3 ms·
I'm interpreting your comment as you're using ad blockers and also not paying for a subscription. If that's the case, it's probably true that robbing YouTube o
by jarjoura 2y ago
I'm interpreting your comment as you're using ad blockers and also not paying for a subscription.
If that's the case, it's probably true that robbing YouTube of the revenue to cover their R&D and data center costs is covered in whatever insurance and investment risks they manage.
However, also robbing the content creators you're enjoying of the revenue they need to fund their content, is definitely in some unethical grey area. Still true, even if the creator makes only a fraction of their total revenue through ad sense.
- zolbrek 2y agoThere's no violence involved, it can't be robbery.
- tobz1000 2y agoOr you can adblock and donate on Patreon etc. to your favourite channels. Not every channel you watch will benefit, but a much higher percentage of your money goes to creators, who generally get a less than fair deal from platform holders. Same goes for buying music on Bandcamp + pirating, versus a music streaming subscription.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- manuelmoreale 2y ago> However, also robbing the content creators you're enjoying of the revenue they need to fund their content, is definitely in some unethical grey area. I’m curious what’s your intuition about the opposite situation. If I’m paying for YouTube and I’m supposed to get an AD free experience but a creator has baked in ad read for their sponsor, is the creator then in the wrong?
- Bancakes 2y agoIf I don’t click ads and purchase products, it doesn’t matter whether I have them or not. I’m not robbing anyone since I don’t click on ads anyway. I don’t generate people revenue. I’m not “in commerce”
- jodybruchon 2y agoI'm not robbing anyone by blocking ads. I control what my computer loads and processes. How others make their money is not my problem.