15 ms·
Apart from the Youtube stuff, the post also highlights something else, entitlement towards free services like uBlock origin. > It’s one thing to play cat and m
by crop_rotation 3y ago
Apart from the Youtube stuff, the post also highlights something else, entitlement towards free services like uBlock origin.
> It’s one thing to play cat and mouse with YouTube. It’s quite another to deal with a wave of angry users.
> And then one of the moderators actually deleted their Reddit account. “The ID in the post wasn’t updated because my mother was hospitalized,” they said.
It’s sad to see them leave because of some drive-by comments — new users who sign up for Reddit, leave their comments,
I have seen this becoming more and more common on open source projects and totally free services, where people act as if they are entitled to something as if it is their god given right. The people doing public services like uBlock origin can only take so much from the mob.
- philipwhiuk 3y agoIf they didn't have such entitlement they wouldn't be blocking the ads in the first place.
- hotnfresh 3y ago"I sent you data so you have to use all of it exactly the way I want" is the entitled perspective.
- frebdo 3y agoAs opposed to the so un-entitled "customers have no right to negotiate use of their data". ACCEPT THE EULA PLEB
- pohuing 3y agoNonsense. I provide a service in exchange for payment, then not paying is entitlement.
- wredue 3y agoThe problem is that for YouTube to get that payment, I have to give them, and other ad networks a major view in to my whole life. Ad networks are currently scum of the earth, easily giving lawyers a good name. If ad networks were riddled with crime, invasion of privacy, and other bullshit, people would be much more willing to entertain them. Today though, they’re obnoxious AND invade your privacy AND may actually just a virus AND are of questionable legality or outright illegal. It’s not just about funding the platform. You’re not “getting a service in exchange for payment”. Or at least, that is massively understating the behaviour of the scum of the earth ad networks.
- gwd 3y ago> The problem is that for YouTube to get that payment, I have to give them, and other ad networks a major view in to my whole life. Wait... does that mean, Google could offer "DoubleClick Premuim", where I pay to not see any DoubleClick ads whatsoever, anywhere on the web, but the websites I visited would still get their funding? I think I'd pay $10/mo for that.
- ndriscoll 3y agoPay-per-view creates a perverse incentive to make SEO noise and make it more difficult to find what you want. You would be mostly paying to make your life worse. Better to just block ads, encourage and help others to block ads, and hope those sites die.
- gwd 3y agoI certainly understand the perverse incentive, but that's already the incentive we're working under. And how do you propose we fairly compensate people for the value they've created when making content? How can we support artists, journalists, and so on to do the work that we enjoy? If everyone did as you suggest, spammy SEO sites will be the last to die, because the effort invested to make them is so much lower than the effort of quality content.
- ndriscoll 3y agoIf they're worthwhile and looking to be paid, you pay them. If they're not worth paying, they go out of business, and SNR improves. From what I've seen on youtube, almost all professional "content creators" make very shallow entertainment (or thinly veiled ads), which at least personally usually just makes me feel disappointed in myself for having wasted my time if I indulge.
- matheusmoreira 3y ago> And how do you propose we fairly compensate people for the value they've created when making content? > How can we support artists, journalists, and so on to do the work that we enjoy? We either pay them before the work is completed or in an ongoing manner to support their activities. Patronage. Crowdfunding. Plenty of people seem to be achieving success via platforms like Patreon and GitHub Sponsors. This is ethical.
- ndriscoll 3y agoIf your form of payment is running malware, don't be surprised that security software (recommended by the FBI mind you[0]) blocks it. Same as if your form of payment were running a crypto miner or exploiting local IoT devices to set up a botnet. Don't be surprised also that if your business is distributing malware that people won't be very sympathetic toward you when they take the bait you offer without running the payload. [0] https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2022/PSA221221 https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2022/PSA221221
- pohuing 3y agoAren't ads in YouTube locked down to displaying a video and some plain text you fill into a template. Doesn't sound like a great attack vector. I understand this for shady file sharing sites, but in the case of yt I'm not so sure.
- ndriscoll 3y agoAdware and spyware are malware. Youtube delivers both. uBlock blocks them.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoAttention and personal information are not a valid payment methods. Either charge money up front or accept the risk we're going to delete your ads and block your tracking.
- pohuing 3y agoWhy aren't they valid payment methods?
- matheusmoreira 3y agoBecause our minds are sacred. They're not empty spaces they get to insert brands and products into at will. I consider that a form of violence. Their surveillance capitalism should be literally illegal. They should be scrambling to forget all about us the second we're done transacting with them, not amassing vast amounts of information into data lakes.
- happytoexplain 3y agoYou're implying that my not watching your short video that you sent to me is equivalent to my not paying for a service you just rendered. The fact that this extremist opinion is anything but ultra-fringe is evidence of the deeply greedy, entitled, irrational, antagonistic, dangerous, bully-ish relationship some businesses have with citizens. The internet is not a platform for exchanging services for the promise that the user viewed a short video. It is a general purpose platform, on which you happen to be able to almost implement said exchange. The fact that it's "almost" is not the user's fault - you are simply trying to do something at odds with the platform you are using. You are free to use a different platform, or adjust your strategy on the current platform in an honest manner. But trying to alter the premise of the internet in order to remove that "almost" is immoral. If you don't feel that way, that's a pretty fundamental disagreement that is likely unreconcilable.
- pohuing 3y agoMost Internet traffic happens with the agreement that you watch ads alongside the content you actually want to see. This is not a fringe position, it's the absolute majority of all traffic. If you don't want to see the ads, you can just not use my service, what's so hard to understand there.
- blooalien 3y agoThat's actually a mentality that was "bolted on" by the advertising industry after the fact, once they realized how utterly wrong they were about their assertion that "The Internet is just a passing fad. Nobody will ever want to advertise on the Internet." (That's an almost exact quote from a lot of advertising folks I talked to back in the early days of the Internet, when websites were just starting to get popular.) Prior to their involvement in the Internet, it was purely just a network of networks, not a giant global advertising platform. They "jumped on the bandwagon" and corrupted it to their needs, and everyone else's wants and needs be damned, and then they convinced everyone "It's always been that way".
- account42 3y agoThere is no such agreement, only a one-sided demand. Don't be so surprised if more and more of those on the other side respond with "LOL. LMAO, even."
- happytoexplain 3y agoThe technology that constitutes the internet is fundamentally incompatible with this opinion, despite that businesses would absolutely love if they could convince people otherwise. Trying to prevent me from modifying whatever you send me for my purely private use is mostly infeasible and potentially immoral, regardless of how that simple reality affects your business model. It is not the user's responsibility to alter their behavior to support a business's strategy. If a video hosting platform is mathematically unsustainable with the number of people who choose to view ads, along with any other sources of income, then that's just the way it is: Unsustainable (However, the answer to the question is: It's sustainable. Leadership just might not like what that means in practice).
- nvm0n2 3y agoIt isn't incompatible actually. Remote attestation exists and platforms that allow rampant ad blocking will go the same way as PC gaming did due to rampant piracy and cheating: become a second tier platform that gets some stuff late and other stuff never :(
- anonymousab 3y agoLike those entitled tv viewers who switch the channel.
- jasonboyd 3y agoI allowed ads for a long time, believing a site should be able to earn revenue for the content they provide. I started blocking ads when ad networks failed to properly vet their ads and allowed malicious ads to be distributed.
- paulryanrogers 3y agoDo you allow ads on sites with more responsible ads?
- blooalien 3y agoYep. All two of them. ;~)
- jasonboyd 3y agoHonest answer, I have no interest in doing that research. I wouldn't know how to make that determination with any degree of confidence. Even if I could, I feel like it would require that I constantly monitor how a site delivers its ads. Fortunately, I am at a point in my life that if I really like something, and they offer an ad-free subscription, I can support them that way.
- account42 3y ago> when ad networks failed to properly vet their ads and allowed malicious ads to be distributed All ads are inherently malicious.
- e2le 3y agoAs a user, I have a right to control what is executed and rendered on my devices. It's not the user's fault that internet advertisements have become a security threat, a significant visual nuisance, and now an environmental issue [1]. Additionally, for those with neurological issues, I imagine using a browser without content blocking must be unnecessarily difficult. It would be a tragedy if these users lost control over the content rendered in their browser. Additionally, for those with family members who struggle with discerning scams and other forms of manipulative advertising, content blocking is a legitimate tool for mitigating this risk. [1]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340321563_Energy_Conservation_with_Open_Source_Ad_Blockers https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340321563_Energy_Co...
- frebdo 3y agoThese services have had years to set up privacy-preserving micropayment systems. Instead they want your PI and a monthly fee, all the while using network effects to create defacto monopolies. Why are these big tech monopolists so entitled?
- crop_rotation 3y agoI am talking about free and open source products like ublock origin and not YouTube itself. Entitilement towards youtube can be debated, entitlement toward uBlock origin is just bad behaviour.
- LordShredda 3y agoIf we're going through the hassle of micropayments and other unnecessary beggar stuff, when why rely on some big company to take a cut of the money? Just setup a bank account and host your videos on a simple web hoster. If you're not willing to learn how to use wordpress then don't complain about youtube putting ads.
- gchamonlive 3y agoWe could apply LLMs to act as an interface with the angry crowd, rephrasing angry comments into constructive criticism and summarizing needs. In turn LLMs could be applied to synthesise development progress and answer the angry crowd. Everyone would be happy.
- djbusby 3y agoOr, use an LLM to detect angry comments and delete them before any humans have to deal with the BS
- gchamonlive 3y agoYou don't need llm for that I think. But sure, if you want people to just leave you. It is a pain but a part of scaling is dealing with a crowd. And I would prefer LLMs to hallucinate a nice constructive criticism than to delete comments by mistake.
- djbusby 3y agoI'm pretty familiar with scale and open source. Entitled jerks can fuck off. They take away from your passion and those helpful & respectful users. I draw a hard line there - not letting haters get in the way of love.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoor use LLM's to ruby my feet before bed since apparently LLM's can, and should, be applied to everything. I can't wait for the day an LLM can wipe my ass for me.
- Tao3300 3y agoNo. Because then angry people are rewarded for being angry, and that's not happy.
- gchamonlive 3y agoThey are not angry because they are rewarded for being angry. And an answer is far for being a reward. A negative answer is still an answer.
- thomastjeffery 3y ago> especially when you consider that there are only two people on the uBO team Why in the world are there only two? That's your problem right there. How many competent devs are right here in the comment section? Why is it so difficult to get their help?
- drivebycomment 3y agouBO readme https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/README.md makes it clear this is not for profit; > Free. Open-source. For users by users. No donations sought. > If you ever want to contribute something, think about the people working hard to maintain the filter lists you are using, which are available to use by all for free.
- zimpenfish 3y ago> Why in the world are there only two? You may have missed "there are only two people on the uBO team dealing with YouTube" rather than "on the whole team".
- thomastjeffery 3y agoIndeed I did.
- deadmutex 3y ago> I have seen this becoming more and more common on open source projects and totally free services, where people act as if they are entitled to something as if it is their god given right. Do you count YouTube as a "free service" (with ads) in this case? I wonder if there is an overlap with people that expect free stuff and people that use uBO on YouTube. YT does offer most users YT premium, which gives users an ad free experience. Disclosure: I worked at YT in the past, but still pay for premium because I don't want the ads.
- ozarker 3y agoI think he’s referring to the Adblock as the free service here.
- crop_rotation 3y agoCorrect.
- ysavir 3y agoI think deadmutex is pointing at a bit of irony and hypocrisy at how we're saying it's bad for people to feel entitled to free adblock support (and ask for more) but champion people feeling entitled to free videos by blocking the ads or refusing to pay for no ads.
- ndriscoll 3y agoOne is free high quality security software, and the author doesn't even accept donations. The other is "free" videos that come with malware.
- pb7 3y agoOne is the best, most reliable video serving platform on the planet and the other is a scriptkiddie’s project that evidently doesn’t even work and he’s so salty about it that he had to make a post.
- AshamedCaptain 3y agoBut I don't understand why this would be annoying at all to the developers. I have absolutely zero conundrum with just ignoring a request if I'm not in the mood to do it. Most of them I even delete outright, but I still have requests that were sent to me in 00s that I'm keeping just in case one day "I'm in the mood". And yes, people request (demand!) crazy things, and have done so for decades. There are even "If you don't do it, then $threat" guys. And my area of software is generally industrial/professional....
- taftster 3y agoI mean, you still read them though, right? And you somewhat sort out the ones based on how much of a buffoon the user is? Maybe someone with excellent writing skills and having demonstrated reading all the documentation and FAQs is still asking for help in a respectful and intelligent way, and so maybe you engage. All of that is mental tax. And it gets tiring, even if you're mostly ignoring the request. It's still tiring even when you're in the mood for it. Just saying, it's a hard thing and I definitely sympathize for the way which open source / open project / volunteer collaborators get treated.
- AshamedCaptain 3y ago> Maybe someone with excellent writing skills and having demonstrated reading all the documentation and FAQs is still asking for help in a respectful and intelligent way, and so maybe you engage. You mean it gets tiring to find the entertaining messages instead of the random trash? Because it doesn't matter how much effort the sender has put, or how intelligent his request/question/contribution/comment is. If I'm not in the mood, I will ignore it. I'm doing it for the fun, not to provide free support, so I will only read stuff that is fun to me. Obviously being an intelligent question is likely to add points, but it's not always the case. It's not like this is race to see who is the least Torvalds-like of the bunch. It's 100% OK to just ignore everything. The people who complain "I had to moderate comments while my mother was in the hospital!" look like they have an addiction, or a runaway hobby. I even have an online board for this sort of requests and generally I just read the subject lines. Fortunately for them, once your software is popular enough, a lot of people seem to like to reply to other people's questions, for some reason.
- dessant 3y agoIt also feels awful to be called a beggar and a panhandler just because you're trying to find a balance and build a sustainable project by having a donation popup (that can be disabled) in your software. This disgusting review was sitting at the top of the review page for Search by Image on the Chrome Web Store: https://i.imgur.com/P1QU176.png https://i.imgur.com/P1QU176.png This person has edited their review a couple of times in the past year which pushed it to the top, and also emailed me with a similar demeaning message. I've reported it to Google staff, and they thought that the review did not break their content policy, so they did not remove it. So yeah, it hurts when you're offering so much of your free time for so little benefits, or none at all, and a couple of entitled jerks still manage to poison the well for everyone. With each abusive message the thought of no longer offering up your time and the results of your work for free grows stronger and stronger. It's no surprise that people either quit, sell their open source projects, or stop offering it for free.
- least 3y ago> It also feels awful to be called a beggar and a panhandler just because you're trying to find a balance and build a sustainable project by having a donation popup (that can be disabled) in your software. Interrupting someone's browsing experience to ask for donations is both providing a poor user experience and is in poor taste. I think it's fine to solicit donations in the browserAction popup, the settings page or even the initial installation window, but doing so elsewhere would deservedly be criticized.
- dessant 3y agoA donation popup is shown once a year, and only when you use the extension, it does not randomly interrupt your browsing experience. Te popup can even be disabled from the extension's options. It is similar to a donation prompt being shown when an app is opened, once a year. That's what this person was complaining about, that they've seen a donation prompt once when they've initiated an image search with the extension. There is no winning with some of these people, they want your time and the results of your work, they want it for free, and they want it to be neatly packaged and presented exactly the way that is most convenient for them. If you deviate even a little bit from their unreasonable expectations, you'll be promptly attacked. Once your projects grow past a certain size, threats of physical violence also become a regular occurrence, here's a milder email I have received last year: https://i.imgur.com/LKJQq1p.png https://i.imgur.com/LKJQq1p.png This kind of harassment is happening every 1-2 weeks on different channels, we keep these private messages because everything has to be documented in case law enforcement needs to be involved.
- plasticeagle 3y agoIronically, "entitlement towards free services like uBlock origin" is exactly the kind of sentiment that leads to the use of ad-blockers in the first place. So it can scarcely be surprising that the sorts of people blocking youtube abs because they want the content for free, are the same sorts of people that feel entitled to uBlock Origin's services for free. If you want youtube's content without ads, then pay for it. If you despise ads, but refuse to pay, then don't watch youtube.
- goalieca 3y ago> Ironically, "entitlement towards free services like uBlock origin" is exactly the kind of sentiment that leads to the use of ad-blockers in the first place Entitlement towards tracking me across the internet and delivering malware is why I use an adblocker.
- sofixa 3y agoPrecisely why I use an adblocker but still pay for services thay provide that option (like YouTube Premium, Nebula, various Patreons).
- jonathanstrange 3y agoWhy can't I just use an ad blocker? My machine, my choice of what and how I display things on it. You haven't presented any argument why people shouldn't use ad blockers. I suppose the pejorative term "entitled" is supposed to replace the actual argument?
- matheusmoreira 3y agoI hope the people developing uBlock Origin and all the filter lists are alright. They're my heroes. No one deserves this treatment, least of all them. I like to take a moment to publicly thank them whenever the opportunity to do so arises. Thank you so much!
- blooalien 3y agoEvery single time I meet one of the developers of an open source project that has benefited me in some way, I always make it a point to tell them "Thank you" and let them know how (and how much) their generosity benefited me, and how much I really appreciate it. I also make efforts to help out in any ways I'm able. Sometimes that's cash (when I've got some available to spare), and sometimes it's just helping out in support channels, or bugreports / pull requests, etc.
- chii 3y agoThank you for making the world a better place!
- blooalien 3y agoNot I, thank you. The folks who create and release open source software (which I myself have not done in many years now). I'm just reacting appropriately to their generosity which is actively contributing to the world being just that little bit better because of their actions / decision. :~)
- matheusmoreira 3y agoYes! Their generosity is an inspiration to me. Open source technology is empowering and world changing. I really admire these people.
- blooalien 3y agoYou and me both. They're the people keeping alive the original "hacker spirit" from "ye olden days" of computers, back when it was all new and exciting to have an actual "home computer" on your desk at home. Almost all software back then was "open source" (though we didn't call it that yet). :P
- Gigachad 3y agoOf course Ublock users think they are entitled to free stuff when the whole point of the tool is getting free access to sites without paying for ad free.
- JohnTHaller 3y agoIt's unfortunately been this way for a long, long time. Though it does seem to have gotten more frequent in recent years. I've been running PortableApps.com for nearly 2 decades and, in that time, I've been sworn at, harassed, doxxed, received death and rape threats, etc. My personal favorite was a user who accused me of donating a kidney to my father because I thought I was better than everyone else and to try to garner donations. Despite the fact that I donated it years before PortableApps.com existed. Just this week I had someone mad a meet for not updating an app due to the fact that I am recovering from a concussion.
- mixmastamyk 3y agoThe common advice to delete toxic people from your life applies to those online as well. I don't think of this as a FLOSS-centric problem. Instead of taking it personally I try to think of a suffering person lashing out at the world attempting to spread misery. Then I hit the delete/block button and move on.
- firexcy 3y agoThank you for your work at PortableApps. Windows isn’t my daily OS but when I get my hands on it from time to time, the apps you pack are what keep me sane.
- JohnTHaller 3y agoYou're welcome! I'm glad it's been helpful for you.
- fennecbutt 3y agoDoesn't the same apply to YouTube then? People who want to block ads are entitled imo. Those people outright refuse to pay or to simply not use the service if they don't like ads. And it enrages so many people when this is pointed out. Google made a mistake in offering free drive, gmail, Google docs, etc etc. Imagine telling someone in the 90s all the shit we get for free with a couple ads/our data being sold. People have free will, they should use it, and stop using these services if they don't like ads or want their data sold. Pay for email instead of your Gmail. Everyone refuses to do this, they'd rather shake hands with a devil and then cry when their soul is taken.
- FuckButtons 3y agoYou say that as though there’s a viable alternative, which is precisely googles business model.
- kerkeslager 3y ago> People have free will, they should use it, and stop using these services if they don't like ads or want their data sold. People have free will, and they should use it the way you want them to? No thanks, I don't agree to the rules set forth by the ad-supported companies. I think I'll use my free will to install an adblocker. I don't use Gmail any more, but that's because there are viable alternatives for people with my technical abilities. Not everyone is a software dev. The tradeoffs for most people switching off Gmail aren't acceptable. When the choices are "conform to what this company wants" or "don't have working email", that's not freedom of choice. Freedom requires real viable alternatives. Only in late-stage-capitalist hellholes like Hacker News is this sort of choice considered freedom. I literally read someone on HN recently saying that if people didn't want to pay tens of thousands yearly for insulin they were welcome to not, i.e. the choices are pay a pharma company or die. That's a much more extreme example, but it's pretty typical of HN these days.
- josteink 3y ago> Those people outright refuse to pay or to simply not use the service if they don't like ads. And it enrages so many people when this is pointed out. YouTube used to offer “Premium Lite” which was reasonably priced and only offered ad-free YouTube. But now Google has shut down that subscription and only offer is one more than twice the price which includes lots of things people don’t want. I can see why some people refuse to pay for that.
- high_5 3y ago> I have seen this becoming more and more common on open source projects and totally free services, where people act as if they are entitled to something as if it is their god given right. The people doing public services like uBlock origin can only take so much from the mob. Only donators should be allowed to review the service and complain then.
- ce4 3y agoGuess why gorhill ended uMatrix....