime (coming)
- harry8 3y agoIf you've been paying attention to the industry you'd know driving customers to bit torrent is suicidal.
- OtomotO 3y agoWhich means I simply quit... I mean, I actually did already :)
- Fnoord 3y agoNetflix has it on their cheapest tier. Prime already has ads but for their own content only. I don't have Hulu. Either way, you can always just pirate stuff with Sonarr, Radarr, and a Usenet server account. Black Friday is coming then you can get huge discount on Usenet server account / block accounts, Torznab/Newznab server (you can use SpotWeb, too), VPN.
- Fnoord 3y agoWay too expensive (unless you are able to pay in a currency of a third world country which is what I do). They still do tracking on you. You still get sponsored ads by 'creators', so you'll need Sponsorblock as well. For Android, consider using "NewPipe x SponsorBlock x Return YouTube Dislike" [1] [1] https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe
- artursapek 3y agoI don’t mind creators having sponsors. I skip past it if I’m not interested. How do you people expect all of this to be free?
- Fnoord 3y ago(I've not once seen a sponsor I'd be interested in. Many of them are scams, US-centric, or just stuff I don't want/need and I certainly wouldn't be stimulated to purchase something because of a sponsorship.) I don't expect that. I, like everyone else in this world, have limited amounts of time and money, and I'd like to spend them wisely with the tools I have available.
- tomrod 3y agoWhen will YouTube pay me for watching ads?
- paulcole 3y agoIsn’t that what the videos are for? What you get in exchange for watching ads?
- jitl 3y agoWhy would they do that? No reason. You get paid with the video stream. That’s your payment.
- tomrod 3y agoWhy do they get all the negotiating power in this arrangement? They should pay me to watch ads. I'd watch more videos. Win-win for them. Otherwise they have polluted their value prop -- to be a video sharing platform, and my content that I share, your content that you share, and all your watching patterns data, which has value, is stolen without recompense. Please. Don't "but you get something for FREE" me -- we're the product and that ain't right. Youtube should be a service -- pay for or not -- not a package delivery vector for ~~meme viruses~~ content-free and meaningless adverts.
- jitl 3y agoIf it costs YouTube 2 cents to stream a video to you, and they get 3 cents for delivering the ads with it, let’s say they could pay you half a cent and keep half a cent of profit for themselves. For that to be worth it, you’d need to watch 2x the videos (and ads) for them to break even on the deal, and more than 2x for the deal to make more than the current deal today (you watch 1x and they keep the whole 1 cent). Would actually watch 2x more content to earn those pennies? These numbers are made up, but explain a possible model of why YouTube doesn't try to induce more views with a monetary incentive. > Otherwise they have polluted their value prop > Please. Don't "but you get something for FREE" me -- we're the product and that ain't right. I think the economic deal is clear to you. You don’t get something for free. You’re paying by watching ads (same as OTA TV broadcast for the last 60 years) and with the collection of your habit data (modern surveillance capitalism). In exchange YouTube serves you videos. If you don’t like the deal, and they won’t negotiate with you, then you should walk away. Personally I pay the $14/mo to not see ads; YouTube doesn’t produce content directly but they incentivize the production of a lot of niche content creators who otherwise would never get a deal from Netflix etc, and the YouTube mobile app is the most reliable one I use (better than Netflix, much better than Hulu).
- Winsaucerer 3y agoIt's so expensive. I have multiple people in the house, and I already pay for music with Apple. It's a big price to just get no ads and nothing else.
- mattrighetti 3y agoI pay $6.99 for the student plan which is not that bad. Since I got AdGuardHome on my network ads started to be very very very aggressive on YouTube so I just gave up and paid for it since I use it extensively during the day.
- DrReachAround 3y agoIt's not "so expensive". It's a couple of cups of coffee from Starbucks, for 720 hours of content per month per person. Even if you factor in 8 hours a day of sleep you could watch it for 16 hours per day per person for one low price. That's about US$0.01 per hour.
- Winsaucerer 3y agoI obviously don't watch anywhere near as much YouTube as you do. The price is higher than I pay for any other streaming service. I don't drink coffee, but a quick look suggests it's 4 to 6 cups of Starbucks coffee here in Australia. I remind again that this is the price I'd need to pay for my household, not just one individual (just like the other streaming services I subscribe to which is used by the whole household).
- OtomotO 3y agoI remember 2004, when ads on the web were incredibly annoying. There was (loud) sound, and half the information was buried under ads for certain pages. Me being a teenager back then, decided I've had enough after a late night gaming session with friends ended with a stupid website screaming in my ear to buy a new car. I installed an ad blocker and since then my web experience is (mostly) ad free. When I see ads I immediately know what NOT to buy. I feel I've already paid with my lifetime, so I am not going to add (haha) money on top
- otteromkram 3y agoHow have you paid them with your lifetime (whatever that means)? Especially since you've been actively avoiding advertisements. Follow-up: If you like someone's YouTube content, how would you suggest they be compensated?
- fileeditview 3y agoThe catch is that you pay Google and not the content creators..
- frabcus 3y agoPatreon of content creator that I like.
- AuthorizedCust 3y ago> If you like someone's YouTube content, how would you suggest they be compensated? Not my problem to solve. Perhaps content creators or those who host their content can find less offensive ways of monetizing?
- DrReachAround 3y agoSure, they could charge you per view, which is being done indirectly now through ads. You're not entitled to free content no matter how much you think you are.
- Xelbair 3y agoI would if they didn't datamine me so hard. simple as. Also i get to chose what runs on my machines, not them. Wait, now that i think about it i wouldn't. I would rather give that money directly to few creators i watch, instead of them getting 0.01% of that.
- RektBoy 3y ago.
- haunter 3y agoI'd consider it if it was a part of Google One for the same price
- jamesponddotco 3y agoSure, if they also stop harvesting my data after I pay.
- zecg 3y agoNote: you have to disable Ublock Origin in order to be able to use this.
- b3lvedere 3y ago"What does this do? It replaces the text 'skip ads' with 'Fuck Off'. That's it " Okay then. Fun for 30 seconds. :)
- gnuj3 3y agoWhat ads is he talking about?
- paulcole 3y agoThe ones that are so offensive to Hacker News commenters that they will rail wildly against them, call YouTube’s business practices scummy because of them, and make a new hobby of blocking them rather than pay $14 a month for YouTube Premium.
- gnuj3 3y agoI havent seen an advertisement on YT in about 20 years. Did none of these people ever heard of uBlock Origin?
- raincole 3y agoSuch a snobby comment. Do you really think people on HN don't know uBlock Origin? People make their own adblockers because YouTube and uBlock Origin have been in an arm race for years. Sometimes uBlock Origin doesn't update fast enough to respond to YouTube's changes. And this thread isn't even about ad blockers...
- neonihil 3y agoLoving this.
- stefanos82 3y agoI wonder what could happen should they paywall it instead. How many would they continue using it, 5%? ~20% max the most?
- RektBoy 3y ago.
- nextlevelwizard 3y agoStop watching then
- DrReachAround 3y agoI presume this means you're now pirating. If so, then you've admitted you're a criminal. Nice work. If not, the what are you using your NAS for? Purchased content like I am?
- RektBoy 3y ago.
- sun_har 3y agoAm I the only one that is a little turned off by how everyone feels they deserve everything for free?
- thrownaway561 3y agono... you are not... without some sort of revenue, youtube would go away and then what?
- Nextgrid 3y agoSomething else less greedy would surely take its place.
- belltaco 3y agoHard disk storage isn't getting cheaper at the same pace as earlier(before the Thailand floods 10 to 15 years ago IIRC). Bandwidth is also expensive, especially across the world. Microsoft threw in the towel in a related space(live streaming) with Mixer. Twitch wasn't really profitable for a long time IIRC, if it now is(even after adding a lot of unskippable ads and adblocker blocking). Kick is bankrolled by online casino gambling profits and is probably a huge money sink. If something was feasible, surely the people who hang out on HN would be all over it trying to build something. Even if something does get built, it will go the same route eventually.
- pastacacioepepe 3y agoAm I the only one that is a little turned off by how everything nice on Earth needs to be monetized to death? It's not like Youtube isn't profitable already.
- infecto 3y agoI don't think its a good argument to say "because x is profitable they should not do y". Sure I can dream of a world where actors do not try to extract profit where possible but its not realstic. Whats the alternative?
- drcongo 3y agoThis YouTube war on adblockers is going well isn't it.
- carabiner 3y agowow so edgy
- preya2k 3y agoThe irony of a website for an ad-blocking extension showing it's own Ad (blocking modal for the author's side project).
- masukomi 3y agoYou know there aren't ads if you actually pay for it right? I agree the ads are obnoxious, but hosting YouTube is incredibly expensive, and online ads are incredibly cheap so... Even if they _weren't_ being greedy there would need to be A LOT of ads to compensate for the hosting & engineering costs. Like... If you hate the ads THAT MUCH, but want to continue using the service, why not just pay for the service? (side note: you also get streaming music (YouTube Music) when you pay for YouTube which is a nice bonus.)
- raincole 3y agoBut you're not just paying for the bandwidth. You're paying for the bandwidth that used by others who use ad blockers too. It's a prisoners dilemma. The honest ones (who pay for YouTube premium) lost the most.
- TheLoafOfBread 3y agoAre you sure that there won't be any ads in the future? Because it already repeatedly happened that that paid subscription was without ads, until it wasn't.
- HDThoreaun 3y agoWhy does that matter? Youtube premium isn't locking you into anything. If you decide you no longer like the service you can get rid of it.
- TheLoafOfBread 3y agoIt does matter a lot. If I do not want ads but get them later, even as a paying customer, then there is no reason to pay for no ads.
- HDThoreaun 3y agoBut you won't get them as a paying customer, because you'll stop paying if they try to show you ads...
- thrownaway561 3y agothis literally is the dumbest things i've ever seen. I'm surprised this even got attention on hacker news.
- joshfarrant 3y agoYouTube charge different amounts for Premium in different currencies. If you appear to be purchasing from Turkey (Türkiye), for example, then you’ll only be paying 29.99 Turkish Lira, or about £0.90, per month. Well worth it for an ad-free experience (and picture-in-picture) in the native app imo.
- infecto 3y agoWhats the alternative to YouTube then? I get it, some people really don't like ads and especially do not like Google's data collection tactics. Whats the alternative then, in the YouTube model they need to pay the creator, pay for the associated costs of running the site and pay themselves. Lets not even go down the road that they already make so much money that they could play less ads or do xyz, I don't think that is a constructive argument. I learned of an alternative recently, Nebula. One issue there is discovery, I consume a bit of youtube and had never heard of it before. The only reason I noticed it was Strange Parts mentioned it in his last episode and that he posted a new video there that will not show up on youtube for a bit. The first problem is discovery. YouTube is really great for content creators as they can get discovered with the massive amount of viewership. The second problem is how much it pays. I tried to get a better idea of Nebula's model but this recent thread with the founder really did not answer the question for me. Felt like a redirection then just getting down into the economics of it. I would be curious what the actual per viewer income is between the two. We can immediately assume though that YouTube is paying more in total. They have the network with all the viewers. https://www.reddit.com/r/Nebula/comments/16qeup8/does_nebula_pay_creators_more_than_youtube/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Nebula/comments/16qeup8/does_nebula... At the end of the day I would happily use something else but imo there really is nothing else that exactly serves the purpose. The majority of content creators are on YouTube in some form with only a very minority that have totally left it and done their own thing.