3 ms·

Let’s not kid ourselves into thinking that the adtech industry is just serving up harmless banner ads or 30 second videos and calling it a day. Seeing an ad is

• wombat-man 3y ago
  Sure, maybe we shouldn't be using YouTube at all. And I would prefer if we had more legal protections for user data in the US. But that aside, the sheer size and quality of YouTube. It's availability on every phone tv or whatever. This doesn't just happen magically.
  • gentleman11 3y ago
    You’re right. It’s not magic at all. It happens via monopoly and network effects
  • dahart 3y ago
    > This doesn’t happen magically. Correct! It happened by offering a completely free service with no advertising, in order to become the dominant player and eliminate all the competition, some of which was trying to use more sustainable business models. The idea that YouTube should be free also didn’t happen magically, it was (and still is) intentionally fostered.
    • wombat-man 3y ago
      Sure, well was there a competitor you would have preferred to prevail? What was their business plan? YouTube is free. If you don’t mind ads.
      • dahart 3y ago
        YouTube was free even if you do mind ads, on purpose. To a first approximation everyone minds ads. YouTube used this fact to establish their dominance before switching tactics. Lots of competitors have tried to use both paid accounts and ad-funding. What competitor I might prefer is irrelevant here, but there are plenty of them, just Google YouTube competitors. Vimeo is a good example of a site with high quality content and a more sustainable business model that tried for a while and was unable to broach the same market. YouTube so far surpassed everyone by offering videos without ads until more recently, in order to gain market share. The mindset you’re currently arguing against was established and curated and encouraged by YouTube, and they’re still hoping you hang on to it while they keep cranking up the amount of advertising and trying to normalize the bogus idea that avoiding ads is somehow bad. They do not have to offer an ad-funded business model, so if they don’t like the cat-and-mouse adblocker game, they can switch to paid accounts only. It’s perfectly fine to block ads, because it’s perfectly fine to ignore ads we didn’t ask for. You can fast-forward or turn the volume down manually, just like you can write software to automate it. As a society, we wouldn’t have it any other way. We’ve had this same debate over VHS and DVD warnings & trailers, over TV and cable ads, over radio ads, and over general internet website ads. It will never change because advertisers are not allowed to force us to watch ads, as much as they’d like to.
        • wombat-man 3y ago
          I think it’s fine for people to block ads and i think it’s fine for YouTube to try and counter that.
          • dahart 3y ago
            Same, agreed!
          • PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
            The issue is those who turn it into a moral or ethical dilemma, as if people avoiding ads is akin to cheating on ones spouse, theft, murder, etc.
        • fma 3y ago
• acdha 3y ago
  If you’re worried about surveillance, stop using YouTube. It’s a Google first-party product, they don’t need ads to collect and resell information about your viewing habits.
  • gentleman11 3y ago
    You have a YouTube alternative to recommend I take it? Because I looked for one and there isn’t any, just a bunch of half baked sites that I can’t get to work properly. YouTube ate everything
    • acdha 3y ago
      I don’t use YouTube much so I’m skeptical that it’s impossible to live without it but the point is simply that if your top concern is surveillance, then you don’t have a choice where you continue to use Google services.
    • carlosjobim 3y ago
      Turn on your TV or radio? They're still there. Read a book?
    • fma 3y ago
      Put rabbit air antennas on your TV and tune into PBS. Minimal ads except for "this broadcast is sponsored by viewers like you" and no tracking.