4 ms·

Am I the only one paying for Youtube Premium? Everyone's always saying "if you aren't paying you are the product", but Google actually offers an easy way to pa

Am I the only one paying for Youtube Premium? Everyone's always saying "if you aren't paying you are the product", but Google actually offers an easy way to pay to not get any ads! Unfortunately you still get the ads -- sorry, sponsorships -- baked into the videos, but the obnoxious interruptions and scummy links are all gone for 14€/month. Compared to Netflix this seems like a fantastic deal, there's so much more stuff on Youtube than on Netflix. Or is it because Youtube used to be free that people just don't want to pay for it?

asdff 3y ago
I don't agree with this sort of advertising as a business model. I don't like being extorted to not see ads. I don't agree with the assumption that me watching youtube without such invasive advertising is a valueless proposition for youtube, given what has been argued to mean value in shareholder meetings over the years. I don't like this idea that I must accept a firehose of data that I have no interest in, that I am not allowed to filter what renders on my own machine. I also don't agree that a 1.62 trillion dollar company now needs to start penny pinching.
- sushid 3y ago
  How are you being extorted? Who is forcing you to watch Youtube videos?
  - asdff 3y ago
    Unfortunately for youtube, they have positioned themselves as a de facto public utility now that things like local council meeting recordings and even federal announcements go directly onto their platform, not to mention things like conference recordings, school lectures, job training videos, the works. So yes, in theory, sometimes you very well can be forced to watch youtube at this point in time. We are no longer in the age where youtube was merely one of many equivocally popular media hosting sites on the internet. They have eliminated nearly all competition and monopolized most video hosting.
LordShredda 3y ago
The stuff on YouTube is very low quality and not worth my money. Google also interferes too much in what people can and can't say on it, so you have history channel's avoiding saying wrong words like Hitler or COVID. And no I'm not a conspiracy theorist but google is pretty much convinced only tin hatters think about such things. And the way they comply with DMCA is so insane I refuse to reward that with my hard earned cash. And if the video is good, I'd rather pay the channel maker itself rather than have the web hoster take a cut of it. Video hosting is expensive because they have petabytes of videos no one watches hosted on their servers. It's not my fault they can't have decent budgeting skills or any customer support.
- spicyusername 3y ago
  If you think the stuff on YouTube is low quality, you might not be watching the right content. I am constantly shocked at how much awe inspiring, educational, or creative content you can find for free on YouTube.
e2le 3y ago
Pay $42.99/month or watch multiple low quality garbage advertisements per video. I assume Google is using the carrot and stick method?
- MattSteelblade 3y ago
  Not sure where that number comes from. I'm a happy subscriber and it's $14/month and comes with YouTube Music.
digitalPhonix 3y ago
It's not the ads that I care about (as much). I would pay (and do - eg. Kagi) to not be tracked and profiled. Youtube doesn't offer a way to pay to opt out of tracking and profiling and even if they did, no one would believe it because its fundamentally at odds with its business model.
RoyalHenOil 3y ago
YouTube is still free. You can access the same content (just with ads) by paying nothing at all, so the fact that there is more content than Netflix is beside the point. You aren't paying for access to the content; you are just paying for no ads and for the other features included in YouTube Premium. I am trying out YouTube Premium (halfway through a three-month trial). I disabled adblocking a month before I started the trial because I wanted to do a fair comparison and see if YouTube Premium is really that much better than the base experience. I have concluded, for me, it is not. I have found that I don't really use any of the other features besides the ad removal. YouTube Premium also introduces some annoyances. For example, it bugs me to use the music service whenever I navigate to a music video. It also requires me to install an app to download videos (which means I can't download videos on my laptop, which is where I really wanted them for offline viewing), and I have found that I don't like the app due to some UX isses. They want $18 AUD for this. I would maybe pay $10-12 AUD, but any more than that feels like a rip off. I would rather watch ads than pay that much. (Of course, in reality, I will just re-enable adblock once I cancel, and it will be a better experience than YouTube Premium.)
I_Am_Nous 3y ago
I will never give YouTube money to stop showing me ads because YouTube isn't going to stop building an ad profile for me based on my watch history. To pay to remove ads feels like paying YouTube for the privilege of getting my data tracked. At least with ads I know what they think about me. I also understand this is an illogical and personal conviction so most others likely won't agree with me lol

asdff 3y ago

I don't agree with this sort of advertising as a business model. I don't like being extorted to not see ads. I don't agree with the assumption that me watching youtube without such invasive advertising is a valueless proposition for youtube, given what has been argued to mean value in shareholder meetings over the years. I don't like this idea that I must accept a firehose of data that I have no interest in, that I am not allowed to filter what renders on my own machine. I also don't agree that a 1.62 trillion dollar company now needs to start penny pinching.

sushid 3y ago
How are you being extorted? Who is forcing you to watch Youtube videos?
- asdff 3y ago
  Unfortunately for youtube, they have positioned themselves as a de facto public utility now that things like local council meeting recordings and even federal announcements go directly onto their platform, not to mention things like conference recordings, school lectures, job training videos, the works. So yes, in theory, sometimes you very well can be forced to watch youtube at this point in time. We are no longer in the age where youtube was merely one of many equivocally popular media hosting sites on the internet. They have eliminated nearly all competition and monopolized most video hosting.

LordShredda 3y ago

The stuff on YouTube is very low quality and not worth my money. Google also interferes too much in what people can and can't say on it, so you have history channel's avoiding saying wrong words like Hitler or COVID. And no I'm not a conspiracy theorist but google is pretty much convinced only tin hatters think about such things. And the way they comply with DMCA is so insane I refuse to reward that with my hard earned cash. And if the video is good, I'd rather pay the channel maker itself rather than have the web hoster take a cut of it. Video hosting is expensive because they have petabytes of videos no one watches hosted on their servers. It's not my fault they can't have decent budgeting skills or any customer support.

spicyusername 3y ago
If you think the stuff on YouTube is low quality, you might not be watching the right content. I am constantly shocked at how much awe inspiring, educational, or creative content you can find for free on YouTube.

e2le 3y ago

Pay $42.99/month or watch multiple low quality garbage advertisements per video. I assume Google is using the carrot and stick method?

MattSteelblade 3y ago
Not sure where that number comes from. I'm a happy subscriber and it's $14/month and comes with YouTube Music.

digitalPhonix 3y ago

It's not the ads that I care about (as much). I would pay (and do - eg. Kagi) to not be tracked and profiled. Youtube doesn't offer a way to pay to opt out of tracking and profiling and even if they did, no one would believe it because its fundamentally at odds with its business model.

RoyalHenOil 3y ago

YouTube is still free. You can access the same content (just with ads) by paying nothing at all, so the fact that there is more content than Netflix is beside the point. You aren't paying for access to the content; you are just paying for no ads and for the other features included in YouTube Premium. I am trying out YouTube Premium (halfway through a three-month trial). I disabled adblocking a month before I started the trial because I wanted to do a fair comparison and see if YouTube Premium is really that much better than the base experience. I have concluded, for me, it is not. I have found that I don't really use any of the other features besides the ad removal. YouTube Premium also introduces some annoyances. For example, it bugs me to use the music service whenever I navigate to a music video. It also requires me to install an app to download videos (which means I can't download videos on my laptop, which is where I really wanted them for offline viewing), and I have found that I don't like the app due to some UX isses. They want $18 AUD for this. I would maybe pay $10-12 AUD, but any more than that feels like a rip off. I would rather watch ads than pay that much. (Of course, in reality, I will just re-enable adblock once I cancel, and it will be a better experience than YouTube Premium.)

I_Am_Nous 3y ago

I will never give YouTube money to stop showing me ads because YouTube isn't going to stop building an ad profile for me based on my watch history. To pay to remove ads feels like paying YouTube for the privilege of getting my data tracked. At least with ads I know what they think about me. I also understand this is an illogical and personal conviction so most others likely won't agree with me lol