5 ms·

No one is entitled to YT videos without ads. But at the same time, Google is not entitled to dictate how my user agent renders a page, locally, on my own compu

No one is entitled to YT videos without ads. But at the same time, Google is not entitled to dictate how my user agent renders a page, locally, on my own computer. I'd have no problem if google just inject ads directly into the video streams. ( by which time, equally I'm entitled to configure my own video player to skip whichever frames I want )

zdragnar 3y ago
If allowing ads is part of the terms of their service for non-paying users, then they are in fact free to not grant you access to the video feed. It's still shitty, but this isn't a thing where you can have your cake and eat it too.
- genocidicbunny 3y ago
  > then they are in fact free to not grant you access to the video feed. Correct, but as long as they do grant me access to the video feed, I should be free to modify how it is rendered on my end as I wish.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - JAlexoid 3y ago
    You're not granted access to the video feed, unconditionally. You know, same as you're not granted any GPL code unconditionally. If you want unconditional video streams - Wikimedia is the place for you.
cykros 3y ago
Well, they are entitled to code the page how they'd like, provided it's not anything that meets criminal standards for malware. And if they do start putting ads in video streams then I will likely be writing them off for dead just like I did months ago with Reddit. Til then I'll be using the various moles that still haven't been whacked (there's a good few) and not suffering through the experience. If they think they're getting a dime from me with the agenda they push, just because the creators I want to see don't have time to post across the variety of platforms (yet), they can get their heads examined.
- matheusmoreira 3y ago
  > they are entitled to code the page how they'd like Yeah, and as the owners of the computers we are entitled to alter or even delete that code as we see fit. They should pray we do not alter it further. > provided it's not anything that meets criminal standards for malware Google spies on us. Pretty much everything Google ships is malware since spyware is malware by definition. I also consider anything that so much as tries to circumvent uBlock Origin to be malware. > And if they do start putting ads in video streams then I will likely be writing them off for dead just like I did months ago with Reddit. Same.
- JAlexoid 3y ago
  Well... I'm a creator. I choose to post to YouTube with a reasonable expectation that you're either a YouTube Premium subscriber or will produce ad revenue. None of that entitles you to see my work on your terms, no matter how (insert rant about evil corporate overlords) Yet here you all are, making any and all excuses for your obvious entitlement.
  - archontes 3y ago
    You should instead have a reasonable expectation that some percentage of people will and some percentage of people won't, because that's the world you live in. You work with youtube to deliver a box of files to people's houses free of charge, with the expectation that folks will view every file in the box. Do you think it's reasonable to believe or expect that folks won't throw the annoying ones over their shoulder?

zdragnar 3y ago

If allowing ads is part of the terms of their service for non-paying users, then they are in fact free to not grant you access to the video feed. It's still shitty, but this isn't a thing where you can have your cake and eat it too.

genocidicbunny 3y ago
> then they are in fact free to not grant you access to the video feed. Correct, but as long as they do grant me access to the video feed, I should be free to modify how it is rendered on my end as I wish.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- JAlexoid 3y ago
  You're not granted access to the video feed, unconditionally. You know, same as you're not granted any GPL code unconditionally. If you want unconditional video streams - Wikimedia is the place for you.

cykros 3y ago

Well, they are entitled to code the page how they'd like, provided it's not anything that meets criminal standards for malware. And if they do start putting ads in video streams then I will likely be writing them off for dead just like I did months ago with Reddit. Til then I'll be using the various moles that still haven't been whacked (there's a good few) and not suffering through the experience. If they think they're getting a dime from me with the agenda they push, just because the creators I want to see don't have time to post across the variety of platforms (yet), they can get their heads examined.

matheusmoreira 3y ago
> they are entitled to code the page how they'd like Yeah, and as the owners of the computers we are entitled to alter or even delete that code as we see fit. They should pray we do not alter it further. > provided it's not anything that meets criminal standards for malware Google spies on us. Pretty much everything Google ships is malware since spyware is malware by definition. I also consider anything that so much as tries to circumvent uBlock Origin to be malware. > And if they do start putting ads in video streams then I will likely be writing them off for dead just like I did months ago with Reddit. Same.
JAlexoid 3y ago
Well... I'm a creator. I choose to post to YouTube with a reasonable expectation that you're either a YouTube Premium subscriber or will produce ad revenue. None of that entitles you to see my work on your terms, no matter how (insert rant about evil corporate overlords) Yet here you all are, making any and all excuses for your obvious entitlement.
- archontes 3y ago
  You should instead have a reasonable expectation that some percentage of people will and some percentage of people won't, because that's the world you live in. You work with youtube to deliver a box of files to people's houses free of charge, with the expectation that folks will view every file in the box. Do you think it's reasonable to believe or expect that folks won't throw the annoying ones over their shoulder?