3 ms·
Yeah, it would be conversions of ad-blockers to Premium subscriptions. And they will get some of those, maybe even a lot. I believe it will be a challenge for
by ravenstine 3y ago
Yeah, it would be conversions of ad-blockers to Premium subscriptions. And they will get some of those, maybe even a lot. I believe it will be a challenge for YouTube to convince enough of those people using ad-blockers to convert. I've considered getting Premium, and perhaps I will eventually because the experience in the YouTube app on the TV (not "YouTube TV") has become so unpleasant because of ads. But I really don't want to. I don't trust YouTube to not roll out "reasonable ads" for Premium in the near future. If Amazon decides to retroactively place ads on their TVs, YouTube more easily can do the same for Premium. It'd be one thing if YouTube was a different company, in which case I wouldn't hesitate to pay. But we know the kind of people they are.
- jmnicolas 3y agoCan't you use some kind of DNS blocker (like pi-hole or the other one) to block ads on your TV?
- ravenstine 3y agoYes, but not when I'm using my YouTube account on someone else's TV to show them something.
- karmakaze 3y agoI was thinking the conversions from Firefox users using adblockers would be too small--but they have to do this otherwise there's an incentive to switch from Chrome. Edit: Just saw this post "In June 2024, ad blockers such as uBlock Origin will be disabled in Chrome 127". So there's an incentive either way. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38361758 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38361758