9 ms·

If you don't like ad supported services then vote with your wallet and pay for services that don't show ads. What makes people feel entitled to enjoy ad support

If you don't like ad supported services then vote with your wallet and pay for services that don't show ads. What makes people feel entitled to enjoy ad supported content for free?

glitchcrab 2y ago
What are the alternatives to YouTube which have the same level of content? I don't mean the low effort crap either.
- jhdias 2y ago
  They mean pay for YouTube Premium. There's nothing like YouTube.
- nickff 2y ago
  Nobody is entitled to some “level of content” of other people’s work. Some creators choose to distribute their content (and often monetize it) via YouTube, and those of us who wish to consume the content can choose whether or not to participate in that system. Just like nobody is entitled to “use” your work without abiding by your terms, whether that work is source code or some physical good, nobody should come along and take it just because it’s not “low level crap”.
jimbob45 2y ago
Because our data is nearly universally stolen to the point of absurdity and most videos already contain in-baked ads in the form of endorsements and placements. YouTube certainly makes more from knowing my viewing preferences than it could from ads.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >most videos already contain in-baked ads in the form of endorsements and placements. To be completely fair here: That is a problem with the creators, not Youtube.
- cageface 2y ago
  So go support other video sites with owners and policies you find less objectionable.
RandomThrow321 2y ago
Isn’t YouTube premium essentially what you’re describing?
- cageface 2y ago
  Right. If you don't want to see the ads then pay for a subscription. Using an ad blocker on a site that is monetized by ads is essentially taking the content for free, against the wishes of the creators.
maxden 2y ago
Or you do support those and they introduce ads later. Unfortunately for users, advertisers will keep throwing money at the problem until the provider finds it attractive enough to add ads, or the provider builds up the user base to make it attractive for ad revenue. Same result.
- newswasboring 2y ago
  > Or you do support those and they introduce ads later. Then you got fleeced I guess. But it doesn't have to happen this way. Existence of Nebula is a good example. Fortunately it also has some of my favorite YouTubers. I pay for premium but if YouTube ever pisses me off, it will take 5 mins for me to cancel and move to nebula.
  - Brian_K_White 2y ago
    Nebula has about 11 videos. You tube was named you-tube because it was you and me on the tube. I can't go frictionlessly upload and then share a video on Nebula, nor can I see you on Nebula. Nebula is nice and all but it is not an actual answer to the problem of current youtube.
cm2187 2y ago
If youtube was a pure platform, personally I wouldn’t mind. But it is also politically militant and I don’t feel like giving money to militant organisations I disagree with. If they stayed neutral it would be very different. I also object to the creation of a stasi-style file on my viewing habits. I don’t use google for anything else.
- cageface 2y ago
  If you really feel this strongly about it then you have a moral obligation to support with your money and your attention other services that align with your values.
  - cm2187 2y ago
    I agree and I do
- newswasboring 2y ago
  While I agree with the privacy point, how is YouTube politically militant. Those are some big words.
tomcam 2y ago
Agreed. I get enormous value out of YT and am delighted to pay the $20/month or so. Plus the paid version works great as a podcast medium because it is robust, runs in the background and uses comparatively few resources.
- belter 2y ago
  Until they go the way of Amazon/Netflix and show you ads anyway even if you pay...
- throw__away7391 2y ago
  100% agree. The value I get from YT is easily 10x any other streaming subscription (maybe excluding Spotify), probably a lot more than that actually. Particularly for the HN crowd I would assume, there's so much good and interesting content being made by very knowledgable and passionate creators on every topic imaginable. Great for WFH too, I put on a walking tour of different cities or an extended session recording from some deep house DJ in the background, perfect for coding.
- Brian_K_White 2y ago
  I've been paying for yt for years. And it was fine for years. Then one day I have a blank home screen with no suggestions on all my tvs and rokus etc, because I have history turned off, and have no subscriptions. Note, it didn't go blank when I turned off history. History has always been turned off. Only a year or so ago it went blank and nags me to enable history on every device every time. I partially caved and subscribed to 20 or 30 channels, and still have a blank home. On some interfaces it does show new videos strictly from the subscription list, but nothing else related, and it includes 50% fucking shorts mixed right in, and no way to filter those out. And of course yt phrases the nag like an error that needs to be fixed, and pre-loading the focus on that button on launch, every time, every device. Now every single time I turn on the tv it's a several click sequence on the roku or tv or google remote to navigate off of that to the subscriptions item half way down the left menu. It's such a slick futuristic life I'm paying for. I wish I could make my money work as shitty for them as this service does for me. Here is the "value" of paying for youtube: It's having only 8 of your fingernails pulled out instead of all 10.
xigoi 2y ago
I don’t have a choice in where content creators will upload their videos.
- newswasboring 2y ago
  Yes, the content creator does. And it's their living which gets effected by ad block.
  - beretguy 2y ago
    > gets effected by ad block. No, it’s effected by their personal choice and Google. They don’t have to work as content creators, but they choose to. Google doesn’t have to enshitify YouTube, but they do. I’d gladly pay creator directly if they would host their videos on a better platform.
    - newswasboring 2y ago
      This is like saying a movie theater had a choice to not screen your favorite movie while actively sneaking in.
xracy 2y ago
Yeah! The thing that's gonna fix this systemic issue is more personal responsibility! Just stop using youtube everyone! OR pay for youtube premium!
globular-toast 2y ago
There are two types of performances: public and private. A public performance is like a busker in the street. They get a huge audience, but they can't force anyone to pay. A private performance is within a private premises. You can make people pay, but you can't guarantee anyone actually will. Anyone can perform in public, including you and me. But you kinda need to already be Taylor Swift or whatever to perform in private. Private platforms are aplenty. When you go to the cinema you know what you're paying for is from a proven studio or director or at the very least has been reviewed by critics. There are private platforms online too, like Netflix and the New York Times. But YouTube is public. It attracts a vast amount of authors by making itself public. It simply would not have all that content if it were private. So here's the problem: I will not have ads, but I also will not pay for the public square. YouTube wants to have it's cake and eat it too. It needs to be public to attract the authors (the only people providing value). But it also wants to gouge anyone just wandering through. You can't have both. If authors of known quality started to make private videos on YouTube then I would absolutely consider buying them. However, I won't "subscribe" and continue to pay for the service as I want to own those videos and can store them myself and play them with free software. But there is a notable reluctance to go private. Why? Perhaps because ads made Google as rich as it is today..? They don't want you to pay for anything, they went you to see ads. That's the proven business model. I won't see ads.
- malermeister 2y ago
  That private youtube already exists by the way. It's called Nebula and its a project by popular yt creators.
  - globular-toast 2y ago
    I'll have a look, but the trouble is I actually don't like most of the "big" YouTubers. This is just TV again, and I stopped watching TV about 15 years ago. What I really want is the public square back. I want the ad hoc instructional videos etc. I know people will do this stuff for free, because that's just what people are like and everyone has a camera these days. I don't need or want super high res "4K" or whatever. I watch YouTube in 720p and always have. What I'd love is a P2P distributed media platform with curated communities. One can dream, right?
malermeister 2y ago
Capitalism is an inherently adversarial system - Google's motivation is to extract as much value out of me at minimum cost to them. My motivation is to extract as much value out of them at minimum annoyance to me. Technology sometimes tips the balance a little bit towards the individual and away from the megacorp. I don't see how that is a bad thing.
- cageface 2y ago
  So I suppose you also steal from the supermarket? If not why is that different?
  - malermeister 2y ago
    > minimum annoyance to me Stealing comes with a lot of potential annoyance - as it should. Skipping ads does not.
  - sumuyuda 2y ago
    Companies already steal the user’s data, Google is a big leader in this behavior.
    - malermeister 2y ago
      This is also a good point. YouTube didn't even had ads when it initially launched. Corpos will try to shift the deal in their favor all the time, take as much as they can take away with. I intend to do the same. If you just want to take it, that's your prerogative.
disambiguation 2y ago
Voting with your wallet only works in a free and fair market. As for entitlement, no one can force you to watch an ad, ergo I can block them. If monetizing is such a dilemma they have a dozen other methods that are much more reliable. I can't imagine this is anything other than corporate greed, and shaming users for circumventing commercials is just shifting the blame.

If you don't like ad supported services then vote with your wallet and pay for services that don't show ads. What makes people feel entitled to enjoy ad supported content for free?

glitchcrab 2y ago

What are the alternatives to YouTube which have the same level of content? I don't mean the low effort crap either.

jhdias 2y ago
They mean pay for YouTube Premium. There's nothing like YouTube.
nickff 2y ago
Nobody is entitled to some “level of content” of other people’s work. Some creators choose to distribute their content (and often monetize it) via YouTube, and those of us who wish to consume the content can choose whether or not to participate in that system. Just like nobody is entitled to “use” your work without abiding by your terms, whether that work is source code or some physical good, nobody should come along and take it just because it’s not “low level crap”.

jimbob45 2y ago

Because our data is nearly universally stolen to the point of absurdity and most videos already contain in-baked ads in the form of endorsements and placements. YouTube certainly makes more from knowing my viewing preferences than it could from ads.

Dalewyn 2y ago
>most videos already contain in-baked ads in the form of endorsements and placements. To be completely fair here: That is a problem with the creators, not Youtube.
cageface 2y ago
So go support other video sites with owners and policies you find less objectionable.

RandomThrow321 2y ago

Isn’t YouTube premium essentially what you’re describing?

cageface 2y ago
Right. If you don't want to see the ads then pay for a subscription. Using an ad blocker on a site that is monetized by ads is essentially taking the content for free, against the wishes of the creators.

maxden 2y ago

Or you do support those and they introduce ads later. Unfortunately for users, advertisers will keep throwing money at the problem until the provider finds it attractive enough to add ads, or the provider builds up the user base to make it attractive for ad revenue. Same result.

newswasboring 2y ago
> Or you do support those and they introduce ads later. Then you got fleeced I guess. But it doesn't have to happen this way. Existence of Nebula is a good example. Fortunately it also has some of my favorite YouTubers. I pay for premium but if YouTube ever pisses me off, it will take 5 mins for me to cancel and move to nebula.
- Brian_K_White 2y ago
  Nebula has about 11 videos. You tube was named you-tube because it was you and me on the tube. I can't go frictionlessly upload and then share a video on Nebula, nor can I see you on Nebula. Nebula is nice and all but it is not an actual answer to the problem of current youtube.

cm2187 2y ago

If youtube was a pure platform, personally I wouldn’t mind. But it is also politically militant and I don’t feel like giving money to militant organisations I disagree with. If they stayed neutral it would be very different. I also object to the creation of a stasi-style file on my viewing habits. I don’t use google for anything else.

cageface 2y ago
If you really feel this strongly about it then you have a moral obligation to support with your money and your attention other services that align with your values.
- cm2187 2y ago
  I agree and I do
newswasboring 2y ago
While I agree with the privacy point, how is YouTube politically militant. Those are some big words.

tomcam 2y ago

Agreed. I get enormous value out of YT and am delighted to pay the $20/month or so. Plus the paid version works great as a podcast medium because it is robust, runs in the background and uses comparatively few resources.

belter 2y ago
Until they go the way of Amazon/Netflix and show you ads anyway even if you pay...
throw__away7391 2y ago
100% agree. The value I get from YT is easily 10x any other streaming subscription (maybe excluding Spotify), probably a lot more than that actually. Particularly for the HN crowd I would assume, there's so much good and interesting content being made by very knowledgable and passionate creators on every topic imaginable. Great for WFH too, I put on a walking tour of different cities or an extended session recording from some deep house DJ in the background, perfect for coding.
Brian_K_White 2y ago
I've been paying for yt for years. And it was fine for years. Then one day I have a blank home screen with no suggestions on all my tvs and rokus etc, because I have history turned off, and have no subscriptions. Note, it didn't go blank when I turned off history. History has always been turned off. Only a year or so ago it went blank and nags me to enable history on every device every time. I partially caved and subscribed to 20 or 30 channels, and still have a blank home. On some interfaces it does show new videos strictly from the subscription list, but nothing else related, and it includes 50% fucking shorts mixed right in, and no way to filter those out. And of course yt phrases the nag like an error that needs to be fixed, and pre-loading the focus on that button on launch, every time, every device. Now every single time I turn on the tv it's a several click sequence on the roku or tv or google remote to navigate off of that to the subscriptions item half way down the left menu. It's such a slick futuristic life I'm paying for. I wish I could make my money work as shitty for them as this service does for me. Here is the "value" of paying for youtube: It's having only 8 of your fingernails pulled out instead of all 10.

xigoi 2y ago

I don’t have a choice in where content creators will upload their videos.

newswasboring 2y ago
Yes, the content creator does. And it's their living which gets effected by ad block.
- beretguy 2y ago
  > gets effected by ad block. No, it’s effected by their personal choice and Google. They don’t have to work as content creators, but they choose to. Google doesn’t have to enshitify YouTube, but they do. I’d gladly pay creator directly if they would host their videos on a better platform.
  - newswasboring 2y ago
    This is like saying a movie theater had a choice to not screen your favorite movie while actively sneaking in.

xracy 2y ago

Yeah! The thing that's gonna fix this systemic issue is more personal responsibility! Just stop using youtube everyone! OR pay for youtube premium!

globular-toast 2y ago

There are two types of performances: public and private. A public performance is like a busker in the street. They get a huge audience, but they can't force anyone to pay. A private performance is within a private premises. You can make people pay, but you can't guarantee anyone actually will. Anyone can perform in public, including you and me. But you kinda need to already be Taylor Swift or whatever to perform in private. Private platforms are aplenty. When you go to the cinema you know what you're paying for is from a proven studio or director or at the very least has been reviewed by critics. There are private platforms online too, like Netflix and the New York Times. But YouTube is public. It attracts a vast amount of authors by making itself public. It simply would not have all that content if it were private. So here's the problem: I will not have ads, but I also will not pay for the public square. YouTube wants to have it's cake and eat it too. It needs to be public to attract the authors (the only people providing value). But it also wants to gouge anyone just wandering through. You can't have both. If authors of known quality started to make private videos on YouTube then I would absolutely consider buying them. However, I won't "subscribe" and continue to pay for the service as I want to own those videos and can store them myself and play them with free software. But there is a notable reluctance to go private. Why? Perhaps because ads made Google as rich as it is today..? They don't want you to pay for anything, they went you to see ads. That's the proven business model. I won't see ads.

malermeister 2y ago
That private youtube already exists by the way. It's called Nebula and its a project by popular yt creators.
- globular-toast 2y ago
  I'll have a look, but the trouble is I actually don't like most of the "big" YouTubers. This is just TV again, and I stopped watching TV about 15 years ago. What I really want is the public square back. I want the ad hoc instructional videos etc. I know people will do this stuff for free, because that's just what people are like and everyone has a camera these days. I don't need or want super high res "4K" or whatever. I watch YouTube in 720p and always have. What I'd love is a P2P distributed media platform with curated communities. One can dream, right?

malermeister 2y ago

Capitalism is an inherently adversarial system - Google's motivation is to extract as much value out of me at minimum cost to them. My motivation is to extract as much value out of them at minimum annoyance to me. Technology sometimes tips the balance a little bit towards the individual and away from the megacorp. I don't see how that is a bad thing.

cageface 2y ago
So I suppose you also steal from the supermarket? If not why is that different?
- malermeister 2y ago
  > minimum annoyance to me Stealing comes with a lot of potential annoyance - as it should. Skipping ads does not.
- sumuyuda 2y ago
  Companies already steal the user’s data, Google is a big leader in this behavior.
  - malermeister 2y ago
    This is also a good point. YouTube didn't even had ads when it initially launched. Corpos will try to shift the deal in their favor all the time, take as much as they can take away with. I intend to do the same. If you just want to take it, that's your prerogative.

disambiguation 2y ago

Voting with your wallet only works in a free and fair market. As for entitlement, no one can force you to watch an ad, ergo I can block them. If monetizing is such a dilemma they have a dozen other methods that are much more reliable. I can't imagine this is anything other than corporate greed, and shaming users for circumventing commercials is just shifting the blame.